There are updates Open play off results, Open final table and details for the play off at the Team competition.
I have to fight with my sleeping deficit now...
Eventually a strict order of timekeeping has to be instaured, and the participants have to play with games approved by technical committee... Seeing players taking a very long time to choose the game they want to play on will soon be a thing of the past!
In all, I‘m sure everyone had a great time in Riga, although the closing ceremonies were cut short as everyone present at the RTU had a long day, and wanted to go elsewhere...
To Vlada Kraus, again congratulations for the great job in keeping track of the game results! To Intars Zubeckis, being in charge of all the boys to prepare the games was a tough task, but in it you gained experience for future events! Romans Blumenthals finally won his bet! By having nearly 200 participants in thie bi-annual happening, he eclipsed records in participation, and in the number of countries taking part in the activities!
And perhaps I should pat the timekeeper on the back, as if he wasn‘t behind the CD player, watch in hand, the event would have finished later than the actual finishing time...
To those viewing this, and are to fly home: have a safe trip, would be nice to see you again in Russia in 2 years.
I want to thanks all the Latvians organizers, especially to Intars and all those young helpers. They did a great job under the patronate of Roman.
I will fly back home today. I shall update overall results and detail results from the team competition tomorrow or day after tom.
Big congratulation to the winners!
World ranking is update.
The tournament: http://worldrank.bordhockey.dk/lists/tdetail.php?tour=World+Championships+2005
The ranking frontpage: www.worldranking.tk
Hi. I just want to give some cultural and historical background information on the third place issue.If we look at the history there was not played a bronze match in neither of the World Cups 1993, 1995, 1997 and 1999, neither individual or in team competition. A full bronze match is thus in a historical perspective a new invention with respect to table hockey world cups! It is also a fact, that in the mother of all table hockey tournaments and the largest table hockey tournament in the world, the Swedish Open, there has never been played a bronze match in modern time!!!
Thus, with two swedes losing the semi finals, and in light of the history of the two largest and most prestigious tournaments in the world, I ask people to show respect for the decision made and to fully respect these two outstanding players for their results. Reaching a semi final in a world cup is a lifetime achievent and I want to bring my congratulations. Waching the attempt from the organizers to not mention these two players in the final prize giving cermony was truly a painful experience and a shame for the newly founded ITHF.
I guess the decision should be made by the organizers of the WCh or better by the Executive Committee of the ITHF (because after founding the ITHF the organization of the WCh was a matter of ITHF), not by players.
What about if both final opponents would refuse to play finals, just because of they would both agreed to share the gold? Of course this is an extreme argument... But what about the same would happen at the team competition on Sunday
There were rules for the WCh in Riga created by organizers of the event. Among them was the bronze medal match. The bronze medal match was played at every other category. I do not like to see the rules are changing just because of some players agree on it.
I have prepared the results pages (which are not still completed, some small changes are needed) with expecting to ask for the final decision about the "bronze question".
Can you please show me where that rule about the bronze match is written??In the history of world cup, the split of the bronze has been business-as-usual during the nineties. In the greatest of all table hockey tournaments, the Swedish Open, it has always been split. In all swedish tournaments it has usually been split. The same is actually true about the history of the team competitions! Why should we enforce these two players to play a match that no-one wants to play, or to watch. Why shouldn‘t we give these two heroes the possibility to instead watch the important and historic match in the final, the enthrilling rematch between Sweden and Finland?In light of the history and the culture for bronze matches I must say that I find your arguments Vladimir as rather strange and a bit off-topic.I my eyes, and I guess in most in most other Swedish and Norwegian eyes, the bronze medal for World Cup 2005 was split between Petter Bengtsson and Peter Östlund. Split, as in 1999, 1997, 1995, 1993. As in all Swedish Championships. And this no matter what any organizing committee or executive committee might conclude on. This is simply how the WC history is going to be written in Scandinavia. Instead I think the organizing committee should apologize for trying to ignore their achievements at the prize giving cermony.At leas - these are my personal views on the matter!BrgdsEspen S
Espen, as I can see the results from the WChs in 1999, 1997 and 1995 (http://hem.bredband.net/b291604/bordshockey/index.htm), the bronze medal was not splittet. The bronze medal match was not played, but the 3rd was that players with better placement at the final group.
In 2001 and 2003 there were played the bronze medal matches - best of seven. The same was demanded by organizers in Riga. The organizer decides rules, not players.
Could you please imagine that the same could happen at any other sport? Players refusing playing a placement match?
This is also of course my personal view.
I would like to add that the bronze medal match was played also at the 1st WCh in Stockholm 1989. So the Scandinavian history is not so clear anyway.
I want to repeat that the ITHF did not make any decision about this problem. It means there was no attempt for intervention at the final ceremony. Roman said that he can not decide on Sunday evening, because the ITHF exists. Nothing more, nothing less.
BTW: The 3rd place was decided also at the Swedish Masters this year - for the needs of the EuroLeague. EuroLeague has a rule that 3rd place must be decided. But it is not important at this WCh bronze question.
I don‘t know what you did with respect to putting this years Swedish Masters into the EL ranking, but on the official SM results page and for the history record of the Swedish Masters, this years third place was split between Roni Nuttonen, Finland and Finn Fries, Sweden.
With respect to other sports and board games it is as easily common to split between "Winner", "Runner-up" and "Semi finalists". I cannot see how this can be a decisive argument.
With respect to the final cermony I do not now what was thought of or not, but I was personally provoked that the semi finalists of the worlds most prestigious table hockey tournament was not brought on to stage and celebrated. I know for certain that very many of the other players was thinking the same. Thus also the big applaude and relief when Österman showed his great sportsmanship and judgement and brought them up to the stage.
And I am still not convinced that the bronze was not split, even though I can see the same numbers as you Vladimir. I am anyway sure of that the bronze was split in the teams competitions, as Norway received a split bronze medal together with Czech Republic in the late nineties. It is anyway good to see that no bronze match was played. I now that in the early history of the WCs the frenchmen (yes, they were playing by that time) were insisting on bronze matches, but that this then by everbodys relief finally was removed (but again, these are things that I have heard and do not know for sure).
Anyway - to compare the results from two different groups are not a fair method of comparing two players with respect to prizes (but ok for placements further down). Both runner-ups should be awarded in my view. (but i guess most people have heard my views by now ;-)
Both Peter and Petter played at the same final group on Sunday. Petter B. won 3:1.
When putting results from EL tournaments into the EL rankings the 3rd place has to be decided. It mas made even for the SM 2005.
There were rules for the WCh in Riga. Now we have the official body for our sport. So I guess that we should let the ITHF to decide this question.
To let to decide just some players (even the best one; Hans, big congratulations once again!), would not be the best solution for the future of our sport, in my opinion.
I would also like to mention that in the other sports that are most comparable with table hockey - with a large number of individual players and a cup system in the end - sports like tennis, table tennis, snooker, dart, etc - it is not common to play bronze matches. When did you ever see a bronze match played in tennis? And even worse - at the same time as the final?
Bronze matches are common in sports played by teams and with a small number of competitors in the championship, such as for ice hockey and soccer, but these are not the sports table hockey should be compared with.
But I guess you also might find equally good examples proving the opposite, so... ;-)
I respect your arguments. You wanted some opposite example. I can give you one even from tennis. There are played bronz medal matches at the Olympic Games tennis tournament.
But still - the organizers created rules for the tournament. The important fact is that the 3rd place was planned to decide, not to give to both players.
If this would really happen (double bronze medal), all those 3 players beaten in bronze medal matches of ladies, junior and veteran categories (and possibly also both teams) would be able to demand the bronze medal too. Or can we tell them that they just have no claim for it as they have played the bronze medal match?
Then I suggest the follwing:
- For all team competitions: always bronze matches (as for most other similar examples in comparable team sports).- For all individual competions: never bronze matches (as for most other similar examples in comparable individual sports), if a large number of participants (lets say: above 64). You can easily afford to give away 2 bronze medals.With respect to the players taking the issue in their own hand I can see your point. Though, 1) they did what they are used to, 2) some places it is custom habit that even if bronze matches are planned it is ok that they are not played if both players agree on that, 3) i can still not see any place written in the given information that bronze matches has to be played 4) no matter what arguments are going on - as a participant I still want to be able to give my celebrations to the semifinalists of the worlds most prestigious tournament at the price giving cermony, and not having them ignored,
Now I‘ll rest my case... thanks for listening.
Espen, could you please give us an example from some other sport where it was decided by players not to play a bronze medal match, although it was scheduled? You wrote, you know about it.
Both players asked for being 3rd at the WCh, while the medal would be in the holding of just one of them, OK. But I guess their demand was not officially decided yet.
I also have respect to both Petter and Peter because of their results. I just want to be sure, that all rules were fulfilled. Of course we can change rules for the future WChs.
They acted very unsportsmen-like :(
IMHO they deserve only 4th place.
They refused even to play just sudden death for 3rd place, but in WCh2005 rules was match for 3rd place "best of 5"
As I wrote both Bengtsson and Ostlund refused to play....