Olympics Talk: A brief discussion before it goes away


log in or register to remove this ad

Ice hockey. Or any event that’s actually a competition between amateurs rather than paid professionals.
I read an interesting perspective on that a while ago.

The original idea of the Olympics (well, not original original, but original regarding the late 19th century revival) was that the Olympics were for amateurs only. If you made money from your sport, you could not compete in the olympics. You'd think that would lead to an equal playing field. It very much does not.

As a first effect, it limits competition to those with the means to train in their spare time, which means the upper class. As a second effect, it expands the circle to those who can pretend not to get paid for being athletes, which basically means those who can do sports while pretending to be in higher education or the military. One of the reasons the East Bloc did so well in the Olympics back in the day was that they saw it as a PR strategy, and thus got a bunch of people who were supposed to be soldiers but in reality were just training to compete professionally. Well, that and the 'roids. So by lifting the ban on professionals, the competition was actually opened up to people from far more backgrounds, because now the best athletes could actually make a living from their athletics.
 

I happened to catch the gold metal Archery finals over the weekend. The #1 in the world who is Korean vs #7 in the world American. 5 volleys of 3 arrows at a target almost a football field away. They trade sets going 2-2 into the final volley where they each hit 3 bullseyes. Sudden death with one arrow each for the gold with the Korean beating the American by 5mm closer to the center.

I was more impressed by the video showing the flight of the arrow and amount of drop over that distance.

The golf final was ok as well with several ups and downs and a come from behind victory, but I would not call it exciting like Archery was.
 

As a first effect, it limits competition to those with the means to train in their spare time, which means the upper class. As a second effect, it expands the circle to those who can pretend not to get paid for being athletes, which basically means those who can do sports while pretending to be in higher education or the military

I am not sure what the rules are around qualifying as an amateur these days but it seems like a lot of amateur athletes make money off what they do. Even back in the 30s, my grandfather said when he was an amateur boxer he was getting money all over the place (during the depression): he had a car, he was doing ads in the papers, etc. He was also dirt poor growing up and the money he made from boxing never really lasted (he worked as a brick layer after the war with all his brothers)

In terms of class, I would imagine this varies a lot by country and by sport (I would be interested to see the breakdown). When I did Taekwondo, I got the impression there were more middle class and upper middle class people getting into the nationals and stuff (but that is an expensive sport because the fees to join a dojang can be high and the sparring gear itself is pretty expensive). But in boxing it felt like there were more working class and people at the poverty level doing it amateur. Most of the boxing gyms I have been to, even ones that specialized in amateur boxing, were in poor neighborhoods (and when someone from the local community gets on the Olympic team or the national team it is a big deal)
 

Anyway, I created this thread so people can chat, if they want.

Three things-

1. What is the least impressive event to you, in terms of someone saying, "I am an Olympian."
Sailing. I can't stand sailing. I am sure it takes talent, but I grew up but the water and have zero interest in sailing on it

2. What is the coolest event that doesn't get all the press (not the 100m, or swimming, or gymnastics)?

I usually lean towards the combat sports. I think they do get some attention but not all the press. Taekwondo, Judo and boxing. Archery is also fun

3. Finally, what other thoughts do you have? I mean, other than learning that all the Olympic swimmers pee in the pool?

The olympics is much harder to watch casually now that I don't have cable and watch most things online. I usually just end up watching key events after the fact because it is easier
 


I happened to catch the gold metal Archery finals over the weekend. The #1 in the world who is Korean vs #7 in the world American. 5 volleys of 3 arrows at a target almost a football field away. They trade sets going 2-2 into the final volley where they each hit 3 bullseyes. Sudden death with one arrow each for the gold with the Korean beating the American by 5mm closer to the center.

Thats insane.
 

I read an interesting perspective on that a while ago.

The original idea of the Olympics (well, not original original, but original regarding the late 19th century revival) was that the Olympics were for amateurs only. If you made money from your sport, you could not compete in the olympics. You'd think that would lead to an equal playing field. It very much does not.

As a first effect, it limits competition to those with the means to train in their spare time, which means the upper class. As a second effect, it expands the circle to those who can pretend not to get paid for being athletes, which basically means those who can do sports while pretending to be in higher education or the military. One of the reasons the East Bloc did so well in the Olympics back in the day was that they saw it as a PR strategy, and thus got a bunch of people who were supposed to be soldiers but in reality were just training to compete professionally. Well, that and the 'roids. So by lifting the ban on professionals, the competition was actually opened up to people from far more backgrounds, because now the best athletes could actually make a living from their athletics.
So much this. The "amateurs only" mantra of the Olympics actually came from a place of elitism and class hierarchy, though they tried to frame it as being about equality.

Which is why we have a massive overabundance of rich people and military events in the Olympics.
 

I figure they’re scored based on a routine, but I’m hoping it’s more like 1v1 breakdance fighting like in Zoolander.
You're in luck because that's pretty much what it will be. Watched a little primer video on Peacock about it and the competitors have no idea what music they'll get. So improvisation is one of the categories they're scored on, and it's done in a 1v1 round robin format.
 


Remove ads

Top