Talk:Luge at the 2014 Winter Olympics – Qualification

[Untitled]

According to the FIL [1] the Athletes will be ranked by World Cup points (General Class) earned in the Olympic season up to December 31, 2013. The Olympic Season started in November of this year not last year. So my calculations are correct and are not "vandalism".

Actually your opinion that the Olympic season started in November of this year does not seem to be shared by the FIL. In the previous Olympics the FIL used the phrase: "Athletes will be ranked by World Cup points earned in the Olympic season up to December 31, 2009." If you review the qualification for that Olympics you will discover that the full 2008-09 season was added to the first five races of the 2009-10 season. This article would seem to indicate that you have it wrong, but it is not conclusive, it only implies that how the athlete is doing in the winter of 2013 is relevant to Olympic qualification. In addition, it would be easy to view as vandalism because, even viewed in light of the argument you make, they are still not correct. For one thing there are 39 male berths listed with a total of 38. For another, the nations listed do not follow the tie-breaking rules established in the qualification document you link.18abruce (talk) 22:25, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh interesting I didn;t know that. Sorry. 174.91.155.64 (talk) 23:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guess what, I had a conversation with Christoph Schweiger (executive director of the FIL) and they have changed their policy to only considering the five races of this year for this olympics. At this point maybe I should just stick to hockey.18abruce (talk) 03:33, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think India is qualified as well because there is only nation that can get an allocation in the relay that would need a men's quota. Also does anyone know if a nation can get more than one additional quotas reserved for the team relay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.228.14 (talk) 02:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the list to reflect the team relay allocations. Let me know what you think — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.228.14 (talk) 03:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

please reread the qualification rules that are sourced at the bottom of the page: 8 relay teams are to qualify not 12. At that point Romania would receive a doubles allocation leaving room for six athletes. After that it is debatable (or ambiguous), it says, "First priority for first round of reallocation for unused quota positions will go to qualified athletes who have met FIL minimum qualification standards from non-represented countries. Once all possible NOC/countries are represented, then the second round of reallocation will go to the next ranked qualified athletes in each discipline with equal distribution between disciplines (men/women/doubles)." The problem there is whether non-represented is applied by race or in general. And does 'first round' mean the first opening, and second round mean the second opening? I don't know for certain, and that is why I did not indicate the reallocated positions as qualified yet.18abruce (talk) 03:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean this "The 8 allocations for Relay Team are given to athletes from the highest ranking nations" If so I think that is referring to the 8 quotas that can be used to create relay teams. In essence that would allow for those 12 teams to compete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.228.14 (talk) 03:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I don't know how many times I read that to mean that 8 relay teams qualified without looking at it closely. Looks good I think. I am still hesitant about South Korea in the men's, but I believe it is correct.18abruce (talk) 04:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

South Korea is correct because their athlete got the highest placement (26th in the Nations Cup) out of all the tied athletes.

And also Kazakhstan benefits twice from the "unqualified nations thing" so when they get a spot in one of the events, does it mean they aren't eligible for another? Which would mean Croatia would qualify in women's?

I don't know for sure, I wondered the same.18abruce (talk) 04:41, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Australian Olympic committee wrote their athlete was in 38th in an "adjusted Olympic ranking" whatever that means. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.228.14 (talk) 20:19, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

just a guess, but they probably mean Ferlazzo. The world cup listing has him after macovei from moldova (which would put him 38th), but I believe the tie-breaker should put them the other way around with Ferlazzo being in 37th.18abruce (talk) 21:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

South Korea qualifies in all four disicilpines

This article says South Korea qualified sleds in all four events [2] we only have listed one. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is completely possible, it is likely they would take the spots that we believed were going to Kazakhstan, so they could field a relay team, they did rank ninth in the qualiying period. Seems peculiar though because the Kazakh entries were thought to be achieved by the same logic that qualified the Korean man.18abruce (talk) 00:05, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]