OOAK Table Tennis Forum

I think it would be silly to reduce ,China ,Germany ,Japans and korea's players as other Table Tennis Countries don't have enough players to make up a team ,New Zealand qualified with a womans player at the last Olympics but our Olympic Committee wouldn't send her as we required her to be ranked in the top 50 or so in the world. so her position was gifted to an Australian player ranked lower than our lady.

Its just not right to send lower standard players just to let the dominent Country get two and not have the Chance of 3 medals

Adham has kindly added some clarifications, as there seem to be some wrong assumptions here:

- The IOC owns the Olympic Games
- The NOCs enter the players to the Olympic Games
- The IOC decides the total number of players (or teams) per sport.
For Table tennis it is 86 women and 86 men. This cannot be increased.
- The IOC decides the total number of athletes allowed to take part at the Games. It is currently 10,500.
- The International Federations decide the type of event system to be used (knock-out, groups, etc.) but the IOC must approve it
- The International Federation "recommends" the number of athletes per event, but the IOC has the final say.
- The International Federation decides the qualification system (players from ranking, continental qualifications, etc.) but the IOC must approve it.
- Most sports are reducing the number of athletes per event, and some sports are even limiting the number of events per NOC (weightlifting, Taekwando, etc.)
- In Table Tennis there will still be 3 players per NOC for the 16 NOCs that will qualify for the Team Events. So for the top NOCs their top 3 players will still play. However, for the singles, only 2 players per NOC will be able to take part, this means that MORE NOCs will have players represented in the singles events (MS, WS).
- The IOC has "Universality" as a priority, "Participation" is the main aim of the Olympic Games. It is the NOCs that convert that notion into a race for medals, not the IOC. The IOC wants to reduce the importance of medals and increase the notion of participation.

NOC= national Olympic Committee
IF - International Federation.

BTW Swimming now has only 2 swimmers per event. This was supported by both the USA and China in order to reduce the American dominance in swimming. It was also proposed to limit the number of events per swimmer, but that was not accepted.

Adham

I, and others in this thread, have discussed the issue along the line of having the best players to participate in TT of the Olympic Games, because we want to watch excellent matches and enjoy them. There are, of course, opinions that matches of players lower in world ranking are also nice and enjoyable to all. Personally I agree entirely.

There is no doubt that our discussion is an open and democratic one. We are not driving this issue along national sentiment. Thus it is unnecessarily for Adham to emphasize the stands of the two gigantic nations in this discussion. I know also when the matter was first brought up in ITTF meeting, China did not oppose the proposal.

We are all matured guys. Are we not guys?

I believe, Adham has no authority to speak for the IOC. Obviously it is just his opinion.

I didn't find anything in the Olympic Charter, that supports that opinion.

At the same time the Olympic Charter allows 3 competitors per NOC. And the fact is, the IOC has not reduced this number. Which they could have done, if they wanted. But they didn't.

Which means, they find 3 competitors per NOC OK.

He's not speaking for the IOC, he's merely telling about the roles of the different organisations, which I though was quite helpful. Instead of appreciating his input, you seem more interested in bickering about his wording.

This discussion is not about you, or trying to make you change your mind, so lets keep the discussions constructive shall we?

Please, dear native speakers, correct me, if I'm wrong, but doesn't "will be" in this context mean, the decision has already been made? If so, then the statement quoted above doesn't seem to be true to me, although I might be wrong here.

The ITTF rule 4.05.02.02 says:



It doesn't look like the Board of Directors has already made the decision and the IOC approved it.

Nothing against constructive discussions and appreciating Adham's input. Adham has actually made 15 statements, 12 of them are correct. I didn't express my appreciation, because those facts were not new to me, I had already read the Olympic Charter and some documents about Olympics from the ITTF home page. It took me a certain amount of time, by the way. I also thought it would be right to comment on the statements I found to be wrong or questionable. In my opinion, putting things right is constructive, isn't it? It can even be appreciated, too.

To clarify further:

- The process to make any change to the table tennis competition at the Olympic Games is as follows:
1. Discussion at the ITTF Olympic Commission
2. Decision within the ITTF Olympic Commission to make a recommendation to the IOC and to the ITTF's Board of Directors
3. Approval of the ITTF's BoD and approval of the IOC. The order of approval depends on the dates of the meetings.
4. The IOC issues the final Technical Regulations for each sport 2 years before the Games.

Therefore, in the matter regarding the 2 entries per NOC in singles events only, the following has happened:
1. Discussion took place at the ITTF Olympic Commission in December 2008
2. Decision to recommend to the IOC and the BoD was voted upon and the result was 13-1 in favour to make the proposal
3. The IOC has approved the proposal in writing. The BoD will decide in May 2010 in Moscow.
4. Any changes to the regulations will be published around August 2010 by the IOC.

I would like to repeat that in the Team events 3 players per NOC will still take part, so in fact, the 16 NOCs that qualify for the Team events will still have their top 3 players at the Games. The number of matches at the Team events represent almost 50% of the total number of matches for the TT competition at the Games.

I would like to thank Haggisv for relating the information about the Olympic Games. Of course I will continue to inform him on anything new within the ITTF.

(Plug) Please be ready to see an improvement with the itTV starting hopefully with the Qatar Open.

I am not a native speaker, but that does not change the fact that you are right; you are wrong.

Yet again you are ending up miles offside because you look at an excerpt without considering its context. The context controls the final meaning of the words "will be" in this case.

Two simple examples for you how context affects the meaning of the following sentence:

1. After the 2032 rule change, the team competition will remain unchanged. However, for the singles, only 2 players per NOC will be able to take part
2. After a possible implementation of the proposed 2032 rule change, the team competition will remain unchanged. However, for the singles, only 2 players per NOC will be able to take part

Same "will be", different context, different meaning.

Tell me, if you can not grasp such basic language principles, how can you expect anyone to accept your claims that you are able to correctly interpret the chapters and rules of the IOC and ITTF, something you say both of them, as well as some of us here, fail to do?

Thank you Adham, much appreciated!

This whole post raises one question to my mind, who is likely to have most communication with the IOC, you, or Adham? My guess is, and note that I am only guessing here, is that Adham have more communication with the IOC then you. As a result of this guess, I'm making a second guess, and that guess is that Adham knows more about the IOC's opinion then you do, regardless of how many documents you have read, cause everything is not spelled out in a document. Any one who have ever been a part of a board knows how this works.