查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 「奧會模式」之使用現況分析--賽局理論觀點=The Analysis of "Agreement between IOC and CTOC": Based on Game Theory |
---|---|
作 者 | 張智瑋; 施致平; | 書刊名 | 臺灣體育學術研究 |
卷 期 | 55 2013.12[民102.12] |
頁 次 | 頁1-20 |
分類號 | 528.9822 |
關鍵詞 | 洛桑協議; 賽局理論; 中華臺北; 國際奧會; Agreement between IOC and CTOC; The game theory; Chinese Taipei; IOC; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 自1981年,我國採用「中華臺北」名稱以來,每逢我國參與國際運動賽事,便會上演名稱、旗幟之保衛爭奪戰。近來,中華臺北之名更已不限於奧運等運動賽會場域,連與運動完全無關之國際活動亦出現中華臺北之名,檢討「奧會模式」似乎勢在必行。本研究運用「賽局理論」其策略導引與策略推演之特性,分析中華臺北奧會、中國奧會及國際奧會三方所可能採行之策略並進行策略假設與推演,希冀透過本文能讓國人共同正視「奧會模式」所帶來之影響。其分析結果如下:(一)假設我國奧會採行合作策略:保有運動員參賽權利的機會為100%,維護國家主權機會為25%~50%,而修正「奧會模式」的機會則是0%。(二)假設我國奧會採行對抗策略:保有運動員參賽權利為75%機會,維護國家主權的機會為50%~75%,而修正「奧會模式」的機會為25%~50%,另有25%機會將面臨最窘境之零期望值情況。綜整上述,採取對抗策略方有機會達成策略假設中的正名成功,雖有可能被迫面臨最差選擇之風險,但選擇對抗策略仍為期望值較高之決策。 |
英文摘要 | Since "Chinese Taipei" was first used as a country name in 1981 for the participation in international sporting events and passed into the "Agreement between IOC and CTOC", the dispute over the name of the national team and the flag presentation has constantly been occurring. Considering that the designation "Chinese Taipei" has not only been displayed on the sports field but also in many international events recently, it is important to review the "Agreement between IOC and CTOC" in which Taiwan competes under the name "Chinese Taipei". Based on Game Theory which features the leading and deductive reasoning, the researchers in this study analyze the strategy adopted by the "Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee", "Chinese Olympic Committee" and "International Olympic Committee", aiming to show how the "Agreement between IOC and CTOC" brings influence to Taiwan. The results are as follows: First of all, if our country takes the cooperative strategy, the percentage of the participation rights of athletes is 100%; 25%-50% for keeping the national sovereignty, and 0% to correct the "Agreement between IOC and CTOC". Secondly, if our country takes the confrontational strategy, the percentage of the participation rights of athletes is 75%;50%-75% for keeping the national sovereignty; 25%-50% to correct "Agreement between IOC and CTOC" while there's 25% to lead to zero expected value. To sum up, it may have chance to rectify the "Agreement between IOC and CTOC" if we take the confrontational strategy. Although there could be risks of adopting this strategy, yet it seems that it shows a higher possibility to correct the "Agreement between IOC and CTOC". |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。