Clash of Continents

[Filas2]

I've read the thread Europe vs Asia and thought, what about other continents? As there are 5 continental zones for qualifications to the WC, these zones can be named "continents" and the continent vs continent results can be seen.
So I've tried to check all group results and see how does it look like.

Number of teams
Europe 10
Americas 5
Asia 4
Africa 3
Oceania 2

Total wins-losses, average score, %wins
Europe 27-7, 82.6-71.3, 79.4%
Oceania 6-4, 80.0-69.5, 60.0%
Americas 12-11, 78.7-72.4, 52.2%
Africa 3-13, 64.1-80.1, 20.0%
Asia 3-17, 70.7-82.8, 15.0%

I'd say %wins reflects how strong is average team in each continent.

Does not look good far Asia. But at least they won matchup against Africa 2-1, 73.0-70.0

Although Oceania lost matchup with Europe, but they got better point difference 2-3, 80.4-80.0

Oceania also got better point difference against Americas, 1-1, 71.5-67.5

And, finally, Europe have clear advantage against Americas, but they win much harder than lose, 8-4, 77.6-79.6


In conclusion, such statistics tells that in case if we'll get 8 additional teams to WC to make it total 32, it should be +6 teams to Europe, +1 to Americas and +1 to Oceania.

 

[Test2]

Nice numbers.

"In conclusion, such statistics tells that in case if we'll get 8 additional teams to WC to make it total 32, it should be +6 teams to Europe, +1 to Americas and +1 to Oceania."

This is the case where we can not trust statistics to make decisions - we can not add any more Oceania teams, because they got nothing more. I am pretty sure that Vanuatu or Papua and New Guinea game against Serbia or USA would not be so interesting. IMO Americas deserved one more spot. Venezuela, Uruguay or Mexico are pretty nice teams.

 

[Bury Please2]

You need to compare the 5th in Asia vs 11th in europe vs 3rd in oceania vs 4th in africa.

And you can see who deserve more spots.IMO Difference between 4th and 5th in asia isnt that big as the difference is in oceania between 2nd and 3rd.

IMO, Europe has 16 ready teams.Africa deserves 3.5, Asia 3.5, Oceania 2.5, North America 3.5 and South America 4.5.


europe 16 for sure
asia 3 for sure
africa 3 for sure
oceania 2 for sure
north america 3 for sure ( canada, usa, puerto rico)
south america 4 for sure

thats 30 teams. Then the 4th and 5th from asia, 4th and 5th africa, 3rd in oceania, 4th and 5th from north america and 5th in south america play a mini-tournament of which 2 qualifies to world cup.

 

[planaria2]

Fair enough:

Europe 14
Asia + Oceania (playing togheter) 7
Americas 7
Africa 4

4 more europeans would be fair, since teams like Polonia, Italy are nice. But after that, it´s not like there are too many forces left in Europe.

And if we have to choise between two equivalents teams like Macedonia and Venezuela, my option would be to globalize the basketball.

 

[Bury Please2]

I would definetly give 0.5 seats to continents. Let them battle each other in qualification, and the better team to advance.

Dont forget its 4 year thing. And in 4 years a team that is great can easily turn into garbage and the continent itself as well.

 

[JGX2]

North America 3.5 and South America 4.5.

!!!

3 of the top 5 at the FIBA-Americas last year were North America/Caribbean and the US didn't even play.

In any case it would be silly to break up the Americas. With 32 teams I would allocate the spots like this:

Host 1
Olympic Champion 1
Europe 14
Americas 7
Asia/Oceania 5
Africa 4

Having a world qualifying tournament for the last spots makes sense for the Olympics but it would be pointless for a 32-team WC since none of the teams participating would be serious contenders anyway. Host and Olympic champ spots should be separate from the continental allocation IMO.

 

[Billy Bounce2]

Just for the record:

Top8 : 5 Europe , 2 America , 1 Africa

 

[Dtown2]

Just for the record:

Top8 : 5 Europe , 2 America , 1 Africa

Buh? What African team is left?

It's 6 Europe, 2 America.

 

[Bury Please2]

Its european domination.
Apart from Germany, no european team is eliminated by a team from different continent.

 

[Billy Bounce2]

Buh? What African team is left?

It's 6 Europe, 2 America.

My bad Somehow I added Angola + Brazil from Top16 to Top8

 

[jorje2]

Oceania does not even have a third team.
It's ok for Aussies and Zealand to be there , but the thirdteam, if there is on, is Fiji islands.
Imo Americas+1-2
Africa+1
Asia+1
Europe +4-5
the main reason for these numbers is not how well are the currentteams are doing,but how good teams are the future candidates.
For instance Israel,Italy have the potentials to make some good appearances in the future.
Even in Americas i can't think of some good team not present in this tournament

 

[Gytaz2]

3 European and 1 American team in the semis. It's a good achievement for our continent.

 

[Bury Please2]

3 European and 1 American team in the semis. It's a good achievement for our continent.

I think Europe deserves more seats on performances.

 

[thegreekmeister2]

I think Europe deserves more seats on performances.

of course, but what can you do Well at least stop those stupid threads on the forum which says "should X continent be given more seats in olympics/WC"

 

[Lewis3]

3 European and 1 American team in the semis. It's a good achievement for our continent.

how can any of you do such blank comparson
you can NOT compare the any continent, team by team, when Europe has like four times a many teams as any other continent

one team from the Americans and 3 from Europe means that the Americas have been a lot more successful than Europe this far because you have to take into account the chances of each continent in terms of number of countries participating per continent in compassion with the other continents.

Chances per Continent, # of teams over 24 times 100
Europe: 10 over 24 = 0.4166667 x 100; so European teams have a 41.7 % of wining this championship
The Americas: 5 over 24 = 0.2083 x 100; American teams have a 20.8 %

as a matter of fact, the most successful continent so far have been Oceania.

 

[janos2]

how can any of you do such blank comparson
you can NOT compare the any continent, team by team, when Europe has like four times a many teams as any other continent

one team from the Americans and 3 from Europe means that the Americas have been a lot more successful than Europe this far because you have to take into account the chances of each continent in terms of number of countries participating per continent in compassion with the other continents.

Chances per Continent, # of teams over 24 times 100
Europe: 10 over 24 = 0.4166667 x 100; so European teams have a 41.7 % of wining this championship
The Americas: 5 over 24 = 0.2083 x 100; American teams have a 20.8 %

as a matter of fact, the most successful continent so far have been Oceania.

You are wrong my friend.
There is a reason why each continent has the participants it has in the WC.The first criterion is how strong each FIBA zone is.The quality of basketball produced in Europe is the best in the world like it or not.
That is why European teams dominate all world events (apart from the US obviously.) Fiba Europe was not handed more spots in the WC and OT because of lobbying...
Moreover the WC is not just the final tournament it is also the road to that.This makes the European teams' effort all the more difficult since they have to earn their WC spot through a top competition as the Eurobasket and not some other far inferior regional tourney and that includes the American C as well.
If you haven't watched one already,i would invite you to watch the coming Eurobasket and decide which competition has the higher level.Just keep in mind that the actual level of a competition is decided by the team ranked last and not the one finishing on top...
And please stop with the creative usage of math and stats.
Anybody can use that to prove a point.
i.e why don't you calculate the fraction of each continent's countries to its WC participants,to its final 16 paricipants, to its final 8.........

 

[Gytaz2]

how can any of you do such blank comparson
you can NOT compare the any continent, team by team, when Europe has like four times a many teams as any other continent

one team from the Americans and 3 from Europe means that the Americas have been a lot more successful than Europe this far because you have to take into account the chances of each continent in terms of number of countries participating per continent in compassion with the other continents.

Chances per Continent, # of teams over 24 times 100
Europe: 10 over 24 = 0.4166667 x 100; so European teams have a 41.7 % of wining this championship
The Americas: 5 over 24 = 0.2083 x 100; American teams have a 20.8 %

as a matter of fact, the most successful continent so far have been Oceania.

 

[Dtown2]

Fiba Europe was not handed more spots in the WC and OT because of lobbying...

Mostly true, though those wild cards Russia, Germany, and Lithuania got weren't due to outstanding play.

Props to Russia and Lithuania for actually living up to the wild card spot. Germany could have been replaced with anyone and it wouldn't have made much difference.

 

[thegreekmeister2]

Mostly true, though those wild cards Russia, Germany, and Lithuania got weren't due to outstanding play.

Props to Russia and Lithuania for actually living up to the wild card spot. Germany could have been replaced with anyone and it wouldn't have made much difference.

Its easy to say now. When WC were given it looked like nowitzki was going to play.
Anyway which team not from Europe is stronger than Germany and still did not get a card?

Americas have only 3-4 teams that can be on top 16 Euro level, Asia - zero of such teams, Africa zero of such teams, Oceania 1-2. Thats it

 

[Lewis3]

And please stop with the creative usage of math and stats.
Anybody can use that to prove a point.

EXACTLY
You've just proven my point

Total wins-losses, average score, %wins
Europe 27-7, 82.6-71.3, 79.4%
Oceania 6-4, 80.0-69.5, 60.0%
Americas 12-11, 78.7-72.4, 52.2%
Africa 3-13, 64.1-80.1, 20.0%
Asia 3-17, 70.7-82.8, 15.0%

I raise my case

EDIT:Gytaz, Thanks for editing your post, that's very mature of you