HEAVY GOLD

Following one particularly arduous conclusion to an Olympic decathlon – ie big guys running 1500 metres – an Italian colleague turned to me and said, ‘This is heavy gold’. What he meant was that here was a gold medal won, if not ten times over, then with rather more effort and application than it takes to pick up a gold medal as a team member, whether in a football or hockey squad of eleven; a handball ‘seven’ or a volleyball ‘six’; or indeed a sculling pair, quartet or ‘eight’; or in the archetypal 4 x 100 metres relay, swimming or track.

It is an insult to those who have done it the hard way, ie by themselves to equate a team gold with the ultimate in Olympic achievement, which is to say, an individual gold medal. Which is why I am pleased to add my congratulations to Bradley Wiggins, who on Wednesday picked up his fourth Olympic gold, and seventh medal overall, a British all-time Olympic haul. In reality Wiggins has only won three Olympic golds, the individual ones he took in the pursuit (twice) and now in the road time trial. But his haul takes him past rower Steve Redgrave.

Now I’m sure Sir Steve is a very nice bloke, as we still occasionally say in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, to give the longest name to the frequently shortest collective aspiration; but to pretend that his five Olympic gold medals, all as a team member in a sport practised in barely two dozen countries is worthy of mention in despatches alongside the likes of Sebastian Coe, Steve Ovett and Daley Thompson should have those Olympic giants rolling their eyes, as indeed should anyone else who has won even a single individual gold.

That the Olympic Games are out of control has been clear for ages. They are overweight and imponderable. Unfortunately, it is like drug-testing; once a drug is on the banned list, it’s very difficult to get it off, even if it has been proved to serve little purpose. So it is with the Games, there are sports which shouldn’t even be in the Olympic Games. But once they’ve been co-opted, it’s virtually impossible to shift them.

One of the recent additions, tennis is a good, or should that be a bad example. Despite their occasional affirmations, ie when an Olympics rolls round, no tennis player believes that an Olympic gold medal comes close to winning a grand slam; and that’s the same reason that golf and its ‘majors’ should never be part of the Olympics. And even that equestrian luminary, Princess Anne, whose daughter Zara Phillips won a team bronze in dressage the other day, has been moved to admit that her elite and expensive sport should have no part in a democratic Games.

It is often argued that team sports like football are included, since they give so-called Third World countries an opportunity to compete in the Olympics. But, as Kenya and Ethiopia have long discovered, being low on the list of economically challenged nations hasn’t hampered their progress up the scale of winners of individual golds. And if countries like Nigeria could concentrate on sport rather than scams, then just as they could feed the whole of Africa if they got their agricultural act together, they could turn out more than a few Olympic gold medallists too.

The biggest mystery, of course, remains India, the worst possible advert for sport in a democracy. While economic (and population) rival China wipes the floor with the rest of the world in the medal table, a country like India with more than its share of billionaires, and a middle class (in terms of income) as numerous as the whole of Europe, just about creeps into the lower echelons of the medal lists. Indians have won just nine gold medals in over a century of Olympic competition; eight have come in field hockey, at which they used to dominate, though no longer, the last one was in 1980; the sole other gold was won in Beijing by a millionaire rifleman, whose success owed nothing to national associations. But at least he won it by and for himself.

The Ancient Olympics, incidentally were little better in respect of team events; the chariot race laurels were ‘won’ by the elite owners, not the drivers, who were doing all the hard work. However…. ..

Excuse me, if I’ve strayed somewhat around the Olympic Park. But, as we embark on Friday morning, August 3 on an individual sport par excellence (relays notwithstanding), my point is that it’s time to get rid of some, if not a lot of this dead wood. Make the Olympics into a Platonic ideal, by making it all individual; and with the participating sports having to be played/practised in at least 30 countries, for them to stay in the Games. Then we’ll really have something or rather, someone in particular to cheer for.

This entry was posted in Archive. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to HEAVY GOLD

  1. david cocksedge says:

    I agree 100% with you, Pat. The Games have become far too cumbersome with some really obscure sports that should never have been included – Beach Volleyball, BMX Biking and Triathlon to name just three. And yes, the Equestrian events are elitist in being confined only to those wealthy enough to participate. I would even say that these ‘horsey’ disciplines were included so that Royals and other ‘toffs’ can win medals – just check out the rooster of the International Olympic Committee, a body about as elite and undemocratic as it is possible to get.
    In my view, the Games should comprise these sports: Track & Field, Boxing; Cycling; Swimming (including Diving events); Archery; Gymnastics; Fencing; Wrestling; Modern Pentathlon (for the toffs), and Rowing. The Swimming events should be confined to the standard distances without definition of the stroke (or style) used. i.e. the fastest man (or woman) across the pool for the stated distance becomes the Olympic Champion regardless of technique. Drop the ‘medley’ swimming events, and bin all the rest of the sports we currently have on the programme, cutting back to a manageable ten disciplines in which medals can be won.
    Of course, in Track & Field, THE Olympic Sport, there is a very wide variety of events in which we can watch the world’s best in action at Stratford, East London between now and 12th August.

  2. KLIBERA says:

    The Olympics are about a showcase of sport–not just American sport, or British sport, or S. American sport. The Games come only 1 time every 4 years. I disagree with your opinion of what is dead wood. It gives a better appreciation when you do include all sports rather than concentrating on a simple 4 sports a.k.a. what constitutes America’s 4 pro sports. Missing & still to be added I hope are lacrosse, cricket, squash, racquetball, pool, polo, bowling, cross country racing at the 5k level, & perhaps more relays. Americans, in their overblown sports consumeristic chauvinism, lack an appreciation of why sports like crew are popular in Europe, badminton in Indonesia, archery in South Korea. I look at today’s American schoolchildren. They don’t get any opportunities in school P.E. anymore to learn these other skills. Either the curriculum has been dumbed down or schools are simply trying to build more dumb professional football & basketball players that can’t write a letter & can’t finish college. And there is nothing but scandal once they get into the pros. There is nothing wrong with team relay or team medals in the Olympics-it displays teamsmanship while giving opportunities for individual accomplishment. That is one thing I can say about certain sports. In high school track, your team may lose the meet, but you may win your race. That does not apply to say football. In general if you lose the game, it’s because no individual effort was strong enough to overcome the odds. There are no team medal counts in the Olympics-that’s just national chauvinism at work–by all nations. But again it’s a broadening of our culture if for one time on earth humanity is brought together in appreciation of human endeavor. No the Olympics are not perfect. But look at it this way: would we watch at all if every medal was won by the USA? Probably not. It’s a showcase of skills across the wonderful world of play. Clearly when I see the efforts of other countries’ efforts-it reflects their liking for their sport. Some nations lack the facilities or climate to grow certain sports to an elevated level. So what that India is only good at field hockey. Hey men’s field hockey does not exist here on the college level. Kenya & Ethiopia-I can appreciate that distance runners are national heros in their countries. Likewise I can appreciate a nation as small as Holland can excel at swimming.

  3. Justin says:

    So where then is cricket and netball?

    And why on earth are they adding golf in 2016? This one I simply cannot fathom

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>