If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Let The European and North American Olympics Winter Games Begin
Where the Rich and Elite Meet to Compete
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020302280.html Where the Rich and Elite Meet to Compete By Paul Farhi Sunday, February 5, 2006; B01 Never mind the usual puffery about what this month's Winter Olympics are all about. Sure, there's the beauty of sports, the spirit of friendly competition, the dedication of great athletes and all that. But the Winter Games are about a few other things as well: elitism, exclusion and the triumph of the world's sporting haves over its have nots. What the Winter Games are not is a truly international sporting competition that brings the best of the world together to compete, as the promotional blather would have you believe. Unlike the widely attended Summer Olympics, the winter version is almost exclusively the preserve of a narrow, generally wealthy, predominantly Caucasian collection of athletes and nations. In fact, I'd suggest that the name of the Winter Games, which start Friday, be changed. They could be more accurately branded "The European and North American Expensive Sports Festival." Throughout most of the Winter Olympics' history, the parade of participating nations has been a short one. Until as recently as 1994, fewer than a third of the planet's countries took part. This year, in Turin, Italy, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) expects delegations from about 85 countries, an all-time high, but still barely 43 percent of the world's total. Even that exaggerates the extent of participation. Many of the nations in the Opening Ceremonies will be represented by tokens, some consisting entirely of sports bureaucrats, not athletes. Ethiopia, a nation of 73 million, will send its first "team" to a Winter Olympics this year -- a single skier. As always, the biggest delegations, and the big winners, will come from a familiar pool. In the history of the winter competition, dating from its inception in 1924, competitors from only six countries -- the Soviet Union/Russia, Germany (East, West and combined), Norway, the United States, Austria and Finland, in that order -- have won almost two-thirds of all the medals awarded. Only 17 countries have ever amassed more than 10 medals during the past 19 winter Olympiads. Only 38 countries have won even one medal. This had turned the Winter Olympics into a remarkably insular competition. The Czech Republic (and Czechoslovakia before it) has won more medals than China, home to about one-fifth of humanity. Norway, a nation with a population smaller than metropolitan Washington, has won three times as many winter medals as the nations of Asia, Latin and South America, Australia and Polynesia, the Middle East and the Caribbean Basin combined. By contrast, the all-time list of summer winners is long and deep, extending to athletes from 143 countries, including such places as Tonga, Paraguay and Burundi. The Summer Games have medal hogs, too, but nothing like winter ones. The top six in the summer -- the United States, the Soviet Union/Russia, Germany, France, Britain and Italy -- have swept up slightly more than half the medals since the modern games started in 1896. Obviously, the climate and terrain in, say, Indonesia or Aruba aren't highly conducive to molding superstar aerial skiers and biathlon champions. But it's not just the presence or absence of snow and ice that determines Winter Olympics success, or even participation. If it were, some of America's best ice skaters and speedskaters wouldn't live and train in Southern California or Florida. If it were, athletes from countries like Peru, Chile, Nepal, Morocco, Afghanistan and Ethiopia -- all blessed with soaring, snow-covered mountains -- would be marching en masse in the Opening Ceremonies and fighting for the medal stand. Instead, the more telling factors are economic. Would-be Winter Olympians need years of training, coaching and competition if they're going to make it to the Games. All of these things require massive sums of money. A bobsled (or bobsleigh, in official IOC-speak) costs about $35,000, to say nothing of what it costs to build an Olympic-caliber bobsled run. A pair of speedskates might be relatively cheap, but how many countries have speedskating rinks? Most nations, even those with plenty of snow and cold, simply can't afford such extravagances. Remember the Jamaican bobsled team? Those lovable underdogs endeared themselves to many with their participation in the 1988 games in Calgary (the four-man team was the subject of the 1993 Disney movie "Cool Runnings" and finished a surprisingly high 14th in 1994). Less well-known is what happened -- or didn't happen -- to the Jamaicans in the 2002 games in Salt Lake City: They didn't show up. The team ran out of funding and had to stay home. Unlike the Winter Games, the Summer Olympics level many of the advantages of national wealth, as well as favorable geography and climate. It takes all the usual things to become a Summer Olympian -- heart, outsized talent and the ability to devote most of your waking hours to your sport -- but the barriers to entry are much lower. Athletes from the poorest African and Caribbean nations have developed into some of the world's greatest athletes with shockingly minimal, or even nonexistent, facilities and equipment. In winter sports, by contrast, the rich keep getting richer. Nations wealthy enough to host a Winter Olympics tend to be those that win most of the medals (17 of the 20 Winter Olympics have been held in Western Europe, Canada or the United States). And hosting the Games tends to ensure future success; the expensive facilities left behind -- the ski jumps, skeleton runs, half-pipes, etc. -- become training grounds for the next generation of Olympians. Baron Pierre de Coubertin, the founder of the modern Olympics, recognized some of these global sporting inequities more than a century ago. De Coubertin objected to the creation of a separate Winter Olympics for many years, dismissing winter sports in 1921 as "the snobbish play of the rich." It wasn't until 1924 -- some 28 years after the first modern Olympics -- that the IOC retroactively recognized something called the "International Week of Winter Sports" in Chamonix, France, as the first Winter Olympics. So why perpetuate an event that could just as easily be contested as a series of disaggregated annual championships? The reason, of course, is money and TV. And here again, it's a small world. The Winter Olympics might collapse were it not for the financial support of American broadcasters and their (mostly) American advertisers. Like the teams themselves, the audience for the Winter Olympics is predominantly North American and European, accounting for about two-thirds of all worldwide viewing during the Salt Lake City Games of 2002, according to the IOC. This is just fine by the Olympics' "worldwide" sponsors -- companies like Coca-Cola, McDonald's, Panasonic and Visa -- whose biggest markets are in these places, too. Indeed, with NBC paying about half of all the fees for TV rights the IOC collects, American sponsors and broadcasters call the tune. In 1994, facing sponsor "fatigue" from same-year Summer and Winter Olympics, the IOC decided to stagger the two seasons' Games, so that the Winter Olympics now take place two years after the summer ones. This is not to suggest that Winter Olympians aren't dedicated and superb athletes. They are, of course. But the pool of actual and potential competitors in, say, luge or curling (or skeleton or biathlon or bobsledding or freestyle moguls skiing) is ludicrously small and will probably remain so for years to come. The Winter Olympics simply aren't, and probably can't be, a truly global sporting contest. So please, in the next few weeks, spare us the hokum about the nations of the world joining together in a symbolic celebration of the human spirit. Some nations and some human spirit maybe, but unfortunately, all too precious little. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
What a completely idiotic and weenie article.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Mike wrote:
They could be more accurately branded "The European and North American Expensive Sports Festival." Dang. I guess we and the Kiwis aren't in it then. Ditto the Argentineans and the Chileans. Or the South Africans. What an ignorant article. Do we have to import snow to hot countries that have none? On a US news channel tonight, I saw a "gee whizz" spot about how funny foreign people were entering the Games, and they showed Australian Skeleton racers pracising in the outback. They never once mentioned that Australia has quite a bit of snow and mountains. Morons. Shame the article didn't mention that if you are watching the Games in the US, you'll see nothing that doesn't have a yank flag stuck on it. You won't see other countries athletes unless they are about to win something (maybe). You'll just see US athletes, and lots of dross about the local curiosities. And a ****LOAD of ****ing figure skating. I wish they'd give PBS the screening rights. We'd actually see The Games. -- ant |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"ant" wrote in message ... Mike wrote: They could be more accurately branded "The European and North American Expensive Sports Festival." Dang. I guess we and the Kiwis aren't in it then. Ditto the Argentineans and the Chileans. Or the South Africans. I guess the days of the Jamaican Bobsled team have passed. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On 5 Feb 2006 17:40:20 -0800, "Mike" wrote:
Where the Rich and Elite Meet to Compete http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020302280.html Where the Rich and Elite Meet to Compete What a stupid article. What it seems to miss entirely is the basic reason why most competitors come from a relatively small range of countries. Namely that a large majority of winter sports competitors come from counties that *have* a significant winter. It mentions the fact that Ethiopia will have "just" one competitor - but exactly where in Ethiopia do they see snow or ice most winters? -- Alex Heney, Global Villager Bugs are Sons of Glitches! To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Mary Malmros wrote:
What a completely idiotic and weenie article. I agree with you - the article is a slam piece. But I also agree that there is something real underlying the article. I think the Winter Olympics could do better at inclusion. There's no excuse for the Jamaicans to be excluded for financial reasons when their Bobsled team was otherwise qualified. Possible the dominant countries could create a financial pool for such cases? Also, while I think it's dangerous for Eddy the Eagle to jump or Sulidan the Slink to run a downhill, and therefore support qualifying results before entry in the Olympics is allowed, a "preliminary" open to all countries could be run in each discipline, following entry qualifications similar to those minor league racing uses (The Tahoe League uses no top 10 finishers in Far West races, I believe. Equivalent might be no FIS points nn?) Maybe the podium from the pre-races could be allowed into the "real" Olympics - certainly the safety issue would have been addressed. Many of the warm countries could round up some ex-pat but still citizens who've been living in winter-countries to be their entries in numerous disciplines, who could afford to enter the preliminaries. Such opportunities would go along way toward inclusion without materially impacting the Winter Games. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Haven't you seen Cool Runnin'?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
lal_truckee wrote: Mary Malmros wrote: What a completely idiotic and weenie article. I agree with you - the article is a slam piece. But I also agree that there is something real underlying the article. I think the Winter Olympics could do better at inclusion. There's no excuse for the Jamaicans to be excluded for financial reasons when their Bobsled team was otherwise qualified. Possible the dominant countries could create a financial pool for such cases? Lal, people in North American and European countries are "excluded", as the article calls it, all the time for financial reasons. Except in the few countries like China that maintain a comprehensive state-sponsored development system, an athlete whose family can't foot the bill or otherwise provide the opportunities, isn't going to have the chance. People from the United States don't get some kind of pass because they're from a "wealthy" nation; the ones who can muster the resources get the opportunities, and the ones who can do something with those opportunities get a trip to the Olympics. Everybody else stays home. I also have to ask, what's the point of, for instance, Brazil having an alpine skier in the Olympics? Alpine skiing means nothing in Brazil; it means something in Austria and Norway and parts of the USA. How meaningful is "inclusion" when the thing you're being included in just isn't on your radar scope in the first place? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Well, yea, ski racing (for one) is a damn expensive winter sport. And,
not just cash wise. The time commitment is pretty big as well. Unless you live at the base of a ski area, there will be travel involved. Race days can take you across the state, which means gas, lodging, food and even more time. The price of equipment is quite high. Most age class kids will have several pair of skis for training and racing the various diciplines. Wax, tunung gear, lift tickets, clothing (speed suits, protective clothing, training clothes) - way expensive, even with team sponsored discounts. Oh yea, the team. It ain't basketball at the local rec center folks. Training fees for the season will set you back about $1,500 for even the most basic age class program. I think there are ways for the average Joe to see his child to the elite level if the child is a gifted athlete and really wants it AND the parent wants it for their child. But, the average Joe will have to sacrifice a heck of a lot more than the wealthy that can send his kid to BMA with unlimited funds to fuel the kid to the top. This would have been a much more intesting article if the writer would have done some research on what kind of cash it takes to get a kid to the top in the various winter sports. Citing the cost of a bobsled was a start. But, I'm sure there is a hell of a lot more then just that cost. I personally would love to see more programs like NBS. Here is an interesting artcle about NBS: http://www.skimag.com/skimag/fall_li...327626,00.html From the article: "But the challenges facing young African-American ski racers are daunting. First, there is the cold cash needed to groom a winner: The NBS says that it takes about $30,000 per year to send a child to an elite ski academy and pay for travel to races." -- Marty |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Marty wrote: From the article: "But the challenges facing young African-American ski racers are daunting. First, there is the cold cash needed to groom a winner: The NBS says that it takes about $30,000 per year to send a child to an elite ski academy and pay for travel to races." Well, hell, Picabo Street's family sure didn't have any $30K a year to spend on school. For that matter, neither did Bode Miller's. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|