2024 Paris Olympics megathread

[crazy canuck]

A question for those who don't like weight classes, what is your view about races of different distances in swimming, track etc?

Would you endorse picking one distance to be the one that determines who the best swimmer, runner etc is?

What's the connection?

Different types of athletes excel at different distances.

If you answered a marathon we would never see Bolt, as an example.

But what's the connection with weight classes?

Try answering my question and provide a justification.  You might start to see the connection.

Race distance and weight class are not comparable, except at the highest level of "way to segregate a competition".  Their nature is completely different.

A weight class reflects something an athlete is.  An athlete cannot choose what weight class to participate in.  The competition organizers put them on a scale and tell them, based on the reading, the one and only competition they can enter.  The parameters of the competition are otherwise identical between the weight classes.

In contrast, a race distance is a parameter of the competition.  There are no hard exclusions for athletes; any swimmer can attempt to compete at any distance they wish, and most compete at multiple.  Only their performance under the particular parameters affects their ability to compete at high levels.

So no, abolishing weight classes for an event is not analogous to defining a single distance for an event.  They operate on different mechanisms and have different purposes.

I disagree with a number of your points.  An athlete does have some control over what weight class they are in.  In wrestling a major part of training is staying within a particular class, as an example.  As an anecdote, early on in my son's rowing experience he was asked to choose whether he would be a lightweight or heavyweight rowing.  His decision dictated both his diet and how he would be trained.

Your point that there are restrictions on who can compete at a particular distance is true, but ignores the point that a sprinter is fundamentally different from a distance runner.  They are very different athletes.

And so I ask again, would you give up seeing Bolt by creating one type of competition that is a long race.  The analogy being would you give up seeing Sugar Ray by eliminating light weight boxing?

[The Brain]

Hey, if you guys don't want to discuss the positions you have taken, and their potential weaknesses, that up to you.

[celedhring]

I definitely think the slow swimming styles are silly and unnecessary. You don't win Olympic gold for running backwards or on all fours, and no one misses those events.

There are racewalking events.

Anyway, a lot of events don't really make much sense, but are there due to tradition. One of my favorites are all the variety of "throw some weirdly shaped object the farthest you can" events. At least in the case of javelin/discus there's the Ancient Olympics connection, but then there's also hammer throw and shot put.

[Josquius]

Agreed that the analogy doesn't work.
The different swimming strokes are kind of different sports.
 More comparable to rugby vs football than to lightweight vs featherweight.
It's the restrictive rules of who you are before the sport begins vs rules after the starters bell/whistle/whatever.

All that being said however for totally different reasons I would have no issue with a cull of swimming strokes. Some seem quite pointless. Like the competitors are needlessly performing an inferior way of doing the thing (and yes. Walking can do one too).

[The Brain]

I definitely think the slow swimming styles are silly and unnecessary. You don't win Olympic gold for running backwards or on all fours, and no one misses those events.

There are racewalking events.

Which I consider a silly and unnecessary sport.

[crazy canuck]

Agreed that the analogy doesn't work.
The different swimming strokes are kind of different sports.
 More comparable to rugby vs football than to lightweight vs featherweight.
It's the restrictive rules of who you are before the sport begins vs rules after the starters bell/whistle/whatever.

All that being said however for totally different reasons I would have no issue with a cull of swimming strokes. Some seem quite pointless. Like the competitors are needlessly performing an inferior way of doing the thing (and yes. Walking can do one too).

So what is the inferior stroke?  The one that is the most technical and physically demanding or the one that is easiest to learn.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

I disagree with a number of your points.  An athlete does have some control over what weight class they are in.  In wrestling a major part of training is staying within a particular class, as an example.  As an anecdote, early on in my son's rowing experience he was asked to choose whether he would be a lightweight or heavyweight rowing.  His decision dictated both his diet and how he would be trained.

Yes, they have some control over what class they end up in.  However, for a given competition they can be in one and only one weight class.

Your point that there are restrictions on who can compete at a particular distance is true, but ignores the point that a sprinter is fundamentally different from a distance runner.  They are very different athletes.

Yes, the three classes of runner generally have different builds and training regimens.  However, there are multiple distances in each of the three groups, and there are a few athletes who straddle categories so I don't think the distinction is quite that sharp, nor are the groups quite that homogeneous.  Regardless, my main point was that there is a difference between a mechanism where an athlete can choose to participate (or not) in any number of events at a meet and a mechanism that requires an athlete to compete in a specific event at a meet.  Regardless of the mechanism, what the athlete chooses to focus on and train for before the meet affects what they, legally or practically, can compete in at the meet.

And so I ask again, would you give up seeing Bolt by creating one type of competition that is a long race.  The analogy being would you give up seeing Sugar Ray by eliminating light weight boxing?

Just to be clear, I'm not defending the removal of weight classes from sports that have them.  I just don't think this analogy you chose fits.  The weight class corollary in running would be if there were one and only one race for each of the three categories (sprint, middle-stance, and long-distance), which IMO would be silly.

Weight classes, along with gender and (in some competitions) age, do serve to allow a broader range of athletes to compete in those sports safely and effectively.  They are, however, a blunt and very different mechanism than things like race distances that stratify competitors more naturally based on how the athlete chooses to train.  There just isn't a better way in the cases where they are used.

I think Brain and garbon were reacting to that more than the validity of weight classes as a means of promoting competition diversity.

[Jacob]

I refer you to the Olympic Mission and the Olympic Values.

It seems to me that if your goal is to "find the very best boxer in the world" then having no weight classes and no gendered categories makes sense, but it's pretty clear to me that that is not the purpose of the Olympics. As such, while you may find it silly that there are different weight classes in boxing etc, having them seems perfectly in line with what the Olympics are actually supposed to be about.

The IOC's role is:

• to encourage and support the promotion of ethics and good governance in sport as well as education of youth through sport and to dedicate its efforts to ensuring that, in sport, the spirit of fair play prevails and violence is banned;
• to encourage and support the organisation, development and coordination of sport and sports competitions;
• to ensure the regular celebration of the Olympic Games;
• to cooperate with the competent public or private organisations and authorities in the endeavour to place sport at the service of humanity and thereby to promote peace;
• to take action to strengthen the unity of the Olympic Movement, to protect its independence, to maintain and promote its political neutrality and to preserve the autonomy of sport;
• to act against any form of discrimination affecting the Olympic Movement;
• to encourage and support elected representatives of athletes within the Olympic Movement, with the IOC Athletes' Commission acting as their supreme representative on all Olympic Games and related matters; 17 Olympic Charter In force as from 17 July 2020
• to encourage and support the promotion of women in sport at all levels and in all structures with a view to implementing the principle of equality of men and women;
• to protect clean athletes and the integrity of sport, by leading the fight against doping, and by taking action against all forms of manipulation of competitions and related corruption;
• to encourage and support measures relating to the medical care and health of athletes;
• to oppose any political or commercial abuse of sport and athletes;
• to encourage and support the efforts of sports organisations and public authorities to provide for the social and professional future of athletes;
• to encourage and support the development of sport for all;
• to encourage and support a responsible concern for environmental issues, to promote sustainable development in sport and to require that the Olympic Games are held accordingly;
• to promote a positive legacy from the Olympic Games to the host cities, regions and countries;
• to encourage and support initiatives blending sport with culture and education;
• to encourage and support the activities of the International Olympic Academy ("IOA") and other institutions which dedicate themselves to Olympic education;
• to promote safe sport and the protection of athletes from all forms of harassment and abuse.

The three values of olympism are excellence, respect and friendship. They constitute the foundation on which the olympic movement builds its activities to promote sport, culture and education with a view to building a better world.

The original values of Olympism as expressed in the Olympic Charter were to "encourage effort", "preserve human dignity" and "develop harmony".

Over time, they have evolved and are now expressed in more contemporary terms as:

• Striving for excellence and encouraging people to be the best they can be.
• Demonstrating respect in many different manners: respect towards yourself, the rules, your opponents, the environment, the public, etc.
• Celebrating friendship, which is quite unique to the Olympic Games – an event that brings people together every few years.

This is the idea of setting your rivalries aside. There is more that unites us than divides us.

Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy found in effort, the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.

The goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practiced without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.

[Sheilbh]

It's pathetic really. The BBC main commentators - Clare Balding etc - are getting more and more cliche ridden.

I really hate the X Factor-isation "tell us your journey....now cry" stuff with the athletes. I don't mind focusing on British athletes but I hate the need to create narratives - let the event be the narrative.

[crazy canuck]

Yes, they have some control over what class they end up in.  However, for a given competition they can be in one and only one weight class.

Yes, but how is that different from an athlete deciding to train for a long distance vs a short distance run.  No one is going to be able to be competitive in both a sprint and over a long distance.  The training is completely different those races. 

Yes, the three classes of runner generally have different builds and training regimens.  However, there are multiple distances in each of the three groups, and there are a few athletes who straddle categories so I don't think the distinction is quite that sharp, nor are the groups quite that homogeneous.  Regardless, my main point was that there is a difference between a mechanism where an athlete can choose to participate (or not) in any number of events at a meet and a mechanism that requires an athlete to compete in a specific event at a meet.  Regardless of the mechanism, what the athlete chooses to focus on and train for before the meet affects what they, legally or practically, can compete in at the meet.

I think we are saying the same thing here.  Just as an athlete does not just step on the scales to decide what weight class they are in, an athlete does not choose what distance they will be racing in when they arrive.  In both cases there are years of training that decide those things.

I think Brain and garbon were reacting to that more than the validity of weight classes as a means of promoting competition diversity.

Then they are ascribing motivations that I doubt existed.  I doubt very much the creators of weight classes in boxing had diversity as their guiding principle.   I think it more likely that boxing, like wrestling, rowing and all other sports that have weight classes, strive to create the greatest amount of competition.

[garbon]

To clarify I don't care anything about boxing. I think it barbaric and that's about as much thought I give it.

[crazy canuck]

To clarify I don't care anything about boxing. I think it barbaric and that's about as much thought I give it.

Noted 

[Grey Fox]

A problem that I find more, well, problematic is the youth of the athletes in womens skateboarding. Tokyo had 12 year old,  Paris has 14 year has gold medalist.

That's not good for the long term life of the sport.

[Jacob]

A problem that I find more, well, problematic is the youth of the athletes in womens skateboarding. Tokyo had 12 year old,  Paris has 14 year has gold medalist.

That's not good for the long term life of the sport.

I guess that depends on whether younger athletes will continue dominating (perhaps because it's easier to pull off impressive tricks with a lower body weight), or whether it's a reflection of where the sport is - that folks older than the current crop of 12-14 year-olds are the oldest who've trained for it as an Olympic sport and therefore have a competitive edge?

In general, I'd prefer not to see 12-14 years olds in the Olympics. It should be young adults at the youngest, IMO.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah saw a bit in the Guardian about the UK skateboarder. She's 16 and has already spent years in rehabilitation.

The youngest entry in the preliminaries this Olympics was 11.

Not particularly comfortable with it.