rue_des_plantes
Member
- Mar 14, 2021
- 310
- 678
Every +1 criteria had major restrictions on who could enter, and the FIG didn’t differentiate quota places beyond nominative, non-nominative, and the order in which they wanted them to be allocated. This was intentional, even if they didn’t really spell out or play fair with the allocation order.
I can see FIG generally wanting major specialists or big countries whose specialists don’t fit in well for 4-3-3 going for individual Cups, then two big countries get an AA +1, and anybody who doesn’t have 1-2 spots fights it out with new seniors and individuals without quota places at Continentals, bigger countries being handicapped by who they can send.
Judging by the language and how they treated the AA Cup, i.e. reallocating it before the original allocation and confirmation window even though this didn’t follow per their pandemic documents, I would guess the FIG never intended to have a situation like USA and CHN winning a +1 at Continentals before either World Cup circuit was completed and allocated.
I can see FIG generally wanting major specialists or big countries whose specialists don’t fit in well for 4-3-3 going for individual Cups, then two big countries get an AA +1, and anybody who doesn’t have 1-2 spots fights it out with new seniors and individuals without quota places at Continentals, bigger countries being handicapped by who they can send.
Judging by the language and how they treated the AA Cup, i.e. reallocating it before the original allocation and confirmation window even though this didn’t follow per their pandemic documents, I would guess the FIG never intended to have a situation like USA and CHN winning a +1 at Continentals before either World Cup circuit was completed and allocated.
Last edited: