News

Chit chat.
erpel
Posts: 385
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 3:42 pm

Re: News

Post by erpel »

Hawkpeter wrote: Wed Apr 09, 2025 11:33 pm...
That's almost what they've argued with the IOC.

https://iwf.sport/2025/04/10/iwf-acknow ... 28-quotas/

IWF wanted (2x7)x9=126 athletes.
Hawkpeter
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2022 7:17 am

Re: News

Post by Hawkpeter »

What make the outcome particularly difficult to accept is the number of sports that are also predominately individual in competition format, but have more slots than weightlifting.
Even boxing, a sport that had its federation taken over by the IOC because of how dysfunctional it is, has more than double the slots.

Archery, Badmitton, Boxing, Canoe, Equestrian, Fencing, Judo, Table Tennis, Tae kwon do and Wrestling - hardly sports that bring in enormous viewership, have more slots than Weightlifting. I suppose the sport is very lucky to be there at all given the corruption.
Last edited by Hawkpeter on Mon Apr 14, 2025 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
erpel
Posts: 385
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 3:42 pm

Re: News

Post by erpel »

Even having 6+6 (with no superfluous classes) would be enough for the time being. The argument should've been with other weight divisional sports in mind. Wrestling has 6 too e.g...
strapping
Site Admin
Posts: 647
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 7:46 am

Re: News

Post by strapping »

Hawkpeter wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 8:24 pm What make the outcome particularly difficult to accept is the number of sports that are also predominately individual in competition format, but have more slots than weightlifting.
Even boxing, a sport that had its federation taken over by the IOC because of how dysfunctional it is, has more than double the slots.

Archery, Badmitton, Boxing, Canoe, Equestrian, Fencing, Judo, Table Tennis, Tae kwon do and Wrestling - hardly sports that bring in enormous viewership, have more slots than Weightlifting. I suppose the sport is very lucky to be there at all given the corruption.
erpel wrote: Mon Apr 14, 2025 7:30 am Even having 6+6 (with no superfluous classes) would be enough for the time being. The argument should've been with other weight divisional sports in mind. Wrestling has 6 too e.g...
Whilst I think you are both right logically, I think that the IOC would hate the bad publicity brought by cutting slots with no external reason. Ultimately, doping and corruption gave the excuse to cut weightlifting down and the IOC isn't accountable to anyone.

I would be shocked if the weightlifting quota or number of events at the Olympics ever gets increased again. For whatever it's worth, I think my best guess regarding the weight categories is a pretty good guess. We'll see in about a month or so.
erpel
Posts: 385
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 3:42 pm

Re: News

Post by erpel »

I do think the number of OG medals would've been reduced to 7+7 or even 6+6 eventually even if there were no re-test positives, Ajan was still president etc., simply because the IOC always wants to include new events. Other sports had (less severe) cuts as well.
erpel
Posts: 385
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 3:42 pm

Re: News

Post by erpel »

They're going to change 98 to 94, but not 88 & 110? Now I'm confused.
strapping
Site Admin
Posts: 647
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 7:46 am

Re: News

Post by strapping »

erpel wrote: Tue Apr 22, 2025 6:31 am They're going to change 98 to 94, but not 88 & 110?
As far as I understand it, 88 will probably not be an Olympic category. 65, 79, 94, 110, +110.
erpel wrote: Tue Apr 22, 2025 6:31 am Now I'm confused.
Stop thinking. The I in IWF stands for illogical.
erpel
Posts: 385
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 3:42 pm

Re: News

Post by erpel »

Then 88 is going to be empty at WWC etc.

Also just stating a W69-W86 jump would be awful.
strapping
Site Admin
Posts: 647
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 7:46 am

Re: News

Post by strapping »

erpel wrote: Wed Apr 23, 2025 6:48 am Then 88 is going to be empty at WWC etc.
something something new weight categories to avoid non olympic categories
erpel wrote: Wed Apr 23, 2025 6:48 am Also just stating a W69-W86 jump would be awful.
W63-W77, W86, super. Yes, 77 and 86 are functionally the same category but they have to match the men's.
I don't like the category distribution of featherweight, middleweight, middle heavyweight, heavyweight, super-heavyweight.

The order for those uninitiated:
Flyweight
Bantamweight
Featherweight✔️
Lightweight
Middleweight✔️
Light Heavyweight
Middle Heavyweight✔️
Sub-heavyweight
Heavyweight✔️
Super-heavyweight ✔️

When you put it in those terms, I think even the average viewer can see how biased those categories are. East Asia will not be pleased.
erpel
Posts: 385
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2022 3:42 pm

Re: News

Post by erpel »

53-63-77-SHW should be Olympic and from its competitiveness 58 would be the 5th. But still not properly representative.

Just make 50-60-70-80-SHW and you cover 95% of participation.
Post Reply