C
Christopher68
Guest
The two that immediately come to mind are the synchronized swimming and the events with horses.
I’m all for adding motorcycle racing, why not. If they can get it added to the event list, go for it!I agree with dumping the horse events.
Whenever someone defends them, I ask if they would like to have motorcycle racing added too, since it’s essentially the same thing except A.) the horse is mechanical, and B.) it’s a heck of a lot of fun to watch. They usually object.
So you have a personal gripe with the Olympic Committee, you want to advocate dropping a sport because you are upset that they cut events so a certain country wouldn’t be able to dominate that particular sporting genre. Seems a bit vindictive. Why not complain to the officials involved with cycling and push to have the events added back to the schedule?I know - my point it that there are far more cycling events, which Britain would have won more medals in, but they were cut to deliberately reduce the dominance of GB cyclists. Imagine the uproar if they did that to swimming or athletics.
Highly disagree. Although it should be amateurs and not professionals in the Olympics. Tennis is an amazingly athletic sport that has a wonderful artistry to it.TENNIS
The most boring sport on the planet.
Yes, I ride horses. I still think they should dump it. It does take talent, but so does playing the violin. It is an elitist activity and the horse is too critical to the sport. Like I said, let these riders switch horses around if it really is all about the rider.I’m all for adding motorcycle racing, why not. If they can get it added to the event list, go for it!
Anybody that thinks they should dump the horse events has probably never rode a horse or tried dressage themselves. Its not a sport for the weak even though some may find it boring to watch.
Then womens baseball.No way!
I love MotoGP and Superbike racing. I’m all for adding it too, but it’s fun to see people object.I’m all for adding motorcycle racing, why not. If they can get it added to the event list, go for it!
Anybody that thinks they should dump the horse events has probably never rode a horse or tried dressage themselves. Its not a sport for the weak even though some may find it boring to watch.
just be glad they don’t do these events like they did in Ancient Greece (sans clothing!).. . .
But equestrian events are among the original Olympic events, the oldest sporting events in the Games. If any events have to be dumped, seems a shame to get rid of the oldest events in favor of events that didn’t even exist until this century, just because those events attract a large, partying audience and therefore lots of sponsors.Yes, I ride horses. I still think they should dump it. It does take talent, but so does playing the violin. It is an elitist activity and the horse is too critical to the sport. Like I said, let these riders switch horses around if it really is all about the rider.
What about keeping the tradition alive of having an animal show, but rotating the animal? Equestrian this year, next time have a dog show, then cat show, then all animals. Or we could just open the competition to all owners of animals to showcase them and their training, judging each inaccordance to their species.But equestrian events are among the original Olympic events, the oldest sporting events in the Games. If any events have to be dumped, seems a shame to get rid of the oldest events in favor of events that didn’t even exist until this century, just because those events attract a large, partying audience and therefore lots of sponsors.
By dumping the ancient events, we would be turning the Olympics into a commercial venture. I think we should oppose this trend and ask that the traditional (ancient) events be continued.
This would make it difficult for athletes to train.How about changing the mix every Olympics?
Next summer games drastically cut the number of swimming and track events, substitute rugby for football & increase other events or add new ones.
Wouldn’t be remotely a problem if the sports which were to be included in a particular Games were announced far enough ahead of time. I suppose you’d have to at least do around the time the host city was chosen, so that they would know what venues etc were required. Which means at least a good eight year lead up.This would make it difficult for athletes to train.
And it would really be a bitter disappointment to train for the Olympics, and then discover that your sport isn’t in the Olympics after all. In some sports, athletes have longevity (e.g., equestrian events), but other sports are very difficult (and horrifically expensive) to keep training for past the young years (e.g., figure skating, gymnastics).
I still remember how horrible it was the year that Pres. Carter nixed the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow for the U.S. athletes; athletes like gymnast Kurt Thomas lost out on all kinds of fame that could have led to a larger income that would have provided for him and family for decades. Now no one remembers him, or any of the other 1980 Olympians who never were Olympians.
It would also be very difficult for their sports federations to be able to adequately plan and fund the sport. These federations need to know whether they are working to train and fund Olympians or just athletes.
Sponsors would be beastly hard to attract. Sponsors would not know whether they are supporting an “Olympic sport” or just a regular sport. Imagine doing an ad campaign using “Olympic athletes” to position their product, and then learning that they AREN’T Olympic athletes after all.