Donald?

i cant even understand that. you're sentence structure semes to be collapsing now.

if you think you have a valid point on this 47.7% thing, could you take a moment to rephrase it so that it can be understood. i can then address it for you.

Answers?

Precisely define what makes one event restricted by physical characteristics elite, and one not.

You've written several paragraphs on calming down, giving advice out, written this that and the other bla bla.

But just a simple answer will do cheers

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

i think he's a record threader with a changed name messiah

he's planned this big argument out and it collapsed after the first post, and he's just trying to carry on regardless, as he'd planned it out

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Precisely define what makes one event restricted by physical characteristics elite, and one not.
====================

ive no idea what you're talking about.

i think galvin might be having a mental breakdown of some sort.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

IIs this guy for real? Comes on here takes a sporting event the world is proud of, defines it as not elite, then asked to give a simple definition of what makes one restricted sporting event elite, and one not, says

"ive no idea what you're talking about"

If there was a license for expressing an opinion you wouldn't have earned one

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

An elite one eh galv

The point about the Paralympics (and I think it's a fair one) also applies to the 'main event' and I'm a bit sick of reading any more about this on this site, so I will make a simple point and then leave everyone else who wishes to carry on an argument simply to carry on what is (imho) an absolutely pointless argument.

Basically, either the actual Olympics stick to just track and field, marathon etc (events that EVERYONE in the world has access to), and you keep it to that, or you allow other sports that require specialist equipment, and/or knowledge and coaching.

That rules out, as the extreme example, that horse nonsense. You need to OWN a horse from a relatively early age to even have a chance of entering. It is no coincidence that Philips and her mother represented Great Britain in that. Think they could have been sprinters? The % of the world's population who have access to the facilities needed would no doubt pale into incredible insignificance compared, say, to the number of runners with prosthetic limbs (yes, even a group that small).

You can also rule out shooting, canoeing, diving, gymnastics, SWIMMING - all sorts. Even some field events like javelin would be arguable. I went to quite a good school and we had three or four javelin 'lessons' where most of us couldn't even work out how we were meant to throw it, and if we did well had no real idea why. It didn't matter anyway, next up on the list was discus, just so the PE teacher could tick off his checklist of things he'd 'taught' us and we moved on.

The majority of the 'events' outside the pure track and field are completely dominated by rich westernised countries with a system of harvesting youth and training them intensively, purely to win medals. In Britain you would need to join a private club, or an amateur one and be recommended to do so. I bet less than 0.05% of kids even get as far as that. And we have a 'production line' unlike most countries in the world. Or, maybe we should restrict ALL countries to the LCD - somewhere like Chad, possibly?

There are all sorts of ridiculous, spirit-breaking anomalies at the Olympics. The 'fudge' between Fifa and the IOC to get soccer in the games, so we have teams made up of professionals, all under 23, many of them already earning millions a year, except for three of them per squad who can be over-aged. WTF? Yet in boxing you can't be a pro?

The Olympics and Paralympics are both the same, both have utterly arbitrary and self-serving rules, this argument is null and void, and I can't believe I'm reading so much ****ing about it on a Spurs forum.

Simply:

a) accept the Olympics and likewise the Paralympics for what they are - nothing more and nothing less - and enjoy them FOR WHAT THEY ARE.

b) you reject them both

c) you enjoy the track and field events while arguing against all the rest that are too exclusive as I've outlined briefly above

d) you discard all hope of seeming rational and objective in the eyes of others (whatever your protestations or state of denial) and, for example, celebrate the British triumphs in the trap shooting (thingy) and cycling while bemoaning equally-nutty aspects of the Paralympics.

Take it all or leave it all, the choice is yours.

But please, take all further discussion of this point of pedantry off the Spurs board for good, I am sick of it (and I bet I am not the only one).

Goodnight sirs

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

^ smiley fail

"what makes one restricted sporting event elite, and one not"
===================

as you dont seem to be prepared to explain you're point, i will try to work it out.

you seem to be saying that there are 2 "restricted sporting events"

i guess you must mean the paralympics and the olympics.

you want me to explain why one of them is elite and one isnt.

ok.

in calling the olympics "restricted" i think you are using what i'll call predetermined argument nr 3 - the one about countries not being able to submit more than 3 athletes, so the 4th best athlete cant take part.

is this your point ?

ive already answered that.

there are 2 differences.

1. all athletes were eligbale for the trials. the 4th best athlete did take partm he just ddnt reach the "final" because he wasnt good enough.

2. even if the 4th best athlete couldnt take part but the 3 best could, there is no siilarity whatsoever between that and an event when all of the top 8 million athletes were ineligable to compete, which is likely to be the case in the paralympics.

does that answer the question ?

if not, can you repeat the question ?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

kimchi's been writing an essay for 2 days

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

nah, you make some decent points there kimchi.

as ive said this isnt a discussion about elitism though, and isnt a discussion about fringe sports at the olympics.

i can see some similarity in the points you make about so called "elitst" sports, and some of the arguments i have raised about the paralympics.

i dont think that the arguments ive put forward about the paralympics necessarily mean that it would be hypocritical of me to advocate the inclusion in the olympics of those "fringe" sports (not least because i have raised arguments other than the number of people with access to the sports, and not least because it would probably be reasonable to argue that access and eligibility are two different things).

but in any case ive expressed no view on those matters.

does that answer the question ?
---

No.

Take for example, the guy who was world taekwondo champion that we didn't send because there was only 1 place.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/olympics/18644286

That sound elite to you?

Just another example of why it's hypocritical to take one set of games in a particular spirit and denigrate the other, moreover it's a terribly odd thing to do old chap!!

I'll leave it now I think.
==============

great.

youve contributed nothing to the entire discussion anyway

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

JPB stepping away from the argument. (U1059)

kimchi's been writing an essay for 2 days
-------------------

Says he.

I've read a little bit, and it took me about twenty minutes in between sipping beer and wondering what in my right mind I am doing stepping into this nonsense that you seem intent on creating for yourself to type that, but I thought it might be worth it in the end.

That all alright by you?

I don't want to see anyone else I enjoy reading from and get along with banned, and you seem to have be having a fake argument about something that's fake to begin with.

Waste of time mate, honestly

donald -

have you read the post which indicates that the best 8 million athletes (on average) will be excluded from entry into each of the paralympic events ?

is it not clear how those statistics bear no comparison at all to the odd top athlete missing out ?

the olympics is essentially a competition between the best in the world at each of the events.

the paralympics is essentially a competition between the best out of a very very small pool of people at each of the events.


re your "terribly odd thing to do old chap argument". i think this is the first time you have moved off your preplanned strategy for this discussion which has collpased. i can live with the fact that you think it's "terirbly odd" for me to point out that the paralympics is not an elite sporting event, in spite of the way in which it's marketed