Random Draw in Paris QF: Fair or Fail?

[durden_tyler]

This merits a thread of its own since a bunch of you will be whining about this come KO time in Paris. Posted in International Basket forum but no one's visiting that section. LOL

Group A Group B Group C
Australia France Serbia
Canada Germany South Sudan
Greece Japan United States
Spain Brazil Latvia

If based on paper,

Group A will have Greece and Canada; Group B, France and Germany, then Group C, USA and Serbia. Let's assume the two best non-group Top 2 will be Spain and Brazil (or Australia)-- the point differential really matters at this point because it's likely going to that tiebreaker with expected same win-loss records for the middle of the pack teams.

From the official Olympics/FIBA page:

The knockout rounds begin with eight teams in the quarterfinals. A random draw will determine the matchups for the quarterfinals, with two important caveats:

The two highest-ranked teams will be placed in the same pot and therefore end up on opposite sides of the bracket.
Teams from the same group can't be drawn against each other in the quarterfinals.

That "random draw" will screw some of the better teams! So say USA has the top spot (win over the other or tiebreak via point differential) and let's give France the other one (Japan and Brazil should give them an easy cushion on padding up that lead)

Potential QF pairings and in consideration those rules of same group can't be drawn vs each other in the semis

QF - Bracket A
USA vs. Greece/Germany/Spain/Canada/Brazil (Can't be drawn vs. Serbia/France)
Greece vs. France/Germany/Brazil/USA/Serbia (Can't be drawn vs Canada/Spain)

QF Bracket B
France vs. Greece/Canada/Serbia/Spain (Can't be drawn vs. Germany, Brazil, USA)
Germany vs. Greece/Canada/USA/Serbia/Spain)(Can't be drawn vs France/Brazil)

Obviously we can go into this QF pairings rabbit hole in details but not much point when "randomness" is involved. Let's just say we get the nicest of pairings this KO round so that we get to see the top/elite teams battle at the top (and just rank them 1-8, per "power rankings")

QF:
USA vs Brazil
Serbia vs Canada

Germany vs Greece
France vs Spain

Then, projected semis; USA vs Serbia and France vs Germany

Again, the random draw will draw a lot of flak when when they get the mighty USA in the QF (and even a bad luck in the same bracket with US in the SF).

[UcanUwill]

I do not like it, I do not think its fair, but at least it eliminates all the possible countings, thrown games, etc. But if I finish first in my group, I want to be sure I don't get USA before medal round, isnt that not reasonable?

Definitely not a fan whatsoever. I hate how FIBA changes the formats every time, it wasnt even broken and the mumber of teams is the same. What was wrong with 2 groups with 6 teams, every team also had 5 games, not 3. Imagine you are Japan, its once in a lifetine chance to play in Olympics, and you get to only play 3 games, that blows.

[SweaterBae]

Not a fan. Loaded groups make for poor quality beyond.

[Hungry]

I think some of this comes about from the strange insistence on using 3 groups of 4. Anyway you slice it, trying to make a quarterfinals from 3 groups is a messy proposition. 4 groups of 3 while not perfect (a team would only be guaranteed 2 games) would be better, but the most obvious solution would be adding 4 more teams and running 4 groups of 4. With the depth of the international field great teams miss the Olympics every 4 years (Lithuania and Slovenia jump out at me this year) so I don't feel it would cheapen the tournament. You'd then either run top 2 in every group to the quarters, or top finisher in every group to the quarters with the 2nd place finishers playing 3rd from another for a spot in the quarters.

[lambchop]

I think some of this comes about from the strange insistence on using 3 groups of 4. Anyway you slice it, trying to make a quarterfinals from 3 groups is a messy proposition. 4 groups of 3 while not perfect (a team would only be guaranteed 2 games) would be better, but the most obvious solution would be adding 4 more teams and running 4 groups of 4. With the depth of the international field great teams miss the Olympics every 4 years (Lithuania and Slovenia jump out at me this year) so I don't feel it would cheapen the tournament. You'd then either run top 2 in every group to the quarters, or top finisher in every group to the quarters with the 2nd place finishers playing 3rd from another for a spot in the quarters.

What I like about it is that the point differential becomes extremely important. Therefore, teams will look to blow out weaker opponents as best they can or will try to avoid losing by many points. It keeps the games competitive until the very end.

As for the teams that didn't qualify, it's definitely tough. However, Lithuania only has itself to blame after losing to a Puerto Rican team that has looked pretty underwhelming ever since those qualification games. And regarding Slovenia, I said it in another thread that they look kind of done as a basketball nation for the time being. It would be awesome to see Luka go off, but without a 2nd ball handler (Dragic) they're just not the same. Maybe Urban Klavzar can develop into that, if he can somehow get playing time in a solid pro league. Maybe he could play on the weaker ABA Liga teams or somewhere in Germany?

[peja_the_legend]

With the old format(2 groups of 6) teams would occasionally throw games in order to avoid certain opponents and have an easier path to the medal rounds.It was ugly and too obvious.The random draw is FIBA's solution to this issue even though the seeding is indeed weird,i'd expect two pools (pool A:top 3 plus best second team-pool b :rest of qualified teams)

Definitely not a fan whatsoever. I hate how FIBA changes the formats every time, it wasnt even broken and the mumber of teams is the same. What was wrong with 2 groups with 6 teams, every team also had 5 games, not 3. Imagine you are Japan, its once in a lifetine chance to play in Olympics, and you get to only play 3 games, that blows.

I mean that's the amount of games teams play in World Cup of football and i've never heard anyone saying it's too few games.Besides, with the old format teams reaching the medal rounds would have to play 8 games in 14 days.That's too much imo,6 is far more reasonable.

[UcanUwill]

With the old format(2 groups of 6) teams would occasionally throw games in order to avoid certain opponents and have an easier path to the medal rounds.It was ugly and too obvious.The random draw is FIBA's solution to this issue even though the seeding is indeed weird,i'd expect two pools (pool A:top 3 plus best second team-pool b :rest of qualified teams)

Definitely not a fan whatsoever. I hate how FIBA changes the formats every time, it wasnt even broken and the mumber of teams is the same. What was wrong with 2 groups with 6 teams, every team also had 5 games, not 3. Imagine you are Japan, its once in a lifetine chance to play in Olympics, and you get to only play 3 games, that blows.

I mean that's the amount of games teams play in World Cup of football and i've never heard anyone saying it's too few games.Besides, with the old format teams reaching the medal rounds would have to play 8 games in 14 days.That's too much imo,6 is far more reasonable.

You are reasonable, i am just a fan who is upset there are less games. Football is more demanding sport, you cant really play back to backs, plus Football is far more popular, so they never play multiple games at same time (except final group state round, which they do for other obvious reason), because every game is watched by countless millions. Football just has to have less games, or tournament would drag forever, right? Or they would have to do what basketball tournaments do and have multiple games at once.

[Exp0sed]

I do not like it, I do not think its fair, but at least it eliminates all the possible countings, thrown games, etc. But if I finish first in my group, I want to be sure I don't get USA before medal round, isnt that not reasonable?

Definitely not a fan whatsoever. I hate how FIBA changes the formats every time, it wasnt even broken and the mumber of teams is the same. What was wrong with 2 groups with 6 teams, every team also had 5 games, not 3. Imagine you are Japan, its once in a lifetine chance to play in Olympics, and you get to only play 3 games, that blows.

this is Fiba, this is the way it's always been. it's also the way it's always been in say the soccer Euros or the soccer World cup, usually you'd get one particularly strong group that nicknamed "the group of death" wherein 3 or even 4 strong teams get thrown together, teams that would far better chance to advance had they been in a different group. is it "unfair"? sure, but it's random and it's the way it is, part of the beauty of sports.

[UcanUwill]

I do not like it, I do not think its fair, but at least it eliminates all the possible countings, thrown games, etc. But if I finish first in my group, I want to be sure I don't get USA before medal round, isnt that not reasonable?

Definitely not a fan whatsoever. I hate how FIBA changes the formats every time, it wasnt even broken and the mumber of teams is the same. What was wrong with 2 groups with 6 teams, every team also had 5 games, not 3. Imagine you are Japan, its once in a lifetine chance to play in Olympics, and you get to only play 3 games, that blows.

this is Fiba, this is the way it's always been. it's also the way it's always been in say the soccer Euros or the soccer World cup, usually you'd get one particularly strong group that nicknamed "the group of death" wherein 3 or even 4 strong teams get thrown together, teams that would far better chance to advance had they been in a different group. is it "unfair"? sure, but it's random and it's the way it is, part of the beauty of sports.

Even then, Fiba has all these modifiers in draws, which kind off sucks to be honest. But I think this is randomness that should be controlled. Lets say I am Greece, and somehow i win that group, I beat Spain, Canada and Australia, and I draw USA in quareterfinals. Its just middle finger that doesnt have to be there. If USA ends up second or third in their group and I get them that way, thats good, but its unfair for first seed to get another first seed right of the gate, it just blows.

Imagibe Greece beat Canada in nail biting game, but their win positions and draws USA, where Canada draws South Sudan. F that, I would be do pissed off.

[durden_tyler]

With the old format(2 groups of 6) teams would occasionally throw games in order to avoid certain opponents and have an easier path to the medal rounds.It was ugly and too obvious.The random draw is FIBA's solution to this issue even though the seeding is indeed weird,i'd expect two pools (pool A:top 3 plus best second team-pool b :rest of qualified teams)

Definitely not a fan whatsoever. I hate how FIBA changes the formats every time, it wasnt even broken and the mumber of teams is the same. What was wrong with 2 groups with 6 teams, every team also had 5 games, not 3. Imagine you are Japan, its once in a lifetine chance to play in Olympics, and you get to only play 3 games, that blows.

I mean that's the amount of games teams play in World Cup of football and i've never heard anyone saying it's too few games.Besides, with the old format teams reaching the medal rounds would have to play 8 games in 14 days.That's too much imo,6 is far more reasonable.

You are reasonable, i am just a fan who is upset there are less games. Football is more demanding sport, you cant really play back to backs, plus Football is far more popular, so they never play multiple games at same time (except final group state round, which they do for other obvious reason), because every game is watched by countless millions. Football just has to have less games, or tournament would drag forever, right? Or they would have to do what basketball tournaments do and have multiple games at once.

Yeah, soccer is just a different thing entirely. So boring but a lot of people stil watch it. LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joao Saraiva]

I just hope USA can play the semifinal at night cause I got tickets for that game. It would be a dream come true.

[brackdan70]

The groups seem fine, but the random draw is weird. IDK not a big deal really. If you want hardware then win your games

[Slim Tubby]

I do not like it, I do not think its fair, but at least it eliminates all the possible countings, thrown games, etc. But if I finish first in my group, I want to be sure I don't get USA before medal round, isnt that not reasonable?

Definitely not a fan whatsoever. I hate how FIBA changes the formats every time, it wasnt even broken and the mumber of teams is the same. What was wrong with 2 groups with 6 teams, every team also had 5 games, not 3. Imagine you are Japan, its once in a lifetine chance to play in Olympics, and you get to only play 3 games, that blows.

this is Fiba, this is the way it's always been. it's also the way it's always been in say the soccer Euros or the soccer World cup, usually you'd get one particularly strong group that nicknamed "the group of death" wherein 3 or even 4 strong teams get thrown together, teams that would far better chance to advance had they been in a different group. is it "unfair"? sure, but it's random and it's the way it is, part of the beauty of sports.

I like your train of thought but to play "devil's advocate", we have our World Rankings for a reason and they tend to be a very accurate recent assessment of each country's level of success.

Using the process of Seeding would better ensure that the best teams have a level path to the Medal Rounds. There should be some kind of reward to validate the quality of play that occurs between these International events.

But I will agree that the random draw is certainly a lot more fun.

Sent from my N152DL using RealGM mobile app

[Exp0sed]

this is Fiba, this is the way it's always been. it's also the way it's always been in say the soccer Euros or the soccer World cup, usually you'd get one particularly strong group that nicknamed "the group of death" wherein 3 or even 4 strong teams get thrown together, teams that would far better chance to advance had they been in a different group. is it "unfair"? sure, but it's random and it's the way it is, part of the beauty of sports.

I like your train of thought but to play "devil's advocate", we have our World Rankings for a reason and they tend to be a very accurate recent assessment of each country's level of success.

Using the process of Seeding would better ensure that the best teams have a level path to the Medal Rounds. There should be some kind of reward to validate the quality of play that occurs between these International events.

But I will agree that the random draw is certainly a lot more fun.

Sent from my N152DL using RealGM mobile app

like I said, to me it's part of the "lore" of these type of tourney, it's part of the magic and craziness. is it unfair to someone? sure, someone gets lucky while someone else gets unlucky but since it's 100% random it isn't "unfair" it just makes luck a bigger factor than it could have been. for me as a European whose very used to this (across many sports), it just seems natural but I can see why it rubs some ppl the wrong way. personally I think it's a positive not a negative and yes, sometimes your team (or country) gets screwed and well, such is life

[durden_tyler]

Bump, especially if i and others have misinterpreted the QF draw incorrectly. But if this is correct, let this be a guide why teams are still running up the score late in blowout situations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[durden_tyler]

Thanks to mamba81 for the additional info on the QF draw. Reposting his posts so it’s not lost in the main Olympic thread:

Nobody is protected from random draw. There will be 4 pots
The best 2 first placed teams are in pot 1
The other first placed team and the best 2nd placed team in pot 2
The other second placed teams are in pot 3
3rd placed teams are in pot 4

With how strong group A is, playing a 3rd placed team is not necessarily a good thing, but it's worth a shot to go against the other 3rd placed team.

For Team USA it is important the 3rd team in their group doesn't get through, otherwise they are guaranteed to play to other 3rd placed team.

Can you provide scenarios please, it’s confusing but your specific pot descriptions make sense so thank you. It validates though that the pt differential matters because you don’t want to drop to tier/pots if you lost a tiebreak.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the current standings stay:
pot 1: USA, Germany
pot 2:Australia, France
pot 3: South Sudan, Canada
pot 4: Greece, Puerto Rico

USA cannot play Puerto Rico so they will play Greece
Germany vs Puerto Rico
Australia cannot play Canada so they play South Sudan.
France vs Canada

USA and Germany can only meet in the finals.

In this example there is no need for a draw because of the same group restrictions, but the draw will always determine the semis matchups

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[durden_tyler]

Will fix that when i get to my laptop. Tapatalk copy paste sucks. LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[California Gold]

Doesn’t matter anyway it doesn’t impact anything other than for the Silver and Bronze.

[Dr Aki]

Won't matter, Australia gonna win that gold