Why Isn't This an Event at the Games?

[xaxat]

My counter to the "baseball isn't international enough" argument has always been team handball. In the current men's top twenty world rankings there are only three national teams not from Europe. Since the sport returned to the games in 1972 Korea is the only team not from Europe to have medaled. They did it once. 

So yes, a lot of countries in  Europe play the sport at a high level, but very few out of it.

[sab85]

The other thing about basketball is its super easy to stage. Most cities already have arenas and they are pretty multipurpose. My college had gymnastics, volleyball, ice hockey, and basketball all in the same arena, just with different floors laid down. 

 

I went to 8 different schools all across the US and never once played field hockey in PE. I didn't even know that was still a thing.

[Kromm]

5 minutes ago, xaxat said:

My counter to the "baseball isn't international enough" argument has always been team handball. In the current men's top twenty world rankings there are only three national teams not from Europe. Since the sport returned to the games in 1972 Korea is the only team not from Europe to have medaled. They did it once. 

So yes, a lot of countries in  Europe play the sport at a high level, but very few out of it.

I guess the question is... do we judge Eurocentric sports as harshly as US-centric ones?

You know, if it didn't have a bad rep. due to including betting... there'd always be Jai alai. 

[SnideAsides]

1 hour ago, meep.meep said:

The one sport that is really the counter to "Baseball is too American" is cricket, because it's popular worldwide, and you need a unique field that then can't be used for anything else.  I bet they tore down the 10-12 softball fields they had to put in for the Sydney games.  That's why it got cancelled.  Bringing it back is a terrible idea.

They only built four, and three are still operational (with the fourth, ironically, being a temporarily-converted cricket pitch that was converted back immediately after the Olympics). Cricket pitches are generally easy to use for other things (here's a photo of the Melbourne Cricket Ground, one of the world's most famous cricket venues, during a soccer match; the same stadium is also used for Australian Rules football during the winter months, was used for the ceremonies and athletics events at both the 1956 Olympics and the 2006 Commonwealth Games, and has hosted major concerts and rugby matches); if anything, it's baseball pitches that are virtually impossible to use for anything else.

1 hour ago, Kromm said:

Also, Cricket has its own long established tournaments and organizers that are entrenched. It would be like the IOC deciding all over again to deal with FIFA (albeit the Cricket organizations couldn't be even 10% as corrupt as both FIFA and the IOC itself). 

You'd wouldn't think so, but yes. In addition to the ICC being powerless over the sport's actual rules (which are still set by a suburban London cricket club, in 2016) and staunchly refusing to expand the sport (there are only ten full ICC members, with one of them being the mythical colonialist land of "West Indies", also in 2016), the ICC was basically overthrown by the domestic governing bodies of India, Australia, and England last year. FIFA's positively tame by comparison.

[ElDosEquis]

If they are going to add 'activities' like fucking skateboarding and surfing to the games? Add bowling, darts and Yahtzee.

(If you can drink or smoke pot while doing it, it's not a sport, it's an activity.)

Add scooter riding and that cup stacking thing that kids do, too.

Running with the BULLS!!!!!!

Add a running with the bulls comp, do it like they do in Pampalona, early in the morning and get it out of the way so we can watch ping pong and golf later on?

[kili]

Quote

Does the U.S. even have a men's field hockey team, and if so, where do the players come from?

They do indeed. My niece went to watch them play when they did a pre-Olympic game against the Canadian team (she plays and her coach knew somebody on the Canadian team). The US male team is not in the Olympics. The Canadian team is there, but you'd be hard pressed to know that if you watched Canadian coverage of the Olympics (maybe if they won a game, they might get some coverage).

In other news, I played handball in high school and if ever there was a game designed by committee, that was it. Is cricket played anywhere the British didn't try to colonize? Granted, that is half the world. 

Softball seriously annoys me. Why not just baseball? "We have a sport. Let's create a lamer version of it and tell girls to play it."???? Don't get me started on ringette. 

Edited August 11, 2016 by kili

[LadyArcadia]

On 7/12/2016 at 7:04 PM, legaleagle53 said:

And let's not forget the quadrennial omission that I think should have been remedied at least 20 years ago:  DanceSport.  Given the worldwide popularity of Strictly Come Dancing and its progeny over the past 10 years or so, I am still astounded that ballroom dancing hasn't become to the Summer Games what ice dancing is to the Winter Games.  I would like to see it come in borrowing the competition format that was once used for ice dancing:  a round of school figures, followed by a compulsory dance, and then a free dance.  I can even predict who I think the top countries would be, in no particular order:  the US, the UK, Russia, the Netherlands, and Japan, with possibly Canada and Australia as medal contenders as well.

As a DanceSport competitor it saddens me that it is not an Olympic sport. There's no reason it shouldn't be. There are competitions in almost every US state and obviously, many elite international competitions.  Not to mention the collegiate teams.  It's a legitimate sport and long overdue to be included.

[Kromm]

Of course we haven't even mentioned the ultimate buy in to American sports (vs. talking about how baseball and basketball may or may not be too US-centric)... American football.  I wonder how many nations would even be able to put together teams at all.  That said, I don't think it has ever seriously been considered.

Then there are other martial arts besides Judo. Did we all know for example that Karate has never been an Olympic sport, for example?  They have the global infrastructure for it too. (and apparently it is IN for 2020). And apparently Sumo is coming too. 

There are various X-sports already mentioned, but a few more... Wakeboarding, for example. But then there's the ultimate classic.  Surfing (which like Karate is also apparently in for 2020). 

Bowling.  I mean why not?  

Polo (the non-water version with horsies). It WAS an Olympic event from 1900 to 1936. It is not anymore.  

[galaxygirl76]

Wind surfing is part of the sailing program.

[Kromm]

1 hour ago, galaxygirl76 said:

Wind surfing is part of the sailing program.

Yes, but traditional surfing isn't an Olympic Sport until 2020, apparently. In a way fairly shocking it took so long if you think about it because it really IS a deeply established sport. And fairly International too.

I go back and forth on if I am more shocked Surfing wasn't an Olympic sport, or if I am more shocked about Karate. Sumo I kind of get not being one.  I mean how many nations do Sumo?  Four? Five?  

[ElDosEquis]

Quarters

Cornhole and

Beer Pong, Played with the national beverage of the host city or from a list of approved alcoholic beverages - supplied by the IBPF (international beer pong federation).

Operation?

A good game of Operation - that way you can use that skill to go on to become a doctor?

[kili]

Quote

Yes, but traditional surfing isn't an Olympic Sport until 2020, apparently. In a way fairly shocking it took so long if you think about it because it really IS a deeply established sport. And fairly International too.

How are they going to do surfing for the Olympics? Is it in a surfing pool (I saw one on the Amazing Race - it was a fast pass task)? What do they do for surfing if Paris or Moscow hosts? It's not like you can trundle 30 miles out of town to a good surfing beach - you are going to have to go further than how far you have to go to find a good sailing venue. I'm kind of surprised surfing is in. Host countries are always complaining about the number of venues they must come up with- I live in a coastal city and we don't even have a beach you can competitively surf on (you can noodle around on the beach, but no television audience is going to be wowed by somebody riding the 2 foot waves).

Don't get me wrong - I think surfing is going to be great. It's impressive to see and like with the snow-boarders in the winter olympics, we'll get to learn a lot of fun lingo. The commentators are going to fun.

Why isn't Ultimate in the Olympics? There are lots of people that play it and it is more fun to watch than handball (or baseball). IMO of course. 

[Kromm]

Moscow would be SOL for Surfing.  Paris?  At least it would be in the same country, because France has tons of coastline/beaches. 

Edited August 12, 2016 by Kromm

[Mittengirl]

I think surfing is only in for 2020.  It has not been added to the permanent line-up.  

[Princess Sparkle]

You know, it's a shame to me that skateboarding didn't end up in the Olympics earlier (I'm assuming it's going to be the vert that ends up in the games) because we could've had at least 2-3 games of Shawn White competing, and probably medaling, at both the Summer and Winter games. Unfortunately, I don't think he competitively skateboards anymore, and I can't think of someone who still competes competitively at both skateboarding and snowboarding, and I can't think of anyone who is among the best in the world at both (as Shawn White is). It's so rare that someone even competes in both Winter and the Summer games, much less medals in both, that it would've been something exciting to see. 

Edited August 12, 2016 by Princess Sparkle

[kokapetl]

On 9 August 2016 at 2:00 AM, GinnyMars said:

I'll add a vote for acrobatic gymnastics, I only recently learned it existed and find it really impressive. Like at 22'27... How does her leg not snap.

Super circusy. 

[shang yiet]

Before adding any more sports, it's best to take off some first or the schedule will be over crowded. If the Olympics title is  not the highest honour you can get in that particular sport, I say it shouldn't be part of the Olympics like tennis, for example.

[FormerMod-a1]

I agree with that.  And I was wondering what could be cut from some of the events that have SO many events like swimming and track.  I do understand the difference in lengths (sprinting vs distance) and strokes and different physical requirements for each, but there just seems to be SO MANY of each of these.  And I'm sure they're not the only sports with that, just using them as examples.

[Kromm]

1 minute ago, shang yiet said:

Before adding any more sports, it's best to take off some first or the schedule will be over crowded. If the Olympics title is  not the highest honour you can get in that particular sport, I say it shouldn't be part of the Olympics like tennis, for example.

There's a good argument though to leave sports that have big fanbases and take out stuff that literally nobody outside of the sport itself cares about.

I mean we can joke about Mary Carillo's Badminton rant, but does anyone outside of the sport actually care about it or want to watch it? I doubt it. 

[FormerMod-a1]

I enjoy watching sports like that every four years though.  I don't need to see all the preliminaries and semi-finals, but I do watch.  And that said, I did watch some of the semis for badminton today, and table tennis.  But then I got sucked in by fencing, but I digress.

[shang yiet]

Badminton has a huge fanbase in most of Asia. It's big in China,for example. 

They do keep adding extra events in the same sport, don't they? I didn't know trampoline is now a gymnastics event. I remember back in the day, they didn't have rhythmic gymnastics or synchronized diving or that sport (can't remember the name) where teams of girls form patterns in the water).

[ElDosEquis]

18 minutes ago, aquarian1 said:

sI enjoy watching sports like that every four years though.  I don't need to see all the preliminaries and semi-finals, but I do watch.  And that said, I did watch some of the semis for badminton today, and table tennis.  But then I got sucked in by fencing, but I digress.

If only the finals were broadcast the Olympics could be played in one long weekend.

And that would even be a shorter weekend because of all the sports that the American teams didn't make the finals in.

Some of the best performances happened in the run up to the medal games.

Think of the Miracle on Ice?

Edited August 12, 2016 by ElDosEquis

[FormerMod-a1]

I don't think hockey is one of the sports that @Kromm said " nobody outside of the sport itself cares about", which is what I was responding to.  I was saying I think we should keep those games (badminton, table tennis, etc) in even though I don't need to watch the preliminaries or semis, and even after saying that I do sometimes watch them.

[ElDosEquis]

If you can drink or smoke during or while playing, it's not a sport.

 

Hemingway said something like,

There are three sports, Mountaineering, racing and bull fighting, All the rest are games?

Having done all three (does fighting bullshit count?), I can't say I disagree? 

[Aliconehead]

2 hours ago, shang yiet said:

Badminton has a huge fanbase in most of Asia. It's big in China,for example. 

They do keep adding extra events in the same sport, don't they? I didn't know trampoline is now a gymnastics event. I remember back in the day, they didn't have rhythmic gymnastics or synchronized diving or that sport (can't remember the name) where teams of girls form patterns in the water).

The IOC likes sports that give a lot of medals in one facility, i.e. Swimming, track, judo, and despite their pissing contest, wrestling. This allows many countries and lots of people to win. Most times they don't like sports like soccer/futbol and baseball/softball where they have to have lots of facilities and on winner. They like to add events to the same sport. Diving for instance, you now have 8 medals instead of 4. Gives more medals with minimum outlay

Edited August 13, 2016 by Aliconehead

[Bill1978]

I would still love to see Squash make it into the Games. Surely one day the IOC will eventually just add it just to shut the Squash people up. I often hear one of the reasons is that it's not a spectator friendly/TV friendly spectacle. But I'm really not sure how squash is any different in that aspect than shooting or archery.

I would really love to see Netball get a gig, but I know it's never gonna happen and will just have to be content with its status as a Commonwealth Games.

And after discovering that FINA has added it as an event, I would love to see a mixed Synchronised Swimming event added to the program. An on the subject of synchronisation, how about synchronised trampolining?

[GinnyMars]

On 11/08/2016 at 5:07 AM, Kromm said:

I guess the question is... do we judge Eurocentric sports as harshly as US-centric ones?

How can you put the two on the same level though?
Europe is 40+ countries. The US is one.

Edited August 13, 2016 by GinnyMars

[Kromm]

3 hours ago, GinnyMars said:

How can you put the two on the same level though?
Europe is 40+ countries. The US is one.

One could argue the US is 50, if you use the same kind of meter that sets 28 of those European countries as the EU.  Also, the US is 319 million people. Europe is a bit more than twice that, but it's hardly the same as 40:1.

[SnideAsides]

At most I'd argue the US is five countries (Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Guam compete independently), but ignoring Puerto Rico's tennis win a few hours ago it'd be ridiculous to imply that any of those four make much of an impact on the games, especially compared to United States Mothership. Europe is still 40+ countries; the EU is irrelevant in this context.

I don't see an issue with sports being dominated by particular countries or regions. If you cut every event that is, you lose basically everything except golf (which hasn't awarded its first medal yet) and boxing. I think the key is to strike a better balance, and for that you probably do need to aim towards cutting events that are traditionally won by Americans and east Asians while finding sports that can benefit Latin America, Africa, and the South Pacific. Rugby sevens was a perfect addition in that regard. But there's absolutely no reason we need judo and taekwondo and karate all at the same time, for example.

[photo fox]

1 hour ago, SnideAsides said:

I think the key is to strike a better balance, and for that you probably do need to aim towards cutting events that are traditionally won by Americans and east Asians while finding sports that can benefit Latin America, Africa, and the South Pacific. Rugby sevens was a perfect addition in that regard.

I don't disagree, but - and I hope this doesn't sound too jingoistic - I think whatever you add, the US* will be competitive in those, given enough time. Where there's a will, unlimited funds, a large population, and an emphasis on sports achievement, there's a way.

I think the US* is additionally positioned for success by being a nation of immigrants. No matter how obscure the sport, there are families and coaches here with that tradition. (The exception would be some of the endurance winter sports, just because we don't have much population near that kind of terrain, nor large numbers of Scandinavian descendents.)

*By US, I also include Australia, Canada, GB, etc. I feel like we have similar strategies for success. 

[legaleagle53]

7 minutes ago, photo fox said:

I think the US* is additionally positioned for success by being a nation of immigrants. No matter how obscure the sport, there are families and coaches here with that tradition. (The exception would be some of the endurance winter sports, just because we don't have much population near that kind of terrain, nor large numbers of Scandinavian descendents.)

Exactly, which is why Germany, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, and Austria routinely kick our asses in most of the skiing events, as well as in bobsledding and luge.  The Netherlands frequently does the same thing in speed skating, and Canada does likewise in hockey.  About the only winter sport we really dominate in is ice dancing -- singles and pairs figure skating is hit-or-miss at best.  When we're on in the winter events that we historically HAVE done well in, we're on, but when we're off, BOY, are we off!

[selkie]

On 8/11/2016 at 6:58 PM, ElDosEquis said:

 

Beer Pong, Played with the national beverage of the host city or from a list of approved alcoholic beverages - supplied by the IBPF (international beer pong federation).

We need the beer mile before beer pong. The beer mile seems to check all the boxes of global reach, does not require special facilities, and has an organization serving as a governing board that would probably love to be part of the Olympic program.

http://www.beermile.com/

[SnideAsides]

1 hour ago, photo fox said:

I don't disagree, but - and I hope this doesn't sound too jingoistic - I think whatever you add, the US* will be competitive in those, given enough time. Where there's a will, unlimited funds, a large population, and an emphasis on sports achievement, there's a way.

I think the US* is additionally positioned for success by being a nation of immigrants. No matter how obscure the sport, there are families and coaches here with that tradition. (The exception would be some of the endurance winter sports, just because we don't have much population near that kind of terrain, nor large numbers of Scandinavian descendents.)

*By US, I also include Australia, Canada, GB, etc. I feel like we have similar strategies for success. 

I think whatever sports there are, countries like the US and Australia and Russia and China will still do well, but there's a big difference between the US managing to win a bronze in rugby sevens or field hockey and the US winning yet another basketball gold. Yes, the Eurocentric domination of sports like handball and water polo is a problem. But they aren't dominated by one specific country all the time, and the rest of the issue can be alleviated by fixing the way qualifiers are picked so you don't end up with a bunch of European teams who know how to handle each other. I don't think you could fix that problem in a sport like basketball without something like a "no NBA players" rule that would pretty much wipe out all of the US team, half of the Australian team, and big chunks of most of the other major countries with a chance of winning a medal.

[KungFuBunny]

On 8/11/2016 at 9:20 AM, ElDosEquis said:

If they are going to add 'activities' like fucking skateboarding and surfing to the games? Add bowling, darts and Yahtzee.

(If you can drink or smoke pot while doing it, it's not a sport, it's an activity.)

Add scooter riding and that cup stacking thing that kids do, too.

Running with the BULLS!!!!!!

Add a running with the bulls comp, do it like they do in Pampalona, early in the morning and get it out of the way so we can watch ping pong and golf later on?

I'm having trouble posting on this thread....can we make this an Olympic event? The way things are going, I'm not in medal contention. Can we have medals for the the bottom of the pack for all events? They can be cow chips spray painted with gold, silver and bronze. Instead of standing on the Olympic Podium, the bottom 3 can stand under the scaffolding of any building under construction.

How about Monty Python's 100m dash for people with no sense of direction? Its amusing and entertaining as hell

[MVFrostsMyPie]

I wish golf wasn't an Olympic sport. 

[greyhorse]

On August 10, 2016 at 0:49 PM, Kromm said:

A much better chance with Baseball than Basketball though. I mean if somehow the MLB scheduling conflict is worked out, then the MLB alone generally has players from around a dozen countries.

In theory actual competitive teams for baseball could be mounted from:

US (of course)
Canada
Mexico
Dominican Republic
Japan
Haiti
Cuba (if all the embargoes are gone)

And not TOO far behind in a second tier would be:

Venezuela
South Korea
Netherlands
Tapei
Panama
Columbia

Probably a few more I've forgotten. The US would still definitely win, but it would be far more of a contest than Basketball. 

So very few European countries essentially could probably field a competitive team.  Wasn't there some story of an American playing baseball for Greece a few Olympics back?  Because that was his heritage but essentially he probably wasn't good enough for the US team?  Or maybe I'm making this up.  I think baseball will always be tough because it is limited only to a few nations.  If they chose cricket as a sport, then the US would have a tough time fielding a competitive cricket team, simply because it isn't played here.

I don't think the MLB would ever stop the season so a handful of players could play for free for their countries.  Teams would be worried their star players would be overworked and/or injured, while essentially the rest of the league gets a two week vacation.  I wouldn't mind to see the college kids have a shot at it again.  Still remember the Mark McGwire Olympic baseball card that counted as his rookie card.

[Superpole2000]

As much as I enjoy watching the decathlon, I still think they haven't chosen the best 10 events. Why not make a better version of the decathlon to truly discover the most well-rounded athlete of the games:

1. Running - 1500m
2. Weightlifting - Snatch + Clean and Jerk
3. High Jump
4. Rowing
5. Javelin
6. Swimming - 200m Medley
7. Archery
8. Cycling - Time Trial
9. Hurdles - 110m
10. Just about anything - maybe that carnival high striker game where you hammer something as hard as you can

[SnideAsides]

Because that's what Modern Pentathlon is for. Decathlon is strictly a track-and-field event.

[Kromm]

16 minutes ago, Superpole2000 said:

As much as I enjoy watching the decathlon, I still think they haven't chosen the best 10 events. Why not make a better version of the decathlon to truly discover the most well-rounded athlete of the games:

1. Running - 1500m
2. Weightlifting - Snatch + Clean and Jerk
3. High Jump
4. Rowing
5. Javelin
6. Swimming - 200m Medley
7. Archery
8. Cycling - Time Trial
9. Hurdles - 110m
10. Just about anything - maybe that carnival high striker game where you hammer something as hard as you can

Hmm.  If you really opened it up, I'd imagine something like the Iron Man, but not forced all together.  I mean why stop at 1500m?  Go for a marathon.  In fact, why not test the dichotomy between short and long distance races all across the board?

I'd say...

1.) Running Marathon (outdoors)
2.) Sprinting. 100 m.
3.) Swimming Marathon (open water event--generally those are 10km)
4.) Swimming Sprint (indoors) 100m freestyle
5.) Cycling Road Race (outdoors).
6.) Cycling Sprint (indoors). 
7.) Rowing (single sculls).

Unsure about the last three, but if they can extend the idea of endurance and acceleration both being tested in different events, it would be nice.

[azshadowwalker]

On 7/14/2016 at 10:24 AM, MyAimIsTrue said:

I'm actually fine with that.  Watching pros during the season is what I want but I'd rather see the college kids/amateurs during the Olympics. 

I would be, too, but I remember the whining when college kids represented the US in basketball, hockey, etc. In my youth, the US press never stopped whining about our athletes being "amateurs" (lol, like male athletes in college don't get compensated out the ass, legally and illegally) while Soviet athletes were usually in the military and spent much of their time training. It was ludicrous, but it's why we now have NBA and NHL players in the Olympics. 

And, yes, US baseball players have played for Italy and Greece. The Dutch team has lots of Caribbean players. Only the US, Cuba, Venezuela, the Dominican Republic,  Puerto Rico, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan can really field competitive teams. Insufficient, IMO. 

Edited August 19, 2016 by azshadowwalker

[Mittengirl]

I don't think college athletes were getting comped back in the '80's (and prior years) the way they are now.  And let's not forget that there is no equality on how college athletes are comped.  Football and male basketball players are kings, while gymnasts, softball players, rowers, hammer throwers, et al would be lucky to get a discounted parking pass from their school. 

 

When did the Olympics start allowing pros?  Or was it sport by sport?  I know that the "Miracle on Ice" hockey team was all college kids.  So that would have been 1980.  The Dream Team was what, 1992?

[Minneapple]

That Soviet team that the 1980 US Olympic hockey team beat was like the greatest hockey team ever; they had been playing together for many many years and were de facto professionals, but somehow they were "amateurs" in the eyes of the IOC. The Chinese gymnasts who train and live at a gymnastics camp, they're amateurs too. But Simone Biles is a pro because she takes money from Tide, McDonald's, etc. (Simone had committed to UCLA, and the coach begged her to stay amateur, but the endorsement offers were piling up and it only make sense for Biles to go pro.) 

Amateur, pro. I don't care. Just give me the best athletes in the world at the Olympics. If they only allowed amateurs, then Usain Bolt would not be there; nor would Phelps or Biles. And it would have sucked a lot without those athletes.

As for baseball, I really don't know how MLB is going to handle the sport. I bet they just send college kids for the US, but it will be interesting to see if some non-American players leave their teams to represent their countries. I also wonder who they will choose to manage the team. 

[Mittengirl]

I think the biggest change since having pros in the Olympics is athletes competing more than once.  I believe it was Mark Spitz who said he gave no thought to competing after '72 because he had finished college and had to get a job and earn a living.  So in countries that didn't fund their athletes and run central training facilities, college ended and it was time to grow up and get a job or train part-time and work part-time.  Unless you had money, of course.  

[GinnyMars]

On 19/08/2016 at 3:10 AM, Superpole2000 said:

As much as I enjoy watching the decathlon, I still think they haven't chosen the best 10 events.

 

On 19/08/2016 at 3:39 AM, Kromm said:

I mean why stop at 1500m?  Go for a marathon.

 

Have you seen the state they were in when they finished yesterday?! And they're not just tired for a few hours or a few days; they push themselves so much that the recovery is really long too, to the point where the silver medallist said he would have to skip his national championship in the Fall, for example.

Those guys barely make it as it is... I don't think they need even more extreme stuff thrown at them!

Edited August 20, 2016 by GinnyMars

[UrbanShocker]

I'm more glad that softball is back in the Olympics in 2020 than baseball, since it's not realistic to have MLB players in the Games.  But for everyone who thinks the U.S. would easily win, I don't think so.  The World Baseball Classic is played with MLB players every four years (with the next tournament in 2017) and the Dominican Republic and Japan have combined for all three titles so far.  Those two countries, even using minor leaguers or college kids, could still do well in an Olympics, as could Cuba, Australia and even Curacao.

Softball would be more of an easy win for the Americans in theory, but even they lost the last Olympic softball Gold medal game.

As for new sports, let's bring back tug-of-war (yes, it was once an Olympic sport) and what about F1 auto racing?   And I know they have a lot of swimming events, but why is the 800m only a women's race and the 1500m only a men's race?  That makes no sense.

Edited August 21, 2016 by UrbanShocker

[Daisy]

I don't think it's fair to say if the Olympic Gold Medal isn't the pinnacle of your sport it shouldn't be in. Because then it excludes hockey. (and this isn't a Canadian thing). The NHL and the NHLPA are fighting (well they always fight), but are fighting to be allowed to go to Korea. (and ultimately, China). the NHL gets mad because they have to shut down 2 weeks and someone almost always gets hurt and their season (and team's season) is impacted. 

but the players want to go. they want the right to honour their country and bring a gold medal because it's important to them. Same with most tennis players, and soccer players. What I'd actually do, is reinstate national teams. if you want to include professional athletes - then do so. but that's what I'd do. 

the Am vs. Pro thing gets debated to death. For me. I want to see seventeen days of great sports. for me, the Olympics aren't made or broken because Michael Phelps (pro), or Usain Bolt (pro) do their thing. They help it, and they're the best, but they aren't the best because they're pro. they'd be just as good if they remained Am. status. [in my opinion]. Hockey (even with the Soviets cheating by sending paid workers didn't win all the time).  A star is a star, the story is the story, regardless if they are making 25,000 or 25m.  and I don't think the games would have sucked without them. 

I don't think (this is just my personal view) that the games should solely be dependant on pros. because you saw what happened with Golf. (and Golf's issue is they could have made it anything - co-ed, team play, rider-cup style, but they made it individual links and that was an issue for a lot of the top players, well one of them).. and like my hockey example - for everyone Rory, Dustin, Justin, whomever who think it doesn't matter, tell that to the british player who won Gold and cried afterwards. it mean something to him.  So just because I'd personally like to see no professional athletes in the Olympics (or - have it capped )  that door is kicked way open and it impacts so many people (and - for most athletes, they go pro so they don't/aren't in massive debt. so who am I to literally take money away from them. I let that water go under that bridge a long time ago).

That's why I am always so hesitant to "remove" sports from the Olympic programme. What doesn't matter to us - matters to other countries. Like Why have Badminton? (because it's BIG in Asia. Asia easily could say  - why have BMX?/Mountain Bike]. The IOC (as corrupt as they are) also need to include sports and events that can appeal to the younger generation - and it's that that might actually dictate what gets removed or not. [Say Modern Pentathlon. Like who wakes up as a little kid and says "You know. THAT'S what I want to do. do the Modern Pentathlon]. I remember when Snowboarding was added to the Winter games and people were like noooooo. (and now it's one of the most popular). they're probably banking on that. I know that roller derby/racing - basically Short track/Long Track speed skating but w/no snow, wants in. as does Squash. I don't know what they are going to do, but there are some sports that will get cut.

 

[and I honestly think it will be the ones where controversy keeps popping up. Yes Boxing, i'm looking at you.]

[kalystia1983]

I started thinking about the idea of moving some of the indoor sports from summer to winter, but am now having trouble figuring out which ones would work best.  

Indoor volleyball would work as that seems to be a winter sport at a lot of schools in the US, but then I can imagine not wanting to split up indoor and beach volleyball. I would imagine basketball would be a no due to the NBA schedule (unless we go back to no pro players).  

They also wouldn't want to split up sports that use the same venue, i.e. swimming, synchro swimming, water polo, diving or artistic gymnastics, rhythmic gymnastics, and trampoline. You also would want to do something like have cycling split up track and road race.  

Anyone have any thoughts on what would fit into this category? Table tennis? Badminton? Handball? Wrestling or weightlifting?  The thing is I can see a pro and con for all of these.

[Daisy]

I can see why you'd move "indoor sports" ie: handball, wrestling, indoor volleyball etc. you can even make an argument for Cycling. but then with Cycling this would mean all venues need an Oval - AND a velodrome. It's a sticky wicket. 

[chitowngirl]

Judo, tae kwon do, fencing, wrestling, and weight lifting could all be moved.

[xaxat]

The IOC could consider moving certain sports to the winter, but how much pushback would there be from their respective international federations? The summer games are the premier event. Moving to winter, although still the Olympics, could be perceived as a demotion.