When the 2020 Olympic Games arrive, one of the world's most ancient sports will not be part of the games. Recently, the International Olympic Committee decided that it would recommend that wrestling be removed from the games. Not only was this sport part of the ancient games, it has been part of the modern games since their beginnings in 1896.
The committee has said that their ultimate goal is to ensure that the games are "relevant" to the widest possible amount of viewers. Eliminating wrestling also eliminates the Olympic dream for hundreds of potential Olympic wrestlers, and this decision has been a big blow to thousands of athletes around the globe who participate in the sport in high school and perhaps college.
If we take a look back, we see that the modern games have always included wrestling, as well as cycling, fencing, shooting, gymnastics, swimming, weightlifting, cycling, rowing, sailing, and athletics, which includes the various track and field events such as hurdles and shot put. Aside from wrestling, every one of these events will be featured in the 2020 Olympics. Quite frankly, it's hard to imagine that rowing and fencing are more relevant events that draw a larger audience.
There are several other choices that might be better to do away with than wrestling. Even if you keep the sports that have been there since the first modern games, we could cut something such as badminton, table tennis or team handball. Three of the badminton teams from the 2012 Olympics had players disqualified for cheating, not to mention the fact that badminton is a game we play at picnics. When it comes to table tennis and team handball, they are certainly moderately fun to watch, but should be eliminating core sports for what are essential playground and leisure activities?
At least handball and badminton are games people around the world can easily learn at little expense. Equestrian sports, on the other hand, require great expense and it's difficult for most people to afford this kind of training. If the IOC wishes to trim down the time constraints of the game, it could also consider making eliminations within some of the core sports. Take swimming and gymnastics, for example, do we really need to have synchronized swimming and rhythmic gymnastics? If you compare statistics in the United States alone, there are 85 NCAA Division 1 collegiate wrestling teams and that's just in division one. For synchronized swimming, there are five colleges with programs. Fencing, which the IOC is keeping, has just 25 Division 1 programs. Clearly, the interest in wrestling is far higher, making it much more relevant.
Any time a sport is eliminated, there is always controversy because this elimination hurts a group of athletes committed to their sport. In general, it might behoove the IOC to consider keeping the original set of sporting events intact and widening the scope to include more events in the games themselves.
The committee has said that their ultimate goal is to ensure that the games are "relevant" to the widest possible amount of viewers. Eliminating wrestling also eliminates the Olympic dream for hundreds of potential Olympic wrestlers, and this decision has been a big blow to thousands of athletes around the globe who participate in the sport in high school and perhaps college.
If we take a look back, we see that the modern games have always included wrestling, as well as cycling, fencing, shooting, gymnastics, swimming, weightlifting, cycling, rowing, sailing, and athletics, which includes the various track and field events such as hurdles and shot put. Aside from wrestling, every one of these events will be featured in the 2020 Olympics. Quite frankly, it's hard to imagine that rowing and fencing are more relevant events that draw a larger audience.
There are several other choices that might be better to do away with than wrestling. Even if you keep the sports that have been there since the first modern games, we could cut something such as badminton, table tennis or team handball. Three of the badminton teams from the 2012 Olympics had players disqualified for cheating, not to mention the fact that badminton is a game we play at picnics. When it comes to table tennis and team handball, they are certainly moderately fun to watch, but should be eliminating core sports for what are essential playground and leisure activities?
At least handball and badminton are games people around the world can easily learn at little expense. Equestrian sports, on the other hand, require great expense and it's difficult for most people to afford this kind of training. If the IOC wishes to trim down the time constraints of the game, it could also consider making eliminations within some of the core sports. Take swimming and gymnastics, for example, do we really need to have synchronized swimming and rhythmic gymnastics? If you compare statistics in the United States alone, there are 85 NCAA Division 1 collegiate wrestling teams and that's just in division one. For synchronized swimming, there are five colleges with programs. Fencing, which the IOC is keeping, has just 25 Division 1 programs. Clearly, the interest in wrestling is far higher, making it much more relevant.
Any time a sport is eliminated, there is always controversy because this elimination hurts a group of athletes committed to their sport. In general, it might behoove the IOC to consider keeping the original set of sporting events intact and widening the scope to include more events in the games themselves.
About the Author:
Rod Bourgoine likes blogging about mixed martial arts benefits. To get more details about martial arts San Diego or to find San Diego boxing classes, please go to The Arena MMA site today.
No comments:
Post a Comment