In its not-so-infinite wisdom, the International Olympic Committee has removed the sport of wrestling from the list of participating sports at the 2020 Summer Olympic Games. This comes as a bit of a shock to wrestlers and fans around the world, especially considering this sport has been part of the modern Olympics since its inception in 1896 as well as the ancient games in Greece centuries ago.
While the goal of the committee is to keep the games relevant for the widest majority of sports fan, exclusion of this ancient sport would be a huge loss to members of both the wrestling and mixed martial arts communities. Most high schools and colleges in the United States have wrestling programs, and eliminating this sport from the Olympics removes the pinnacle of competition for these young athletes.
The first Olympic games included athletics, which are just track and field events, cycling, fencing, gymnastics, shooting, swimming, tennis, weightlifting and wrestling. Rowing and sailing were scheduled but poor weather conditions forced them to be excluded. All of these events except for wrestling are set to be part of the 2020 Olympic Games. It seems curious that all of the original sports save one should be included and somehow the IOC considers something such as fencing or sailing more "relevant" sport than wrestling.
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.
While the goal of the committee is to keep the games relevant for the widest majority of sports fan, exclusion of this ancient sport would be a huge loss to members of both the wrestling and mixed martial arts communities. Most high schools and colleges in the United States have wrestling programs, and eliminating this sport from the Olympics removes the pinnacle of competition for these young athletes.
The first Olympic games included athletics, which are just track and field events, cycling, fencing, gymnastics, shooting, swimming, tennis, weightlifting and wrestling. Rowing and sailing were scheduled but poor weather conditions forced them to be excluded. All of these events except for wrestling are set to be part of the 2020 Olympic Games. It seems curious that all of the original sports save one should be included and somehow the IOC considers something such as fencing or sailing more "relevant" sport than wrestling.
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 enjoys writing about mixed martial arts advantages. To get more details about martial arts San Diego or to find San Diego boxing classes, please go to The Arena MMA website now.
No comments:
Post a Comment