Quote:
Originally Posted by kyp275
I'd say both are equally boring to watch. As a matter of fact, most Olympic sports are terrible as spectator sports, but then again that's not what the Olympic is about.
|
Maybe not in its origins or its culture, but the Olympics today are all about spectators, particularly those watching on television via networks that are paying millions and billions of dollars for the rights.
I think the Olympics lost its way when it began allowing professionals to play and added sports like tennis and basketball which are simply another venue for professionals in those sports to compete. Even though I am a golfer, I don't believe golf should be an Olympic sport either, not when it comes at costs of a sport called "Greco-Roman" for a reason.
The situation was complicated in the Cold War years when it was an open secret that the Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellites fielded teams with members who were amateurs in name only. The US victory over Russia in hockey at Lake Placid remains celebrated because the Americans fielded a team of collegiates who could defeat the mighty Russian "amateurs." So the IOC decided to resolve this problem by letting professionals play and adding events like tennis precisely to showcase professionals. Did having the "Dream Team" play basketball at the Olympics boost US television ratings? Of course it did. Did it undermine the whole notion of the Olympics as a showcase for amateurs? Of course it did.
For those wondering why sports like dressage continue on while wrestling was cut you need only look at who competes in and watches these types of equestrian events. People with money. People that the likes of Mercedes-Benz wants to advertise to. Golf is another example. I'm sure we'll see the course in Rio littered with signage like we see in European and Asian events with ads for UBS and BMW.