Posts by karakedi

    So to close off the NT season for the women's teams, I wanted to have a look at how teams changed over this summer. Unfortunately I didn't have the ranking points from before, just the seeds from the OQT draw in March. Over the whole summer, the biggest improvements would be for Türkiye, France (both +6 positions), Argentina and Ukraine (+5). Poland and Canada also did well with +3. USA, NL, THA (+2), DOM, GER, PR and Slovenia (+1) also improved their position :super:

    The biggest downfalls are for Korea (-17), Peru (-12) and Mexico (-8). Bulgaria's rebuilding but lost 4 positions. COL, JPN, BEL, ITA and SRB lost 3 while China lost 1 position. Brazil and Czech Republic seem the most stable teams from this summer as they are currently ranked the same as before summer :flower:

    For the OQT, the big winners when it comes to ranking points are the Dominicans (+22,5), Puerto Rico (+22,18) and Canada (+18,71). The most points were lost by Mexico (-21,89), Peru (-19,40) and quite surprisingly, Belgium (-17,76) :white:

    But history is there.…yball/world-ranking/women

    Click "More details" for any team. For example for Türkiye:

    The first match in 2023:

    May 31, 2023KOR149.12299.14TUR0 - 3+2.85

    And the the latest rating is: 397.46 so it means +98.32 in 2023.

    Oops. Sorry .Wrong Calculation. Can be deleted.

    you are wrong twice.

    Poland men swept this match 3-0 in the 2018 Men’s Final.

    Italy and Brazil were also in the Final in 2016 a 3-0 Brazilian sweep.

    Me? It's Bard's answer. How could it make it up? Interesting!

    However there is a match between Italy and US in 2016 Olympics which Italy won 3-1 and its first set score is 28-26.

    Is it correct? I feel like Bard makes up a lot of numbers even if it's somewhat correct about the subject its getting at

    It seemed to be a reasonable answer to me. Also seeing a comeback from 24-19 to 24-24 by Brazil today, I asked another question about comebacks when one team is at 24.

    Here's its answer:

    The biggest comeback in a volleyball game when one team is at 24 is 7 points. This has happened on a few occasions, but one of the most notable examples is the 2016 Olympic Games semi-final between Italy and Brazil.

    Brazil was up 24-17 in the first set, but Italy managed to come back and win 28-26. Italy went on to win the match 3-1 and claim the gold medal.

    Another example of a 7-point comeback in a volleyball game is the 2018 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship final between Poland and Brazil. Poland was up 24-17 in the fourth set, but Brazil came back to win 28-26. Brazil went on to win the match 3-2 and claim the gold medal.

    It is very difficult to come back from a 7-point deficit in a volleyball game, but it is possible. The team that is down needs to play very well and the team that is up needs to make some mistakes.

    Well Türkiye's winning streak makes me curious. I asked the following to Google Bard and it came with the following answer:

    Question: What is the longest winning streak of a national team in women's voleyball?


    The longest winning streak of a national team in women's volleyball is 56 consecutive wins, held by the Soviet Union women's national volleyball team from 1964 to 1968. This streak is the longest winning streak in any international volleyball competition.

    The Soviet Union women's national volleyball team was one of the most dominant teams in the world during the 1960s. They won the gold medal at the 1964 and 1968 Olympic Games, as well as the 1960 and 1962 World Championships. The team was known for its strong defense and its ability to win close matches.

    The Soviet Union's winning streak came to an end on December 21, 1968, when they lost to Japan in five sets at the 1968 Olympic Games. However, their winning streak remains one of the most impressive accomplishments in the history of women's volleyball.

    It is important to note that the Soviet Union women's national volleyball team was a state-sponsored team, and it is possible that some of their wins were not entirely fair. However, the team was still very talented and well-coached, and their winning streak is a testament to their dominance of the sport.

    I tried to be kind and helpful, asking to user who shared the table, his/her objective and his/her aim with full of good thoughts, tried to help if I could but you intervened with your cynical wordings, not even taking into consideration my reasonings (why it is not an indication and how it can be).

    From this moment onwards, I will not continue with the discussion on the same topic, since this will not help to anyone and will not add any value to anything so I leave you and the user(s) who thinks in the same way as you do (if there is any) and I will repeat the same words once again. You just believe in what you want to believe.

    Türkiye's block stats for the final stage were very good. Would it have been the same if they had played with Cansu instead?

    That was my starting point and went ahead and created that list (from raw data in your words). I thought it looked interesting and posted here. Is there anything wrong with it?

    I really tried to understand this comparison but to be honest, this is far to give any idea about setters performances with block comparsions.

    1- There are many elements to compare the blocks of Türkiye's vs opponents and one of them is the names of the MBs and their skills in blocks at both sides.

    2- Secondly, names of attackers (attack players) and their skills on blockings at both sides so no one can say it was because of Elif or Cansu played and we have these numbers. This is totally speculative and a kind of attempt to convince people to believe in something forcefully and I cannot even say that it is statistics (and cannot even say it is biased). Only a bulk of raw numbers, taken from tables which means nothing to me.

    3- If you want to compare something, you can compare the number of blocks for each setter by per match (average) or for whole tournament. Considering the whole tournament, it is 2 blocks and 14 touches for Cansu and 14 blocks and 7 touches for Elif an that is all.

    4- If you really want to look at the setting performance and the distribution, I can recommend to look at the table, which I shared yesterday, in the post 1055 (the table prepared by Hernandez).

    2- I do not want to convince anybody for anything.

    4- I have had a look at that table but I cannot figure out how to relate it to block performance.

    I had posted in another site about the block performance by setter for this year's VNL.

    Final stage (Türkiye's blocks - the opponent's blocks)

    Italy 16-6 (Elif)

    USA 18-14 (Elif)

    China 14-5 (Elif)

    Group stage (from last to first):

    Croatia 6-4 (Cansu)

    Brasil 13-5 (Elif)

    Thailand 14-5 (Elif)

    Japan 17-9 (First 2 sets Elif, last 3 sets Cansu)

    Dominik 16-3 (Elif)

    Canada 8-5 (Elif)

    Holland 6-8 (Cansu)

    Polland 7-6 (Cansu)

    USA 3-13 (Cansu)

    Italy 13-8 (Cansu)

    Serbia 10-9 (Cansu)

    South Korea 6-4 (first 2 sets Cansu)

    Tournaments where points are given is somewhat wrong statement. You are not given points. You exchange points depending on your result and rating of your opponent using a K factor.

    The ratings are based on zero-sum games where one team's gain is equal to the other teams loss with the result that the net improvement in benefit of the game is zero. K factor affects the number of points exchanged, the higher K factor, the higher gain/loss of points.

    8 out of 16 participants in the VNL are European national teams...

    How is it possible to assign the same coefficient "K" to the European championship as to the other continental championships?

    The coefficient, starting from a basic score for everyone, should be calculated each time on the basis of the ranking of the participants in the tournament...

    Makes sense. Different K factors can be used depending on the average rating of the particpants. So for ECH there would be a higher K factor than other confederations.

    In chess for example there are tournament categories depending on the avreage rating of participants.

    Nothing goes more than this IMHO.

    During the finals of Türkiye Efeler Ligi playoff finals 2021-2022; Ziraat had

    Aslan Ekşi

    and Halkbank had

    Arslan Ekşi

    Aslan and Arslan are actually the same name both of them mean "lion"

    Both of the players were setters of their teams.

    Türkiye will be ahead of Netherlands or Iran.


    - If one them cannot win one point (loses 0-3 or 1-3), Türkiye is ahead of that team because the loser would have 5 points

    - If Iran loses in 5sets, Iran is behind Türkiye (6 points each but worse set ratio than Türkiye)

    - If Netherlands loses in 5 sets, then Netherlands is behind Türkiye (6 points each but worse set ratio than Türkiye)

    In summary, the loser cannot pass Türkiye.

    Ukrain needs +16 in 3 sets to pass Türkiye.

    My calculation:

    Points ratio for Türkiye:

    gp > 210/186.

    %1 = 1.1290322580645161290322580645161290323

    Ukrain currently has 142 points won and 133 lost, so to top Türkiye's points ratio (assuming Ukrains wins 25-x, 25-y, 25-z)

    gp > (142+75)/%1-133

    %2 = 59.200000000000000000000000000000000001