Jump to content

Talk:Skeleton at the 2018 Winter Olympics – Qualification

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

rankings for olympics[edit]

Topcardi (talk · contribs) has brought to light the possibility that the IBSF rankings may be modified to remove nations 4th or greater entries from the list. Unfortunately there is not a source (yet) that validates this, but creates enough doubt that I thought it best to remove statements and italics that appear to convey definite knowledge of who qualifies next, but maybe there is a better way, I don't know. In adding information about possible African continental qualifiers I tried to limit the amount of weasel words, but hopefully communicated the real possibilites. It might even be better to remove the final four qualifiers from each table and indicate what continents are not qualfied yet and let the reader draw their own conclusions about who would fill those spots during reallocation.18abruce (talk) 15:47, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The rule book does address it (Rule 4.1), but I don't know if we should adjust how we display the rankings. In my opinion it would be better not to, and just note relevent sleds if applicable, because there is no example of what the precise effect would be.18abruce (talk) 14:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
NBC has ran a story that addresses the issue directly, and confirms what Topcardi has brought up. I believe Frimpong should be added as qualified.18abruce (talk) 00:29, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Even then, Frimpong doesn't appear to be in the top 60. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:05, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you only remove sleds that are a nation's 4th best or more, he is 62nd or 63rd, but the article is saying (and others) that you also remove more than that. I don't fully understand it because it makes the limits of 60 or 45 basically irrelevant, but that is the conclusion of the article. I am really okay with the page listing him as a continental qualifier, or not, but I am inclined to believe the conclusions of the source.18abruce (talk) 10:12, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Who else would be removed? The third best of the nations qualifying two and second of countries qualifying one? If that is the case then I think he is qualified. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:48, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that would seem to be the case. This would also explain why sources were reporting the Nigerian bobsled team was qualified - if you remove the ones who should be removed, they may be guaranteed Top 40, though I'd have to do the math which I don't have time for right now. Smartyllama (talk) 17:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Latvia[edit]

The Latvia row shows 2 men and 1 women qualified but a total of 1.

212.134.213.226 (talk) 12:52, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where the qualifications currently stand (women)[edit]

This will all be moot by the end of next week, but I spent a lot of time trying to figure out the quota situation for the women, and here's what I've come up with so far.

  • Germany and Canada are guaranteed the three-woman quota: no other team has a third competitor with the mathematical possibility of overtaking Fernstädt in eighth place.
  • Russia, Great Britain, USA, and Netherlands are guaranteed the two-woman spots, but Martin Haven makes it sound like the Dutch NOC qualification criteria might make them refuse one (apparently with her 7th in Altenberg Bos is now safe).
  • Currently, Belgium and Latvia own the two one-woman quotas, but Flock is close behind Priedulena and could overtake Meylemans with a good performance in St. Moritz. Likewise, Gilardoni is not far behind Flock and could pass one or more of the other three women, but right now it's BEL/LAT in and AUT/SUI out.
  • The Korean women are too far down the rankings to figure in the main allocation, so KOR gets the automatic entry. (If Jeong stays on the ICC and wins two races at Altenberg, she would still be behind Gilardoni.)
  • That then leaves only Oceania and Africa as the unrepresented continents, guaranteeing at least one additional country by reallocation. Oceania will go to AUS (Narracott), but the African one is interesting. After application of Rule 4.1, Adeagbo (NGR) is currently in 44thd place, but whether she ends up above or below the magic 45th place depends not only on her performance at Lake Placid NAC next week, but also on which (of BEL/LAT/AUT/SUI) teams get those single-athlete spots, because LAT and AUT have more women on the ranking list.
  • Assuming Adeagbo does make it in, there will be either one or two reallocations depending on how the Dutch NOC deals with their qualifications. If the relative rankings don't change from today, one reallocation gets AUT, two get AUT and SUI. If Adeagbo doesn't qualify for the African quota (could happen if one of the lower-ranking women passes Adeagbo on the EC or NAC next week), and the Dutch refuse Le Conté's spot, then the final quota goes to JPN (KOR currently ranks higher but the host country allocation takes precedence).

That's incredibly complicated. Probably should have just waited a week for the official announcement. 121a0012 (talk) 03:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. As for Adeagbo, she really only has to complete one more race to get the african continental spot. Currently by the IBSF's "clean" list she is 30th I believe. I really do not understand why they have done this because it makes the 60/45 threshold seemingly irrelevant.18abruce (talk) 10:19, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're taking too many people out there. Rule 4.1 says (albeit non-normatively) "If Nation A has 3 quota spots, all Nation A's other athletes on the List will be taken out of the list, allowing other Nations athletes to move up the List" (emphasis mine). So that means that you don't take out all the Canadians and Germans, just the ones ranking lower than Fernstädt, and likewise for the other countries that will qualify on ranking and Korea. That's why it matters whether Priedulena finishes ahead of Flock and Gilardoni: Latvia have two sliders between Priedulena and Adeagbo, but Austria and Switzerland each have only one women below their top performer, and that could be the difference between Adeagbo being in 45th (she's in) and her being in 46th (she's out and Japan is in). As for why they'd do this, I think it comes down to the fact that the IOC really wants representation from places other than Europe and North America in the Winter Olympics, so the qualifications were relaxed sufficiently to give Africa a chance without making it a complete gimme. I'm betting someone at the IBSF actually simulated various qualification requirements until they found one that the IOC would live with. 121a0012 (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to mention: I have no knowledge of whether any of the women behind Adeagbo are actually entered in this week's races, so it may be that she's already guaranteed a spot so long as she starts at Lake Placid, the Japanese are out, and all this dithering is already moot. 121a0012 (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You may be right, but I disagree. You have made an incorrect assumption about how I am ranking the athletes as well. There was a discussion on the bobsled qualification page previously that addresses the same issue. The the sourced NBC story says: "For the Olympics, the international rankings will be cleaned of all athletes representing a nation that has already reached its maximum amount of quota spots. Frimpong and Adeagbo would easily move into the top 60 and top 45 under that criteria", (emphasis mine) which I have seen personal confirmation of in a private message. There is still some ambiguity, but the implication is that the maximum ranking numbers are irrelevant. We will see.18abruce (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Officially she ended up 40th on the "clean list". Don't understand why they do this, but thanks to @Topcardi: who first alerted us to this possibility.18abruce (talk) 12:48, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should probably cite the official list[edit]

The IBSF has published an official list now [1] so the article should probably cite it. (And someone needs to write an article about Adeagbo if it hasn't already been done!) 121a0012 (talk) 20:17, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and it looks like Gilardoni is next in line if the Dutch NOC should decide not to allow Le Conté to compete. 121a0012 (talk) 20:20, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the article does cite the official lists.18abruce (talk) 20:33, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't have known it from the lead paragraph of the "Quota allocation" section. I see that it is cited lower down. 121a0012 (talk) 04:17, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OAR Entries[edit]

Any source to link with the last update that the original number of entries for OAR (3 mens and 2 womens) decreased to only 2 mens ?

I think it should be removed until a source is found to validate it.18abruce (talk) 22:16, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Skeleton_at_the_2018_Winter_Olympics_–_Qualification&oldid=1210401348"