Clash of Continents

[janos]

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.........

[Gytaz]

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.

[Dtown]

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.

[thegreekmeister]

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

[Lewis]

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

[Gytaz]

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

I thought the image would be more fitting here. It sums up what I wanted to say perfectly.

[janos]

EXACTLY
You've just proven my point

No i didn't.
You just don't get it.
Anybody can use stats to prove whatever he wants.
All one has to do is use the figures that suit him and disregard the rest.
If taken out of context anything can be used to support ANY argument.

I raise my case

Am i missing sth here?

[mcampbell075]

Great updates!

[Dtown]

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

I'd say a healthy Dominican Republic squad could have mirrored Germany's performance, remember they only lost to Canada after one of their stars was recalled due to injury.

[Filas]

I like numbers So let's see some history.

since 1990, the were similar system as now, starting in 4 groups and qualifying either for 1/8 final or quarterfinal (in case if there were only 16teams starting in WC). So for each year we can check numbers of teams from each continent in different phases, like top16, top8, top4, top2 and winner.

Let's see continent by continent performance (for period 1990-2010).

Africa

Allways had 12.5% of all teams in WC (means 2 out of 16 or 3 out of 24).
Never qualified for top8.
50% qualification for top16. Worst at 2010 - 33.3%. Best at 2006 - 66.7%.

Asia

Minimum 12.5% of all teams (2 out of 16), maximum 16.7% (4 out of 24). Average representation of Asian teams - 14.3%
6.25% qualification for top8. Best at 1994 - 50% (and the only).
25% qualification for top16 (same for both 2006 and 2010).

Oceania

Minimum 6.25% of all teams (1 out of 16), maximum 8.3% (2 out of 24).
Average representation of Oceanian teams - 7.1%
12.5% qualification for top4. Best at 2002 - 100% (and the only).
37.5% qualification for top8. Best - 100% (1990,1994 and 2002).
100% qualification for top16.

Americas

Minimum 20.8% of all teams (5 out of 24), maximum 37.5% (6 out of 16).
Average representation of American teams - 30.4%
3.4% winning. Best at 1994 - 16.7% (and the only).
6.9% in top2. Best at 1994 and 2002 - 16.7%.
23.5% in top4. Best at 1990 and 2006 - 33.3%.
50% in top8. Best at 1990 and 2002 - 66.7%, worst at 2006 - 33.3%
45.4% in top16. Best at 2010 - 60%, worst at 2006 - 33.3%

Europe

Minimum 31.3% of all teams (5 out of 16), maximum 41.7% (10 out of 24).
Average representation of European teams - 35.7%
13.3% winning. Best at 1990 and 2002 - 20%.
26.7% in top2. Best at 1990 - 40%, worst at 1994 and 2002 - 20%.
37.5% in top4. Best at 1994 - 60%, worst at 2006 - 22.2%.
67.5% in top8. Best at 1998 - 100%, worst - 60% (4 times).
94.7% in top16. Best at 2006 - 100%, worst at 2010 - 90%.


Got tired with all the calculations, so will go to sleep and leave conclusions for future

[sinobball]

I like numbers So let's see some history.

since 1990, the were similar system as now, starting in 4 groups and qualifying either for 1/8 final or quarterfinal (in case if there were only 16teams starting in WC). So for each year we can check numbers of teams from each continent in different phases, like top16, top8, top4, top2 and winner.

Let's see continent by continent performance (for period 1990-2010).

Africa

Allways had 12.5% of all teams in WC (means 2 out of 16 or 3 out of 24).
Never qualified for top8.
50% qualification for top16. Worst at 2010 - 33.3%. Best at 2006 - 66.7%.

Asia

Minimum 12.5% of all teams (2 out of 16), maximum 16.7% (4 out of 24). Average representation of Asian teams - 14.3%
6.25% qualification for top8. Best at 1994 - 50% (and the only).
25% qualification for top16 (same for both 2006 and 2010).

Oceania

Minimum 6.25% of all teams (1 out of 16), maximum 8.3% (2 out of 24).
Average representation of Oceanian teams - 7.1%
12.5% qualification for top4. Best at 2002 - 100% (and the only).
37.5% qualification for top8. Best - 100% (1990,1994 and 2002).
100% qualification for top16.

Americas

Minimum 20.8% of all teams (5 out of 24), maximum 37.5% (6 out of 16).
Average representation of American teams - 30.4%
3.4% winning. Best at 1994 - 16.7% (and the only).
6.9% in top2. Best at 1994 and 2002 - 16.7%.
23.5% in top4. Best at 1990 and 2006 - 33.3%.
50% in top8. Best at 1990 and 2002 - 66.7%, worst at 2006 - 33.3%
45.4% in top16. Best at 2010 - 60%, worst at 2006 - 33.3%

Europe

Minimum 31.3% of all teams (5 out of 16), maximum 41.7% (10 out of 24).
Average representation of European teams - 35.7%
13.3% winning. Best at 1990 and 2002 - 20%.
26.7% in top2. Best at 1990 - 40%, worst at 1994 and 2002 - 20%.
37.5% in top4. Best at 1994 - 60%, worst at 2006 - 22.2%.
67.5% in top8. Best at 1998 - 100%, worst - 60% (4 times).
94.7% in top16. Best at 2006 - 100%, worst at 2010 - 90%.


Got tired with all the calculations, so will go to sleep and leave conclusions for future

Great analysis! Hope FIBA can see this.

I think we should calculate on a 8-year cycle just like FIBA does though. In which case you'd see Americas as a whole isn't doing that much better than Africa and Asia in terms of qualifying to the 2nd round, despite elite teams like USA and Argentina. All 3 continents should have # of teams reduced. Asia has too many teams every time, but there are excuses (2006-Japan-host; 2010-Lebanon-wild card). Europe is the most competitive and needs more slots. Oceania should stay the same (they have no choice anyway).

[leonesponce]

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

Thats true... Eurobasket 2009 16th ranked team (Bulgaria) could very well win a medal playing in Africa or Asia zone and could make some noise in the Americas region (although wouldnt advance to semis nor win a medal) whereas the 10th team in the Americas Championship 2009 (US Virgin Islands)would not even make the Eurobasket tourney... and I can not assure that it will win a medal in an african or asian tourney, just can assure it'll make some noise...

So even though Im from the Americas region, I understand that if the WC is to be expanded to 32, meaning 8 more spots... 4 of those should be given to Europe... 2 to Americas 1 each for Asia and Africa... (14 Europe, 6 America, 4 Asia, 4 Africa, 2 Oceania + OC and Host)

Nonetheless I think FIBA Americas should also expand in the near future, becuase this region has the potential to be very competitive... (see 2010 Centrobasket where T&T upset PR, Jamaica without Roy Hibbert almost defeated Panama for a place in the semis, and the Dominican Republic which with a complete roster of its best player can compete pretty well with most european teams)

But right now, after USA, Argetnina, Brazil and Puerto Rico, the Americas region does not have a world caliber team... thats why I think 6 teams should be enough as of now...

[mvblair]

Great analysis Filas!!

Thats true... Eurobasket 2009 16th ranked team (Bulgaria) could very well win a medal playing in Africa or Asia zone and could make some noise in the Americas region (although wouldnt advance to semis nor win a medal) whereas the 10th team in the Americas Championship 2009 (US Virgin Islands)would not even make the Eurobasket tourney... and I can not assure that it will win a medal in an african or asian tourney, just can assure it'll make some noise...

I think USVI would be OK in Africa, but not win, and they would do very little in Asia.

...Nonetheless I think FIBA Americas should also expand in the near future, becuase this region has the potential to be very competitive... (see 2010 Centrobasket where T&T upset PR, Jamaica without Roy Hibbert almost defeated Panama for a place in the semis, and the Dominican Republic which with a complete roster of its best player can compete pretty well with most european teams)

Yes. in Centrobasket, we saw some very good teams defeat some other very good teams. T&T was lucky. Jamaica was good. DR was powerful. PR was powerful.

But right now, after USA, Argetnina, Brazil and Puerto Rico, the Americas region does not have a world caliber team... thats why I think 6 teams should be enough as of now...

I disagree, Ponce. What about Uruguay and DR? Don't you think they can compete on a world stage?

[leonesponce]

Great analysis Filas!!

I think USVI would be OK in Africa, but not win, and they would do very little in Asia. Yes. in Centrobasket, we saw some very good teams defeat some other very good teams. T&T was lucky. Jamaica was good. DR was powerful. PR was powerful. I disagree, Ponce. What about Uruguay and DR? Don't you think they can compete on a world stage?

Well that they can compete.... yes... get a positive
result? I doubt it... maybe the DR with all their players... but Uruguay
I'm not so sure that they can be competitive against, let's say Australia,
Yesterday they will compete against China, Lebanon, Angola, Nigeria, and
perhaps win some of those games, but they will struggle vs all
the europeans teams... just look at Puerto Rico's and Brazil's
record against european competition and you'll get an idea of what I'm
saying....

[leonesponce]

Well that they can compete.... yes... get a positive
result? I doubt it... maybe the DR with all their players... but Uruguay
I'm not so sure that they can be competitive against, let's say Australia,
Yesterday they will compete against China, Lebanon, Angola, Nigeria, and
perhaps win some of those games, but they will struggle vs all
the europeans teams... just look at Puerto Rico's and Brazil's
record against european competition and you'll get an idea of what I'm
saying....

Did a research of Brazil's and PR performances vs europe since 2002 (neither team played in Sydney) and they are awful... Puerto Rico is 4-13 but just 1-12 since the athens olympics, after going 3-1 in 2002. Brazil meanwhile isn't playing any better than that going 2-9 during the same span... but its worthy to highlight that both teams have had many close loses in between... PR lost by 1 to Italy in 2006, by 3 to Greece this year and by 2 to Turkey.... Brazil lost to Turkey by 2 in 06 and by 3 to Slovenia this year.... so if they are having such a hard time vs europeans teams.... I can not see Urugay nor the DR doing any better...