planetf1.com

It is currently Sat May 27, 2017 4:25 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3507
aice wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think Laura Trott and Jason Kenny are high up their as far as this Olympics goes, assuming the next hour or so goes well. What a couple. Any offspring they have are going to be amazing cyclists!


I tend to agree. That was a very special performance from Laura Trott- she really is a class apart from the rest of the field. She's now Britain's most decorated female Olympian with that gold win. Such an amazing talent.


Plus, considering how amazing they are, they completely lack in any kind of arrogance. They seem to leave all their aggression in their head and let their cycling do the talking. No showmanship, bad mouthing or anything.

I've not really been one for having heroes at any time of my life, but they come as close as anyone for me.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3680
Asphalt_World wrote:
aice wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think Laura Trott and Jason Kenny are high up their as far as this Olympics goes, assuming the next hour or so goes well. What a couple. Any offspring they have are going to be amazing cyclists!


I tend to agree. That was a very special performance from Laura Trott- she really is a class apart from the rest of the field. She's now Britain's most decorated female Olympian with that gold win. Such an amazing talent.


Plus, considering how amazing they are, they completely lack in any kind of arrogance. They seem to leave all their aggression in their head and let their cycling do the talking. No showmanship, bad mouthing or anything.

I've not really been one for having heroes at any time of my life, but they come as close as anyone for me.

The two of them are great! Very impressive performances and I must say that overall GB has had a great games this time around.

I read an interesting article on the way funding for Olympic sports works in England (the sports where more medals are earned get more funding). Seems a bit cut throat but the results are impressive. I'd be interested to know what the Brits think of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3680
SnakeSVT2003 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
SnakeSVT2003 wrote:
Blake wrote:
SnakeSVT2003 wrote:
Bolt wins 100m for a third time. Absolute legend.

I especially love that, given Bolt's start, Gatlin must've thought he was going to win. :twisted:


By the way, I won't be at all surprised if the 400m winner is in the news a few days from now..... It seemed like he was not getting tired at all. It seemed like he was running faster at 350m than he was at 100m. I hope he's legit, though. It was amazing to watch.


On that subject...

Actually, I am glad that Gatlin did not win... Given his history with bans, it would have been as shame to see him beat Bolt.


Yeah, though IMO it's a shame that he is still allowed to compete. Should have been banned for life.

No that's way too harsh. The first positive test was for Ritalin while he was in college and the NCAA actually determined that he had a valid prescription and did not take it to enhance performance. The second one was weird. It was for steroids but it wasn't at a major meet. It was just some no-name meet out in the middle of nowhere.

Anyway, he served a 4 year suspension during the prime of his career and missed the 2008 Olympics. I think that's punishment enough. I have been impressed by Gatlin in recent years. To win silver at 34 years of age in the 100 meters is an amazing fete. He's the oldest medalist in the history of the event.


I don't. He and Tyson Gay can stay gone, as far as I'm concerned. Deliberately taking steroids is not a mistake. Getting caught was the mistake. Draconian punishments are never popular, and I get why, but I have slowly come around to the idea that such punishments would solve a lot of problems, both in and out of sport.

He swears up and down it wasn't a deliberate use of the substance (testosterone) and that he doesn't know how it got into his system at a time when he really had nothing to gain from taking anything. Of course all athletes who get popped for performance enhancers have some kind of excuse but there is a possibility that he's telling the truth.

That's why Draconian punishments are not popular. In general, they are not fair nor are they just. More importantly, the 4 year ban was the punishment that was agreed upon by calculated thought and deliberation. When we have rules on the books as well as penalties for breaking those rules, we should adhere to them rather than ignoring them out of some misguided, self-righteous, moralistic crusade. When someone has suffered the consequences of violating a rule, they should then be permitted to resume their lives and their careers without constantly having to pay for something they already paid for!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7654
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.

_________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
Mark Twain


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3507
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


:?

As a general rule, do you follow keirin cycling?

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1577
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


That was a farce, but when Chris Hoy is saying he has never seen it before its a bit much to call the whole sport a joke.

Track Cycling has been my favourite sport again in this Olympics. Proper athletes competing in close quarters and being separated by fractions of a second. It's brilliant.

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:37 pm
Posts: 542
Asphalt_World wrote:
aice wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think Laura Trott and Jason Kenny are high up their as far as this Olympics goes, assuming the next hour or so goes well. What a couple. Any offspring they have are going to be amazing cyclists!


I tend to agree. That was a very special performance from Laura Trott- she really is a class apart from the rest of the field. She's now Britain's most decorated female Olympian with that gold win. Such an amazing talent.


Plus, considering how amazing they are, they completely lack in any kind of arrogance. They seem to leave all their aggression in their head and let their cycling do the talking. No showmanship, bad mouthing or anything.

I've not really been one for having heroes at any time of my life, but they come as close as anyone for me.


Totally agree. Laura and Kenny are very understated & down to earth personalities. They are very easy to like.

Wow! What a nail-biting , dramatic final! I really thought Kenny had got himself disqualified on that first overlap. The judges seem to take an eternity to make their decision! Brilliant stuff from Kenny and indeed, all the Brits in the Velodrome. They have dominated the track cycling. :]

_________________
You just need to be accepted for who you are and be proud of who you are and that is what I'm trying to do.
Lewis Hamilton


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3507
Herb wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


That was a farce, but when Chris Hoy is saying he has never seen it before its a bit much to call the whole sport a joke.

Track Cycling has been my favourite sport again in this Olympics. Proper athletes competing in close quarters and being separated by fractions of a second. It's brilliant.


Thing is, are their any other sports where rules are slightly open to interpretation/misunderstood/difficult to implement? I can't think of many that aren't to be honest.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7654
Asphalt_World wrote:
Herb wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


That was a farce, but when Chris Hoy is saying he has never seen it before its a bit much to call the whole sport a joke.

Track Cycling has been my favourite sport again in this Olympics. Proper athletes competing in close quarters and being separated by fractions of a second. It's brilliant.


Thing is, are their any other sports where rules are slightly open to interpretation/misunderstood/difficult to implement? I can't think of many that aren't to be honest.

This one is actually pretty clear and there are dozens of cameras to see everything. You need to see whether scooter left track and whether anyone was ahead before the scooter left track. Maybe they should show any replays because they showed that the 2 were ahead when scooter was still setting pace. With that German I didn't even bother.

_________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
Mark Twain


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3507
Scooter didn't leave track at the exact place it should have. This coupled with panning cameras means that judging this exactly was impossible. As Boardman said himself, he had never seen this. It was basically unprecedented. I guarantee new photo finish style cameras will be installed on the far side line for future major events.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3680
Herb wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


That was a farce, but when Chris Hoy is saying he has never seen it before its a bit much to call the whole sport a joke.

Track Cycling has been my favourite sport again in this Olympics. Proper athletes competing in close quarters and being separated by fractions of a second. It's brilliant.

Your favorite!? Wow, no offense intended but I can't imagine track cycling being my favorite sport!


Last edited by sandman1347 on Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3507
You know the expression including the bit about the 'eye of the beholder'?

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3680
Again, no offense was intended. I actually enjoy watching the cycling but for me it's one of those "once every four years" sports.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3507
I just don't get the laughing smiley. Kind of belittling someone else's choice. How could someone possible like it the most. It's laughable.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3680
No that wasn't the intent. It's just that it's such an obscure sport that it's hard to imagine someone in here happens to be more into it than any other sport. Smiley removed though if that's how it is taken.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 4:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3680
Overall the Rio Olympics have not been the disaster that people feared they would be (knock on wood). I do however think that there has been a clear issue with scheduling of track and field events. The fact that the semi-final for the 100 meter dash was just an hour and change before the final was ridiculous. All of the sprinters said it affected them and it is clearly the reason the times were not as fast as expected.

Also the women's heptathlon was compromised by a wonky schedule that had them entering the second day on only 4-5 hours of sleep and then waiting 8 hours in the middle of the day between the morning and evening sessions. They finished the competition with the 800 meter run at 11:18 PM!!! That's just ridiculous! I understand that they want to optimize the timing of things for the American TV audience but they went too far and it hurt the athletes performances.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 4:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5414
Location: Nebraska, USA
Is it all dramatically different than previous Olympics? BTW, Swimming had some tight schedules as well. IE Phelps swimming the 200 IM Finals and 38 minutes later the 100 Fly semi-final.

I don't know that there is an optimum in scheduling... there are always going to be some complaints.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 5:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1577
sandman1347 wrote:
No that wasn't the intent. It's just that it's such an obscure sport that it's hard to imagine someone in here happens to be more into it than any other sport. Smiley removed though if that's how it is taken.


So because it is obscure it can't be someone's favourite? You should see some of the bands I like :D

I did say my favourite at these Olympics, not overall. But honestly, what has been yours? I can't think of anything that has been more exciting.

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 8:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 8614
Location: Ireland
sandman1347 wrote:
Again, no offense was intended. I actually enjoy watching the cycling but for me it's one of those "once every four years" sports.

I could watch track cycling all day myself. I think it's mesmerising

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 9:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 4908
Herb wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


That was a farce, but when Chris Hoy is saying he has never seen it before its a bit much to call the whole sport a joke.

Track Cycling has been my favourite sport again in this Olympics. Proper athletes competing in close quarters and being separated by fractions of a second. It's brilliant.


Proper? Why, the others are fake or something?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 9:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 4908
For the fans of Beach volleyball, the women's game between Brazil and Switzerland was absolutely fantastic. One of the best games I've ever watched.

On another note, I find it a shame for the fans booing any team that is against a Brazilian. I'd booo someone who's cheated, not athletes that sweated their way to the top of the world. If I want to support my team I cheer for them, not boo the opponents. It is really such a shame


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 9:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1577
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


That was a farce, but when Chris Hoy is saying he has never seen it before its a bit much to call the whole sport a joke.

Track Cycling has been my favourite sport again in this Olympics. Proper athletes competing in close quarters and being separated by fractions of a second. It's brilliant.


Proper? Why, the others are fake or something?


Dressage....

I'd also question Archery and Shooting as sports that are not really athletic. Even though I've quite enjoyed watching some of them too.

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 9:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 4908
Herb wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


That was a farce, but when Chris Hoy is saying he has never seen it before its a bit much to call the whole sport a joke.

Track Cycling has been my favourite sport again in this Olympics. Proper athletes competing in close quarters and being separated by fractions of a second. It's brilliant.


Proper? Why, the others are fake or something?


Dressage....

I'd also question Archery and Shooting as sports that are not really athletic. Even though I've quite enjoyed watching some of them too.


Ok, I see. I take it back! Archery I'd consider a sport, as it does need physical strength


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 9:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4207
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
Track cycling is absolute joke, why are they stopping race when nothing happened... Oh wait, but no one is disqualified.


That was a farce, but when Chris Hoy is saying he has never seen it before its a bit much to call the whole sport a joke.

Track Cycling has been my favourite sport again in this Olympics. Proper athletes competing in close quarters and being separated by fractions of a second. It's brilliant.


Proper? Why, the others are fake or something?


Dressage....

I'd also question Archery and Shooting as sports that are not really athletic. Even though I've quite enjoyed watching some of them too.


Ok, I see. I take it back! Archery I'd consider a sport, as it does need physical strength

What should and shouldn't be in the olympics has a wide range of opinions and something that I have struggled with in the past when sports are added or removed.

I've had friends and coworkers who were avid pool shooters who believed billiards should be included. My first thought is that it would be absurd because it's a game and not a sport, but then again there are lots of games that are sports so where do you set the threshold between games that are sports and those that aren't.

How much athleticism is required to make a game worthy of an Olympic sport? Or is it more than athleticism and it becomes a matter of skill and how valued is that skill?

The shooting sports and archery don't require a lot of athleticism but do require a skill as does billiards. So why should the skill required to hit a target with a projectile be more worthy of an Olympic medal than the skill it takes to hit balls into pockets on a table?

I have no answers to these questions. I'm just rambling because I haven't had any coffee yet and I'm procrastinating from doing my morning run.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 10:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1577
RaggedMan wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
Dressage....

I'd also question Archery and Shooting as sports that are not really athletic. Even though I've quite enjoyed watching some of them too.


Ok, I see. I take it back! Archery I'd consider a sport, as it does need physical strength

What should and shouldn't be in the olympics has a wide range of opinions and something that I have struggled with in the past when sports are added or removed.

I've had friends and coworkers who were avid pool shooters who believed billiards should be included. My first thought is that it would be absurd because it's a game and not a sport, but then again there are lots of games that are sports so where do you set the threshold between games that are sports and those that aren't.

How much athleticism is required to make a game worthy of an Olympic sport? Or is it more than athleticism and it becomes a matter of skill and how valued is that skill?

The shooting sports and archery don't require a lot of athleticism but do require a skill as does billiards. So why should the skill required to hit a target with a projectile be more worthy of an Olympic medal than the skill it takes to hit balls into pockets on a table?

I have no answers to these questions. I'm just rambling because I haven't had any coffee yet and I'm procrastinating from doing my morning run.


I have the same internal conflict. I see no real difference in terms of the level of skill and accuracy required between Archery and Darts. But I have no issue with Archery being in the Olympics and would find it ludicrous for Darts to be included.

Especially when sports like Squash are continually overlooked!

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 10:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:41 pm
Posts: 4095
Well it isn't the Olympics Sports Festival, it's the Olympic Games. Though I'm not advocating we should see Monopoly or Poker at the Olympics. It's clear in my mind that the athletic part should be a significant aspect.

I think many people have some doubt as to where the crossover point is. I feel like the conditioning for archery at top level is higher than dart or billiards - hopefully that won't be controversial. I feel like both of those require a bit more conditioning than the air gun events (note - I've never shot an air gun, I have shot an arrow, played darts badly and play snooker/pool sometimes. This is just my gut feeling).

There are some other things I find kind of weird. Indoor volleyball and beach volleyball. But we don't have clay/indoor/grass tennis medals. No beach (soccer) football. Again, I'm a layman at volleyball but from what little I've seen of both sports, they seem pretty similar. They seem too similar. Because it's beach volleyball I feel like there is another bit of a reason why it'll be protected.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 11:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 4908
mac_d wrote:
Well it isn't the Olympics Sports Festival, it's the Olympic Games. Though I'm not advocating we should see Monopoly or Poker at the Olympics. It's clear in my mind that the athletic part should be a significant aspect.

I think many people have some doubt as to where the crossover point is. I feel like the conditioning for archery at top level is higher than dart or billiards - hopefully that won't be controversial. I feel like both of those require a bit more conditioning than the air gun events (note - I've never shot an air gun, I have shot an arrow, played darts badly and play snooker/pool sometimes. This is just my gut feeling).

There are some other things I find kind of weird. Indoor volleyball and beach volleyball. But we don't have clay/indoor/grass tennis medals. No beach (soccer) football. Again, I'm a layman at volleyball but from what little I've seen of both sports, they seem pretty similar. They seem too similar. Because it's beach volleyball I feel like there is another bit of a reason why it'll be protected.


They are totally different, I can assure you. I compete in both indoor and beach v-ball and the similarities stop at the ball and net! They are very different, from the number of players, the size of the court, the positioning, the side switching, the strategy behind the game play, everything. Actually even the balls weight and material are different. There are things that the casual viewer can't see, but there are quite different sports. I agree they look the same and the principle rules are similar, but that's about it. Take a block for example, in indoor it doesn't count as a touch (each team in both sports have three touches to pass the ball) but in beach it does. So after a block you have 2 touches in beach while you can have 3 in indoor. Or the fact that it is outside and wind, rain or sun glare can change the game (it is the reason why the teams switch sides every 7 or so points too). Too many differences in short.

The tennis association is not valid, as it is only the surface that changes from clay to grass or hard court. Beach footie is a better comparison, but I can't help with why they left it out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 12:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3507
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Again, no offense was intended. I actually enjoy watching the cycling but for me it's one of those "once every four years" sports.

I could watch track cycling all day myself. I think it's mesmerising


Visiting a velodrome and watching it live is probably the most exciting sport I've ever seen.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 12:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 8614
Location: Ireland
mac_d wrote:
Well it isn't the Olympics Sports Festival, it's the Olympic Games. Though I'm not advocating we should see Monopoly or Poker at the Olympics. It's clear in my mind that the athletic part should be a significant aspect.

I think many people have some doubt as to where the crossover point is. I feel like the conditioning for archery at top level is higher than dart or billiards - hopefully that won't be controversial. I feel like both of those require a bit more conditioning than the air gun events (note - I've never shot an air gun, I have shot an arrow, played darts badly and play snooker/pool sometimes. This is just my gut feeling).

There are some other things I find kind of weird. Indoor volleyball and beach volleyball. But we don't have clay/indoor/grass tennis medals. No beach (soccer) football. Again, I'm a layman at volleyball but from what little I've seen of both sports, they seem pretty similar. They seem too similar. Because it's beach volleyball I feel like there is another bit of a reason why it'll be protected.

Could the crowd still get wankered drunk if they added darts to the Olympics?

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 12:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:41 pm
Posts: 4095
mcdo wrote:
Could the crowd still get wankered drunk if they added darts to the Olympics?


Is there any other way to watch darts?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 12:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3680
On the topic of which sports should be included in the Olympics; I'm sure opinions vary dramatically. Some of the arguments as to what should be considered a sport and what shouldn't are interesting to look at but a part of my consideration is that I really deeply feel that the Olympics should be filled with sports for whom the Olympics is the pinnacle of competition.

There are plenty of legitimate sports that no one would debate whether or not they are sports, where I have begun to feel that they shouldn't necessarily be included in the Olympics. For example, football (soccer) and basketball are great sports but if you're a football player, the World Cup is without doubt much more important to you than the Olympics (as is your professional league championship) and if you're a basketball player, the NBA is the top of the mountain; not the Olympics. The athletes who compete in these sports do not particularly look forward to the Olympics. Many of them are multimillionaires who really don't want to run the risk of getting injured in competition and compromising their professional career. To me, it's just not the scenario that Olympic athletes should be in. An Olympian should be experiencing the most intense and meaningful competition in their sport. They shouldn't be there out of some sense of obligation nor should they have a mentality that they want to make sure not to get hurt for their real job.

For Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt, the Olympics are what they live for and where their legacy is created. For Lebron James and Neymar, the Olympics might make an interesting footnote to their legacy. It's just not the same.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4207
mac_d wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Could the crowd still get wankered drunk if they added darts to the Olympics?


Is there any other way to watch darts?

Is there any other way to play darts?

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 4908
sandman1347 wrote:
On the topic of which sports should be included in the Olympics; I'm sure opinions vary dramatically. Some of the arguments as to what should be considered a sport and what shouldn't are interesting to look at but a part of my consideration is that I really deeply feel that the Olympics should be filled with sports for whom the Olympics is the pinnacle of competition.

There are plenty of legitimate sports that no one would debate whether or not they are sports, where I have begun to feel that they shouldn't necessarily be included in the Olympics. For example, football (soccer) and basketball are great sports but if you're a football player, the World Cup is without doubt much more important to you than the Olympics (as is your professional league championship) and if you're a basketball player, the NBA is the top of the mountain; not the Olympics. The athletes who compete in these sports do not particularly look forward to the Olympics. Many of them are multimillionaires who really don't want to run the risk of getting injured in competition and compromising their professional career. To me, it's just not the scenario that Olympic athletes should be in. An Olympian should be experiencing the most intense and meaningful competition in their sport. They shouldn't be there out of some sense of obligation nor should they have a mentality that they want to make sure not to get hurt for their real job.

For Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt, the Olympics are what they live for and where their legacy is created. For Lebron James and Neymar, the Olympics might make an interesting footnote to their legacy. It's just not the same.


Not sure about that. It certainly changed lately, but do you remember the first Dream Team? Boy oh boy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1577
sandman1347 wrote:
On the topic of which sports should be included in the Olympics; I'm sure opinions vary dramatically. Some of the arguments as to what should be considered a sport and what shouldn't are interesting to look at but a part of my consideration is that I really deeply feel that the Olympics should be filled with sports for whom the Olympics is the pinnacle of competition.

There are plenty of legitimate sports that no one would debate whether or not they are sports, where I have begun to feel that they shouldn't necessarily be included in the Olympics. For example, football (soccer) and basketball are great sports but if you're a football player, the World Cup is without doubt much more important to you than the Olympics (as is your professional league championship) and if you're a basketball player, the NBA is the top of the mountain; not the Olympics. The athletes who compete in these sports do not particularly look forward to the Olympics. Many of them are multimillionaires who really don't want to run the risk of getting injured in competition and compromising their professional career. To me, it's just not the scenario that Olympic athletes should be in. An Olympian should be experiencing the most intense and meaningful competition in their sport. They shouldn't be there out of some sense of obligation nor should they have a mentality that they want to make sure not to get hurt for their real job.

For Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt, the Olympics are what they live for and where their legacy is created. For Lebron James and Neymar, the Olympics might make an interesting footnote to their legacy. It's just not the same.


I almost agree with this I think. And I think Golf has been the perfect example of this, so many top seeds missing (admittedly Zika has been the main reason/excuse for not competing).

With the exception of Tennis - from what I have seen, the stars seem to look forward to playing for their country (which they only otherwise do in the Davis/Fed Cup). And I believe the Olympics attracts some ranking points.

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 4908
Herb wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
On the topic of which sports should be included in the Olympics; I'm sure opinions vary dramatically. Some of the arguments as to what should be considered a sport and what shouldn't are interesting to look at but a part of my consideration is that I really deeply feel that the Olympics should be filled with sports for whom the Olympics is the pinnacle of competition.

There are plenty of legitimate sports that no one would debate whether or not they are sports, where I have begun to feel that they shouldn't necessarily be included in the Olympics. For example, football (soccer) and basketball are great sports but if you're a football player, the World Cup is without doubt much more important to you than the Olympics (as is your professional league championship) and if you're a basketball player, the NBA is the top of the mountain; not the Olympics. The athletes who compete in these sports do not particularly look forward to the Olympics. Many of them are multimillionaires who really don't want to run the risk of getting injured in competition and compromising their professional career. To me, it's just not the scenario that Olympic athletes should be in. An Olympian should be experiencing the most intense and meaningful competition in their sport. They shouldn't be there out of some sense of obligation nor should they have a mentality that they want to make sure not to get hurt for their real job.

For Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt, the Olympics are what they live for and where their legacy is created. For Lebron James and Neymar, the Olympics might make an interesting footnote to their legacy. It's just not the same.


I almost agree with this I think. And I think Golf has been the perfect example of this, so many top seeds missing (admittedly Zika has been the main reason/excuse for not competing).

With the exception of Tennis - from what I have seen, the stars seem to look forward to playing for their country (which they only otherwise do in the Davis/Fed Cup). And I believe the Olympics attracts some ranking points.


I'd say cycling too: Chris Froome, Cavendish, Cancellara, Wiggins, etc. Quite a few big names giving it all there


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 3680
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
On the topic of which sports should be included in the Olympics; I'm sure opinions vary dramatically. Some of the arguments as to what should be considered a sport and what shouldn't are interesting to look at but a part of my consideration is that I really deeply feel that the Olympics should be filled with sports for whom the Olympics is the pinnacle of competition.

There are plenty of legitimate sports that no one would debate whether or not they are sports, where I have begun to feel that they shouldn't necessarily be included in the Olympics. For example, football (soccer) and basketball are great sports but if you're a football player, the World Cup is without doubt much more important to you than the Olympics (as is your professional league championship) and if you're a basketball player, the NBA is the top of the mountain; not the Olympics. The athletes who compete in these sports do not particularly look forward to the Olympics. Many of them are multimillionaires who really don't want to run the risk of getting injured in competition and compromising their professional career. To me, it's just not the scenario that Olympic athletes should be in. An Olympian should be experiencing the most intense and meaningful competition in their sport. They shouldn't be there out of some sense of obligation nor should they have a mentality that they want to make sure not to get hurt for their real job.

For Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt, the Olympics are what they live for and where their legacy is created. For Lebron James and Neymar, the Olympics might make an interesting footnote to their legacy. It's just not the same.


Not sure about that. It certainly changed lately, but do you remember the first Dream Team? Boy oh boy

I remember that team vividly. They were the greatest team in history and they are largely responsible for the way the game has become an international sport. From that standpoint, I can see the value of Olympic basketball. Of course, that was 24 years ago and I think that things are not the same today. The rest of the world has closed the gap to the USA somewhat but it would still take a fluke for one of those teams to win gold (it happened in 2004). Overall, the modern USA basketball teams don't quite inspire the awe that the 92' team did with Jordan and Magic and all those legends.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:37 pm
Posts: 542
sandman1347 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
aice wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
I think Laura Trott and Jason Kenny are high up their as far as this Olympics goes, assuming the next hour or so goes well. What a couple. Any offspring they have are going to be amazing cyclists!


I tend to agree. That was a very special performance from Laura Trott- she really is a class apart from the rest of the field. She's now Britain's most decorated female Olympian with that gold win. Such an amazing talent.


Plus, considering how amazing they are, they completely lack in any kind of arrogance. They seem to leave all their aggression in their head and let their cycling do the talking. No showmanship, bad mouthing or anything.

I've not really been one for having heroes at any time of my life, but they come as close as anyone for me.

The two of them are great! Very impressive performances and I must say that overall GB has had a great games this time around.

I read an interesting article on the way funding for Olympic sports works in England (the sports where more medals are earned get more funding). Seems a bit cut throat but the results are impressive. I'd be interested to know what the Brits think of it.


Well the British way of funding their Olympic sports seems to be reaping very high dividends. The relevant sporting disciplines are largely financed through National Lottery funding. That has allowed potential athletes to dedicate themselves full-time to training and to be better prepared. It has also contributed to the capital needed to invest in Britain’s sporting infrastructure. Since 2012, the most successful disciplines receive a greater portion of that funding. This tends to be sports such as the cycling, rowing, sailing etc. Personally, I can understand the ethos behind this strategy. It makes sense to play to one’s strengths and to capitalise on what you are good at. It may seem brutal giving a disproportionate amount to certain sports, but it’s certainly proving effective. On the flip side of the coin, there is a growing fear that those sports with reduced funding, may start to decline at grassroots level. It’s something that the powers that be will have to further examine and closely monitor. In the meantime, the current system is working a treat. If i'm correct, Team GB has already reached their medals target for these games and currently sits 2nd in the overall medals table. The bulk of those medals have come from disciplines that have benefited from increased funding. IMO, it's proving to be a winning formula.

_________________
You just need to be accepted for who you are and be proud of who you are and that is what I'm trying to do.
Lewis Hamilton


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 4:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 4908
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
On the topic of which sports should be included in the Olympics; I'm sure opinions vary dramatically. Some of the arguments as to what should be considered a sport and what shouldn't are interesting to look at but a part of my consideration is that I really deeply feel that the Olympics should be filled with sports for whom the Olympics is the pinnacle of competition.

There are plenty of legitimate sports that no one would debate whether or not they are sports, where I have begun to feel that they shouldn't necessarily be included in the Olympics. For example, football (soccer) and basketball are great sports but if you're a football player, the World Cup is without doubt much more important to you than the Olympics (as is your professional league championship) and if you're a basketball player, the NBA is the top of the mountain; not the Olympics. The athletes who compete in these sports do not particularly look forward to the Olympics. Many of them are multimillionaires who really don't want to run the risk of getting injured in competition and compromising their professional career. To me, it's just not the scenario that Olympic athletes should be in. An Olympian should be experiencing the most intense and meaningful competition in their sport. They shouldn't be there out of some sense of obligation nor should they have a mentality that they want to make sure not to get hurt for their real job.

For Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt, the Olympics are what they live for and where their legacy is created. For Lebron James and Neymar, the Olympics might make an interesting footnote to their legacy. It's just not the same.


Not sure about that. It certainly changed lately, but do you remember the first Dream Team? Boy oh boy

I remember that team vividly. They were the greatest team in history and they are largely responsible for the way the game has become an international sport. From that standpoint, I can see the value of Olympic basketball. Of course, that was 24 years ago and I think that things are not the same today. The rest of the world has closed the gap to the USA somewhat but it would still take a fluke for one of those teams to win gold (it happened in 2004). Overall, the modern USA basketball teams don't quite inspire the awe that the 92' team did with Jordan and Magic and all those legends.

I know, I'm still gutted for 2004... That Dream Team was one of a kind really


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 4:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:19 pm
Posts: 1135
Location: Los Angeles, California
sandman1347 wrote:
SnakeSVT2003 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
SnakeSVT2003 wrote:
Blake wrote:

On that subject...

Actually, I am glad that Gatlin did not win... Given his history with bans, it would have been as shame to see him beat Bolt.


Yeah, though IMO it's a shame that he is still allowed to compete. Should have been banned for life.

No that's way too harsh. The first positive test was for Ritalin while he was in college and the NCAA actually determined that he had a valid prescription and did not take it to enhance performance. The second one was weird. It was for steroids but it wasn't at a major meet. It was just some no-name meet out in the middle of nowhere.

Anyway, he served a 4 year suspension during the prime of his career and missed the 2008 Olympics. I think that's punishment enough. I have been impressed by Gatlin in recent years. To win silver at 34 years of age in the 100 meters is an amazing fete. He's the oldest medalist in the history of the event.


I don't. He and Tyson Gay can stay gone, as far as I'm concerned. Deliberately taking steroids is not a mistake. Getting caught was the mistake. Draconian punishments are never popular, and I get why, but I have slowly come around to the idea that such punishments would solve a lot of problems, both in and out of sport.

He swears up and down it wasn't a deliberate use of the substance (testosterone) and that he doesn't know how it got into his system at a time when he really had nothing to gain from taking anything. Of course all athletes who get popped for performance enhancers have some kind of excuse but there is a possibility that he's telling the truth.

That's why Draconian punishments are not popular. In general, they are not fair nor are they just. More importantly, the 4 year ban was the punishment that was agreed upon by calculated thought and deliberation. When we have rules on the books as well as penalties for breaking those rules, we should adhere to them rather than ignoring them out of some misguided, self-righteous, moralistic crusade. When someone has suffered the consequences of violating a rule, they should then be permitted to resume their lives and their careers without constantly having to pay for something they already paid for!


So then you think Ray Rice's original, meager 2-game suspension for beating his wife unconscious in an elevator was correct because it was, as Goodell himself said at the time, in line with NFL policy? Just because a punishment is in the books doesn't mean it is a strong punishment.

The punishment has to, by definition (and to be effective in any way), act as a deterrent. That drugs are still a huge problem in sports means the punishments are not strong enough.

_________________
"No, there is no terrible way to win. There is only winning."
Jean-Pierre Sarti


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:19 pm
Posts: 1135
Location: Los Angeles, California
sandman1347 wrote:
On the topic of which sports should be included in the Olympics; I'm sure opinions vary dramatically. Some of the arguments as to what should be considered a sport and what shouldn't are interesting to look at but a part of my consideration is that I really deeply feel that the Olympics should be filled with sports for whom the Olympics is the pinnacle of competition.

There are plenty of legitimate sports that no one would debate whether or not they are sports, where I have begun to feel that they shouldn't necessarily be included in the Olympics. For example, football (soccer) and basketball are great sports but if you're a football player, the World Cup is without doubt much more important to you than the Olympics (as is your professional league championship) and if you're a basketball player, the NBA is the top of the mountain; not the Olympics. The athletes who compete in these sports do not particularly look forward to the Olympics. Many of them are multimillionaires who really don't want to run the risk of getting injured in competition and compromising their professional career. To me, it's just not the scenario that Olympic athletes should be in. An Olympian should be experiencing the most intense and meaningful competition in their sport. They shouldn't be there out of some sense of obligation nor should they have a mentality that they want to make sure not to get hurt for their real job.

For Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt, the Olympics are what they live for and where their legacy is created. For Lebron James and Neymar, the Olympics might make an interesting footnote to their legacy. It's just not the same.


I think men's basketball should be U-23 like men's football is, with the same 3-player exception (maybe 2 since the roster is smaller in basketball). It could mean more college players get to participate, and it would still be possible for NBA stars to take part.

_________________
"No, there is no terrible way to win. There is only winning."
Jean-Pierre Sarti


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group