If it can be gamed...Submitted by foo on Mon, 08/06/2012 - 18:56
"four pairs of women's doubles players, including the top seeds, were thrown out of the Olympics for trying to deliberately lose"
Correction: They weren't trying to lose -- they were trying to win. The morons running this thing made it so the best way to win the war may include intentionally losing battles.
"Lund rejected the notion that officials should have predicted the fiasco"
Correction: The officials were warned this would happen, including right before matches where it happened. Of course that never stops the stupid/corrupt/guilty from pulling out the "no one could have seen it coming" defense.
It apparently lead to some very "interesting" games:
"crowds had booed and jeered leading players as they repeatedly hit shots wide or into the net"
"At the deciding group A match that evening it became clear that neither the Chinese top seeds, Yu Yang and Wang Xiaoli, nor their South Korean rivals, Jung Kyung-eun and Kim Ha-na, wanted to win"
"Ha Jung-eun and Kim Min-jung, and Indonesian opponents Meiliana Jauhari and Greysia Polii endeavoured to lose"
My reason for posting this on the DP was because people here might find it useful as an example to others of the absurdity of some people's thinking. Specifically, some people believe you can count on others to just do what's right, that you don't need a free market that properly incentivizes people, that (in general) politicians are actually trying to be helpful, and believe in similar things in other contexts which impact in one way or another on the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. But the reality is, even at something as (supposedly) noble as the Olympics, with athletes representing the "good name" of their respective countries, athletes which have invested a good fraction of their life improving their ability to win their specific contests, they will still lose (intentionally) if it suits their purposes.
[Maybe, if the rules remain stupid, these athletes will spend a bit of time learning how to lose a bit more convincingly, just as politicians strive to become better liars.]
I came across another Olympic "loser" here:
"The 24-year-old lined up at the start of heat five at the Olympic stadium on Monday morning but was already well behind the field at the start of the back straight before stopping running completely another 100m into the race and wandering back across the infield past the pole vault area."
The Guardian doesn't give the details of how this would be in this runner's favor though. I wonder if he just had no interest in running the 800m race. It says he "had been forced to run in the two-lap race after his team failed to withdraw him from it by Sunday's deadline", so it may have just been a case of this. That kind of kills the concept of the Olympics being some kind of great thing so many people want to be in when they have to force people to participate in events.