Rip, I know its nitpicking but the Modern Olympics started in 1896 not 1894.Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
TMPHBITEU
Member
Rip, I know its nitpicking but the Modern Olympics started in 1896 not 1894.
TMPHBITEU
Baron
Sorry.
Member
Good points, but in this vein, to me, the most ridiculous story of these Olympics so far is the travesty surrounding female competitors with naturally high testosterone levels being forced to 'get treatment' (in some cases surgical!!) in order to compete, even though there is no proof that their higher levels are giving them any sort of advantage.
Apparently this has gone on for some time, but I think it is only now getting attention in the media.
Member
Great article. Fighting the good fight.
Member
So is it just the one NBC channel that covers the olympics in the US? Up here in Canuckistan we have like 6 different sports channels all covering different events so it's really easy to find the weightlifting and women's bikiniball, er- volleyball, which get aired in full, and ignore all the bullshit "sports" (like race walking) and the silly human-interest stories (which there aren't many of anyways).
Member
NBC's coverage sucks. It's reality TV, not sports coverage. Fortunately, those outside the US are not subject to NBC. Even those in the US can watch over the internet, as you note. Hating NBC should not equate to hating the Olympics.
Government subsidies of sports is almost invariably a terrible idea from an economic point of view, whether it's nations hosting the Olympics or states or local governments subsiding football and baseball. Does your disdain for wasting taxpayer money on sports extend to football and baseball?
In the sports I follow, the Olympics are regarded as more important and more prestigious than annual world championships.
You seem to dislike games and artistic events, preferring pure athletics. I tend to agree, but many don't. How does it hurt to let them have their fun?
In other words, your arguments against NBC are spot on. The rest is much less clear. If you don't want to spend your attention on it, no one is forcing you. It's hugely popular, which counts for something in free societies.
If you accept that there should be men's and women's versions of events, then you have to find a way to differentiate the two sexes.
Sex verification by physical examination didn't suffice, due to edge cases. They tried chromosome tests, but ran into the problem of athletes who were neither XX nor XY. The next step was testosterone tests, with athletes over a limit deemed not female.
How do you deal with an athlete who presents as female, other than testes producing a high level of testosterone? The first answer was that such an athlete could not compete as female, leading to such athletes acting to reduce testosterone (usually chemically). That answer was overturned prior to this Olympics - your post is incorrect in that regard - no limits on testosterone for athletes competing as females.
The most well known recent case is probably Caster Semenya. Untreated - world records and gold medals. Reducing testosterone to a level many standard deviations above the mean for women - mediocre performance. This suggests higher levels are a major advantage. The issue has gotten lots of attention in the media. It was heavily covered during the 2012 Olympics.
TMPHBITEU
If I decide to allow the Olympics to continue, it will be because I have decided that Bread and Circuses are useful as a part of my plan. Do not flatter yourself by thinking that your influence on my decision has been significant.
Member
Assuming you do allow them to continue, which events would you permit to be held? Just the original athletics? Or would you allow games like, say, Rugby? Obviously men's soccer would be nixed, since it's a ladies sport, but would you allow the women's version to carry on? They look cute running around their field, after all.
Member
Though I agree that it's absolutely ridiculous to build facilities for millions of your local currency just to host one series of events and to then let the facilities fall into disrepair, I can't help but feel like this is mostly the country's own fault, perhaps in conjunction with the population. You have all these large buildings, so why not use them for non-Olympian related events? Host the national, regional, international whatever competition in whatever sport. Provide all the non-athletic events in the Olympics with open air facilities or use already existing facilities such as lakes or rivers for water games and parks or fields for dwarf throwing. Don't tell me your country doesn't have a gym with a track for the athletes to play in or run on. You think the athletes would be insulted if they didn't have buildings erected in their name? You seriously think the aspiring athletes of your country wouldn't love the chance to run the same track as last year's Olympian who got the gold medal in longest jerk-off session while running the 100m?
Or split up the Olympic games to take longer than 3 weeks so you can re-use facilities and have to build less of them. Make them smaller, too, so the number of selected athletes is smaller. Shit, keep the same amount of selections, but split up the events even more so you don't need large, extravagant buildings to host all of them. And if you're already doing this, do it again why don't you. Like I said earlier, just host the regional jerk-off 100m in the same facilities after the Olympic events are over. Repurpose the facilities to build theatres or parks or shit, libraries, I don't know; who cares? Or, yeah, you know, screw it and let nature take over. That works, too. And if you can't get your populace excited enough to start doing sports to fill these facilities after the fact, then do as good ole' 'Murica did: demolish the facilities and build other stuff on top. Sure, it's pretty stupid to buy materials, build a building, destroy the building after its one and only use, buy new materials, and then buy an entirely new thing, but at least it beats letting it rot. At least you're repurposing the ground underneath the building.
I get why there's a push for small government. If you have to rely on any governing body to efficiently regulate and host events like these, you and your country's fucked. It's unnerving just how wasteful this entire charade is.
Posting Permissions