Is it Time to End the Olympics?

Trex · 04-08-08, 05:21 PM

I am splitting this off from 'Beijing Bashing' as I think we need to examine the entire movement, not just the ill-advised choice of the PRC for 2008. Forgive a lengthy post to permit me to make my case.

According to the Olympics’ official website, Pierre de Coubertin, the man who proposed restarting the games, stated, “The important thing in life is not the triumph, but the fight; the essential thing is not to have won, but to have fought well.”

How well have the modern Games lived up to this promise?

The intent a hundred years ago was to boost sport, ennoble the human spirit and to foster international peace and goodwill by allowing amateur athletes a chance to compete in a spirit of friendship and equality. Since then, sadly, the games have become political, professional and corrupt.

At the heart of the problem lies the corruption inherent in the IOC and many of its constituent bodies. All of us can recall the recent scandals surrounding judging and the selection process for host city. The Committee has come to view itself as above comment, answerable only to itself. That the IOC would award games celebrating the human spirit to a repressive and brutal dictatorship is indicative of its complete moral bankruptcy. Lest anyone think that this is a recent trend, remember that it also awarded the Games to Nazi Germany in 1936.

This corruption goes well beyond mere venality, beyond kickbacks and bribes and beyond “I’ll vote for you if you vote for me.” The corruption reaches down to the very bottom levels of the Olympic movement. Were the Olympic Games what de Coubertin had envisaged, our interest would be more on the athletics themselves as opposed to how many medals can be garnered. Instead, from national governments on down, success is measured in medals won, not in terms of participation, effort or heart.

The Games, it is said, are supposed to be above politics. Perhaps, in the same sense that Christmas is above mere gift-giving. The reality is that the Games have become highly politicized. Instead of being considered a solemn duty, having a city accepted as the location of the Games is a political coup, a cause for national jubilation, a showcase to the world. Intense lobbying by governments and huge government financial support has become the norm. It is more important that the games be held here than in the best place, the place most suitable.

Further, that governments have connived at their athletes’ cheating is a certainty. The East German government was infamous for its chemical research programmes. While the DDR is, unlamentedly, gone, it seems most likely that other nations are engaging in activities just as far from the Olympic stated goals.

Even if it is just at the individual level, the number of competitors who violate their oaths and engage in evermore sophisticated chemical performance enhancers is a pretty good indicator of how skewed our vision has become.

“...The essential thing is not to have won, but to have fought well...” How far have we strayed from that concept?

Only about 180º.

The games were once about amateur sport. The scene in Chariots of Fire in which a professional coach is barred from even entering the Game’s stadium is far from fiction. Athletes’ records were once scrutinized to ensure they had not the slightest professional background.

And now? Professional athletes are openly welcomed in some sports. “We want to get the best performance, the best game,” is the rationale. Perhaps, but this comes at a price. Excellent athletes unable to find funding, especially those from poorer countries, cannot do so on an even basis.
On the subject of professionalism, for how many years have we winked at the very concept? How many nations have, for instance, enlisted their best athletes into their armed forces, with their sole duty that of training for the next Games?

Another point - the ancient Greeks held their games in the nude, specifically that no athlete could in any way steal an advantage; it was up to the athletes to triumph, nothing else. Consider how sidetracked the modern Games have become from their original intent given the increasing importance of technology. The human body, some would say, has gone about as far as it can. Records can only be broken by way of a slicker swimming suit, a more aerodynamically-efficient helmet for bicycling, improved shoes. Elaborate security measures are put in place to prevent other nations’ athletes from seeing the new developments and perhaps thereby leveling the field.

Many winners now owe their 1/100th of a second ‘victory’ to hi-tech clothing, computer training programmes and hideously expensive equipment. One is left with the impression that the engineers and designers should share the podium with the athletes, for the success is as much about them as it is about athletic excellence.

No matter what decision is made by individual athletes and nations this year, the Olympic Games will go on, stumbling into the future like some antediluvian creature, unaware of its increasing irrelevance. But that does not mean that there is not another way to rescue de Coubertin’s vision.

It is proposed that we simply walk away from the Olympics – just leave the druggies and the techies, the bribers and the bribed, the connivers and the pretenders to continue their dance of mutual admiration, together with their contract bridge, bowling and ballroom dancing. Instead, let us begin, for the lack of a better name, the Greek Games. Let us hold them every four years, with the following conditions:

to reduce the politicization inherent in site selection, the games should be held in the same location every time. Given the history, Greece is suggested. Although the expense would be high, the benefits to the local economy would be substantial and subsidization by attending nations would be possible. A similar site could be found for the winter version.

only truly amateur athletes would be permitted to participate. Let those who come come out of a love of the sport. The definition of ‘amateur’ would be both tight and strictly defended.

to reflect the focus on the athletes, not the equipment, contenders would be required to use and wear clothing and equipment from a common supplier or at least from suppliers committed to complying with common standards. Tests would be required to ensure compliance. Unfair? Hardly; as the athletes would have to win on the merits of their own abilities, such a system would in fact be more fair. We would be celebrating Nike the goddess of victory rather than Nike the shoe. When somebody won an event, we would know the credit to be entirely the athlete’s, not that of a faceless team of engineers in a million-dollar laboratory. Advances in technology would be permitted, but only on a common basis.

anyone caught using any form of performance-enhancing substance (including things like blood-doping) would be banned for life. Further, to give national bodies a strong incentive to police their own athletes, consideration might be given to pulling all medals for all competitors of a nation from which any competitor was shown to have violated this rule.

to eliminate judging bias, events would be limited to those which can be measured in terms of speed, accuracy, strength, endurance, etc. If a judging panel is required to measure ‘grace’ or ‘technique’, then the event should not be included.

Let’s go back to the basics and celebrate sport in a pure fashion - sport for its own sake, sport that unites us instead of emphasizing our differences, sport demonstrating the true, sadly missing Olympic spirit.

04-08-08, 05:21 PM	#1
Trex Lieutenant Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 262 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Is it Time to End the Olympics? I am splitting this off from 'Beijing Bashing' as I think we need to examine the entire movement, not just the ill-advised choice of the PRC for 2008. Forgive a lengthy post to permit me to make my case. According to the Olympics’ official website, Pierre de Coubertin, the man who proposed restarting the games, stated, “The important thing in life is not the triumph, but the fight; the essential thing is not to have won, but to have fought well.” How well have the modern Games lived up to this promise? The intent a hundred years ago was to boost sport, ennoble the human spirit and to foster international peace and goodwill by allowing amateur athletes a chance to compete in a spirit of friendship and equality. Since then, sadly, the games have become political, professional and corrupt. At the heart of the problem lies the corruption inherent in the IOC and many of its constituent bodies. All of us can recall the recent scandals surrounding judging and the selection process for host city. The Committee has come to view itself as above comment, answerable only to itself. That the IOC would award games celebrating the human spirit to a repressive and brutal dictatorship is indicative of its complete moral bankruptcy. Lest anyone think that this is a recent trend, remember that it also awarded the Games to Nazi Germany in 1936. This corruption goes well beyond mere venality, beyond kickbacks and bribes and beyond “I’ll vote for you if you vote for me.” The corruption reaches down to the very bottom levels of the Olympic movement. Were the Olympic Games what de Coubertin had envisaged, our interest would be more on the athletics themselves as opposed to how many medals can be garnered. Instead, from national governments on down, success is measured in medals won, not in terms of participation, effort or heart. The Games, it is said, are supposed to be above politics. Perhaps, in the same sense that Christmas is above mere gift-giving. The reality is that the Games have become highly politicized. Instead of being considered a solemn duty, having a city accepted as the location of the Games is a political coup, a cause for national jubilation, a showcase to the world. Intense lobbying by governments and huge government financial support has become the norm. It is more important that the games be held here than in the best place, the place most suitable. Further, that governments have connived at their athletes’ cheating is a certainty. The East German government was infamous for its chemical research programmes. While the DDR is, unlamentedly, gone, it seems most likely that other nations are engaging in activities just as far from the Olympic stated goals. Even if it is just at the individual level, the number of competitors who violate their oaths and engage in evermore sophisticated chemical performance enhancers is a pretty good indicator of how skewed our vision has become. “...The essential thing is not to have won, but to have fought well...” How far have we strayed from that concept? Only about 180º. The games were once about amateur sport. The scene in Chariots of Fire in which a professional coach is barred from even entering the Game’s stadium is far from fiction. Athletes’ records were once scrutinized to ensure they had not the slightest professional background. And now? Professional athletes are openly welcomed in some sports. “We want to get the best performance, the best game,” is the rationale. Perhaps, but this comes at a price. Excellent athletes unable to find funding, especially those from poorer countries, cannot do so on an even basis. On the subject of professionalism, for how many years have we winked at the very concept? How many nations have, for instance, enlisted their best athletes into their armed forces, with their sole duty that of training for the next Games? Another point - the ancient Greeks held their games in the nude, specifically that no athlete could in any way steal an advantage; it was up to the athletes to triumph, nothing else. Consider how sidetracked the modern Games have become from their original intent given the increasing importance of technology. The human body, some would say, has gone about as far as it can. Records can only be broken by way of a slicker swimming suit, a more aerodynamically-efficient helmet for bicycling, improved shoes. Elaborate security measures are put in place to prevent other nations’ athletes from seeing the new developments and perhaps thereby leveling the field. Many winners now owe their 1/100th of a second ‘victory’ to hi-tech clothing, computer training programmes and hideously expensive equipment. One is left with the impression that the engineers and designers should share the podium with the athletes, for the success is as much about them as it is about athletic excellence. No matter what decision is made by individual athletes and nations this year, the Olympic Games will go on, stumbling into the future like some antediluvian creature, unaware of its increasing irrelevance. But that does not mean that there is not another way to rescue de Coubertin’s vision. It is proposed that we simply walk away from the Olympics – just leave the druggies and the techies, the bribers and the bribed, the connivers and the pretenders to continue their dance of mutual admiration, together with their contract bridge, bowling and ballroom dancing. Instead, let us begin, for the lack of a better name, the Greek Games. Let us hold them every four years, with the following conditions: to reduce the politicization inherent in site selection, the games should be held in the same location every time. Given the history, Greece is suggested. Although the expense would be high, the benefits to the local economy would be substantial and subsidization by attending nations would be possible. A similar site could be found for the winter version. only truly amateur athletes would be permitted to participate. Let those who come come out of a love of the sport. The definition of ‘amateur’ would be both tight and strictly defended. to reflect the focus on the athletes, not the equipment, contenders would be required to use and wear clothing and equipment from a common supplier or at least from suppliers committed to complying with common standards. Tests would be required to ensure compliance. Unfair? Hardly; as the athletes would have to win on the merits of their own abilities, such a system would in fact be more fair. We would be celebrating Nike the goddess of victory rather than Nike the shoe. When somebody won an event, we would know the credit to be entirely the athlete’s, not that of a faceless team of engineers in a million-dollar laboratory. Advances in technology would be permitted, but only on a common basis. anyone caught using any form of performance-enhancing substance (including things like blood-doping) would be banned for life. Further, to give national bodies a strong incentive to police their own athletes, consideration might be given to pulling all medals for all competitors of a nation from which any competitor was shown to have violated this rule. to eliminate judging bias, events would be limited to those which can be measured in terms of speed, accuracy, strength, endurance, etc. If a judging panel is required to measure ‘grace’ or ‘technique’, then the event should not be included. Let’s go back to the basics and celebrate sport in a pure fashion - sport for its own sake, sport that unites us instead of emphasizing our differences, sport demonstrating the true, sadly missing Olympic spirit. Last edited by Trex; 04-08-08 at 05:55 PM.