I was just about to post the same question.
It seems a little unfair to force an additional match to determine the bronze medal.
The should simply give 2 medals to the losing semifinalists.
Having the Bronze Medal Play-off makes it a bigger achievement. Why should two "losers" get the bronze?! The play-off determines who finishes in 3rd and 4th place. It's better than having two Bronze medalists IMO.
It's unnatural for tennis that two losing players face each other to determine who's the lesser loser.
Besides, there are other sports where both losing semifinalists get bronze medal :shrug:
why is it? i assume you've watched the YEC in which several matches have been played between the bottom 2 players of the group, who have both already lost 2 matches.
bronze means you come 3rd, why shouldn't they play off for it.
its simple when you think about it, the 4 semi finalist will each play 2 matches, 2 of 2 wins = gold, 1 of 2 wins = silver or bronze dependant on which match won. 0 of 2 wins = 4th place no medal.
bronze should always be a playoff in my eyes it makes sense.
SF winners play for Gold and semi losers play for Bronze... why are people saying it's weird that they do it like that, I mean don't they do it in all Olympic sports???!!!
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Tennis Forum
33.4M posts
98.7K members
Since 2001
A forum community dedicated to Tennis players and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about players, gear, matches, scores, guidelines, and more!