Dont talk to me again
You act like A 15 year old
===============

kimchi - ok, i take back the 2 day comment. aplogies for that one, it was a cheap dig. as i say i think you made some valid points in that post.

this started off as an opinion i expressed in an existing conversation. the comment is valid in my opinion, and i did not expect a debate (certainly of this length) to ensue pursuant to the comment. i am only responding to replies to me me though. i agree that it's not amassively important point, and doesnt merit all this coverage.

i reckon donald had spent 2 days on it though

donald thought he was going to be my worst nightmare

JPB - I don't care where it started, I've read enough the last day or two of the 'aftermath' to want to make a comment, which I hope I did objectively and fairly. I won't be looking for a reply as I am honestly sick of it all.

Anyway, speak to you anon (about football/women/drinking matters hopefully!)

I think Galv more or less said the same thing, in his own way and with his own unique 'relationship' with you

Take care mate, and good luck with the job hunting eh

cheers

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Galvin ..Site is gonna be flakey for a bit.

this is a bit like star trek when they go through a nebula.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

I do love the meta commentary, it seems one can't have a discussion with JBP without him acting as "impartial observer" on the discussion attributing not only your intentions, emotions, and mental state, but also the amount of time you spent thinking about it. I don't think I've ever seen a poster make so many and so many wrong assumptions about others

But I digress...I've now been given a statistic from god knows where suggesting that the paralympics excludes on average the best 8 million athletes, one wonders then how many athletes any womens event excludes since about half the planet have automatically been excluded from entering that event.

But of course JBP will just ignore and present some more unsubstantiated rhetoric, and irrelevant meta-commentary because exclusion is ok when it suits him.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

For those that missed it here is an "elite athlete" winning an olympic gold by getting their horse to dance

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/olympics/18913470

I've now been given a statistic from god knows where suggesting that the paralympics excludes on average the best 8 million athletes, one wonders then how many athletes any womens event excludes since about half the planet have automatically been excluded from entering that event.
==================

donald - you followed my advice in the end then

you seem to have (without acknowledmenet) abandonded the other arguments you were so excited about yesterday, and focused exclusively now on an argument based on the extent to which athletes are excluded from taking part in the olympics and the extent to which athletes are excluded from taking part in the paralympics.

you appear to claim that there is an equivelancy between these exclusions, which makes the elitism of the olympics similar to the elitism of the paralympics. effectively you seem to be agreeing that the paralympics are not elite sport, but also saying the olympics are not elite sport.

although the numbers of people eligable to take part in the paralympics was only one of the points which i originally made, and although a suggestion that the olympics is not an elite sporting event seems prima facie (correct use of the phrase there ) so unrealistic as to almost amount to a contradiction in terms, i will happily adress the argument which you have raised in an attempt to refute that point which i have made.

firstly, i would observe that it's difficult to know how say that the 8 million statistic comes from "god knows where", when i have already told you exactly where it's from and you have quoted back to me a line from the post in which it is set out.

the calculation is shown on page 19. the calculation assumes that for every discipline of paralympic competition - eg 100m for the blind, 100m for those with false limbs etc, only 1% of the population is eligible. ie, on average only 1% of the population is afflicted by the particular disability which is the focus of each race.

this is a pretty broad brush approach, but not unrealistic.

the calculation then uses the UK as an example and assumes that all people in the UK at some point are invited to take part in an running race. the calculations states that in the average randomly identified group of 1% of the population, the leading competitor will finish around 8,000,000th in that race.

on that basis, one can assume that if it were not for his disability, the leading paralympic athlete would finish around 8,000,0000th in the UK, in a race in which everybody took part.

the calculation is not quite accurate for a number of reasons. for example, the calculation uses the whole population, instead of the population of competitive age, but then it also only uses the UK population instead of the population of the world. On that basis it is hugely conservative. Nevertheless, for purposes of illustration, I do not beleive that it is unreasonable to use the figure of 8 millionth as the leading position that a paralympian would have been (without their disability) in a race in which everyone could take part.

In the paralympics though, the leading paralympian doesntfinish 8 millionth, he or she finishes 1st. That is the extent to which the paralympics is not an elite sporting context. It excludes ALL of the best athletes from taking part, not through some unofficial barry to entry, but through prohibiting them from particpating.

There are no such restrictions in the olympics. Whereas in the paralympics, the best several million athletes from each country are prohbited from taking part, the olympics invites every country to send its best 3 athletes (in the case of track and field). It is a showcase of the best of the best.

An example of this theory in action would be simon richardson, the disabled athlete who was in the news yesterday regarding a court decision. he was injured in a car crash at the age of 35. before that he had been a cyclist. he did not compete in any competitive racing at any level, he just did it as a hobby. suddenly though, at the age of 41, he became a paralympic cycling gold medalist. until suffering a new injury, he was confident of retaining his title this year at the grand old age of 45.this is just one example of how people who would be nowhere near any sort of international qualifying standard without their disability, are suddenly gold medalists with it.

You and others have stated that people dont have access to all olympic sports, eg sailing horse riding, and also that those with the most ability, might not compete in the other events such as athletics.

Well treating the athletics argument first. Firstly the argument is not that the best in the world can not compete, it is that the most talented in the world do not compete. unlike the paralympics everybody in the world is eligable in theory. in practics of course not everybody does enter because they arent good enough. it's just the same in paralympics, not every person with one leg decides he wants to run round an athletics track. in the case of the olympics though, it is almost certain that the best in the world, or atleast the vast majority of the best in the world, are not only invited to participate (everyone is invited), but are particpating. the idea that there is someone out there who could have been as fast as bolt if they had run as a child and found how talented they were, and then dedicted themselves to a career in athletics, is not a totally fanciful one. the idea though that there is someone out there who has never taken part in any sort of athletics competition in his life and therefore didnt become an athlete in spite of his supreme ability, and didnt enter himself into the selection process for the olympics, but is actually faster than usain bolt at running 100m, is no more realistic than a blief in unicorns or abominable snowmen.

unlike the paralympics, which is a race beteeen people who had they not been disabled, would have been nowhere near to international sporting standards, the olympics is a competition between the vast majority of the worlds most elite athletes in each discipline.

regarding allegedly elite sports such as sailing, horse riding, shooting etc, similar points, i have passed no opiion in this discussion, on whether i think these sports should be a part of the olympics. what i would point out though is that similar principles can be applied to these sports. not only is everybody eligible to take part in theory (unlike the paralympics, nobody is excluded by the rules of the competition from competing for selection), but again those who have actually become the best in the world in their sports, are likely to be participating, unlike the paralympics, when all of best athletes in the world in those sports are prohbited by the rules from entering into the selection process.

As I say, the argument on the numbers of persons and the quality of athletes, eligible to take part is only one of the points I have made to demonstrate why the paralympics is not an elite sporting contest, but the points I have made here, should satisfactorily adress the concerns which you have over that argument.

do you expect me to read that?

and this is where he claims hes beaten you now

defeat by boredom..........................

weare you be up all evening watching the transfers?

mrs is out so yes, got the nibbles in and beer and wont move

Computer on lap with sky sports on tv

Wont have Harry ruin it this yr hanging out his window at 10pm saying we aint signing no one

off to gym after work to get away from it all for an hr

you watching it ?

ah ill have a gander my woman is out too so itd be a bit gay not to

messiah having a night in with his hands down his pants then .............

Weare thats every night