Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › TV Programming › The 2008 Olympics
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The 2008 Olympics

post #1 of 26
4/8/08 at 6:19am
Thread Starter 
(Post Deleted: I didn't mean To bring up Politics!)
Reply
post #2 of 26
4/8/08 at 8:04am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

I lost interest in the Olympics years ago but it's pretty clear that any discussion following the theme of your post would violate forum policy against political discussions.
Reply
post #3 of 26
4/8/08 at 8:45am
Thread Starter 

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Oops! Sorry!
Reply
post #4 of 26
4/8/08 at 8:46am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Well the original Olympic participants suspended wars just to hold them. The origins of the Olympics are about as apolitical as you can get so your boycott would not be in line with the "Olympic spirit". Now I am not saying you are wrong for feeling the way you do or that you shouldn't do what you think is right. I am not about to defend modern Olympics as the Olympic committee is an incredibly corrupt and extremely political organization. I am just pointing out that the Olympics were created to transcend such issues.
Reply
post #5 of 26
4/8/08 at 10:30am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

I'm far more concerned with the history of really shoddy coverage of the games. I'd really like to see something more than women's gymnastics and swimming for the summer games, and ice dancing for the winter. Unfortunately, as someone who enjoys sports like boxing, weightlifting and wrestling (all obviously very popular and mainstream these days), I'm usually frustrated with the coverage.
Reply
post #6 of 26
4/8/08 at 10:45am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by KurtEP
I'm far more concerned with the history of really shoddy coverage of the games. I'd really like to see something more than women's gymnastics and swimming for the summer games, and ice dancing for the winter. Unfortunately, as someone who enjoys sports like boxing, weightlifting and wrestling (all obviously very popular and mainstream these days), I'm usually frustrated with the coverage.
Those are some good points, although I like all of the sports that you mentioned. During one of the recent Olympics (one that occurred prior to 2003) I had to view (due to 'local-local' cabeling requirements) the events on an alternative channel. Although I missed the major events (like those mentioned above), I found myself enjoying some of the less-shown events such as archery and curling. I never knew how interesting curling could be. It was a lot of fun watching the strategy of that event. That was the bright side of what came out of not having access to the primary channel for the Olympics at that time.
Reply
post #7 of 26
4/8/08 at 11:04am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

One thing that's really frustrating to hear every Olympic year is that the CBC does a pretty good job of showing events live and uncut, even when the games are in a far-off time zone (as is the case here), whereas NBC shows a lot of (American) athlete profiles, tape-delays everything, and basically does everything they can to make it into a pre-scripted program.
Reply
post #8 of 26
4/8/08 at 2:00pm

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Seaver
One thing that's really frustrating to hear every Olympic year is that the CBC does a pretty good job of showing events live and uncut, even when the games are in a far-off time zone (as is the case here), whereas NBC shows a lot of (American) athlete profiles, tape-delays everything, and basically does everything they can to make it into a pre-scripted program.
Yep, that's why when I watch the Olympics, I watch CBC coverage. I actually get to see the GAMES. Not a never-ending avalanche of athlete profiles and saccharine fluff pieces that have nothing to do with the competition itself.

Put their life stories on the web so people can look them up if they're interested. Spend your prime-time hours showing actual competition.
Reply
post #9 of 26
4/8/08 at 2:40pm

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Seaver
One thing that's really frustrating to hear every Olympic year is that the CBC does a pretty good job of showing events live and uncut, even when the games are in a far-off time zone (as is the case here), whereas NBC shows a lot of (American) athlete profiles, tape-delays everything, and basically does everything they can to make it into a pre-scripted program.

Agreed. You really can't beat CBC, or to a less-extent, CTV and TSN for Olympic coverage.
Reply
post #10 of 26
4/9/08 at 6:31am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

I lost interest years ago when they started using professional athletes to compete. It was great to see AAA competitors win their events and then get recruited professionally. That was great to watch then, but now, I don't want to see pro athletes compete in games during their off seasons or on a break from their current season to compete.
Reply
post #11 of 26
4/9/08 at 9:02am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

The constant commercial breaks, and being so damn long, makes it very difficult to watch the Games on TV. (I know why they do it, I'm just saying it's annoying.)

That said, I still love watching the Olympics, and will be glued to the TV during that time.
Reply
post #12 of 26
4/9/08 at 12:06pm

Re: The 2008 Olympics

I don't have a problem with professional athletes in the Games. They competed in the ancient games.
Reply
post #13 of 26
4/9/08 at 12:39pm

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Hewell
I don't have a problem with professional athletes in the Games. They competed in the ancient games.
True..., I guess for me it's the whole commerical aspect of using professional athletes in an area that use to be dedicated to hard working individuals who worked regular jobs and trained for the Olympics. I even recall some of the athletes receiving funds from local businesses so that they wouldn't have to work and spend time training. Too me that's true competition. Professional sport is competitive also but not the same for me.
Reply
post #14 of 26
4/9/08 at 1:43pm

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Grate
True..., I guess for me it's the whole commerical aspect of using professional athletes in an area that use to be dedicated to hard working individuals who worked regular jobs and trained for the Olympics. I even recall some of the athletes receiving funds from local businesses so that they wouldn't have to work and spend time training. Too me that's true competition. Professional sport is competitive also but not the same for me.

I could be wrong, but it's always been my understanding that the amateur aspect of the Olympics had a quite different goal in mind. Essentially, they wanted to keep the unwashed masses from competing, so they limited it to amateurs, assuming that only the wealthy would have the money to train and forgo work while doing it.

The other downside was that the US always ended up competing against the Soviet system, whose athletes were definitely professional in everything but name. That was never especially fair. At least now the best can get out there and do their thing in most sports.
Reply
post #15 of 26
4/9/08 at 3:04pm

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by KurtEP
I could be wrong, but it's always been my understanding that the amateur aspect of the Olympics had a quite different goal in mind. Essentially, they wanted to keep the unwashed masses from competing, so they limited it to amateurs, assuming that only the wealthy would have the money to train and forgo work while doing it.
You beat me to it but that has always been my understanding also.
Reply
post #16 of 26
4/10/08 at 6:43am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by KurtEP
I could be wrong, but it's always been my understanding that the amateur aspect of the Olympics had a quite different goal in mind. Essentially, they wanted to keep the unwashed masses from competing, so they limited it to amateurs, assuming that only the wealthy would have the money to train and forgo work while doing it.

That's exactly what I meant those people who had regular jobs who trained as amateurs for the olympics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KurtEP
The other downside was that the US always ended up competing against the Soviet system, whose athletes were definitely professional in everything but name. That was never especially fair. At least now the best can get out there and do their thing in most sports.
I have to admit, as unfair advantage they had, we faired quite well and that's when it was fun to watch, (for me anyway).
Reply
post #17 of 26
4/10/08 at 7:05am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Popping in to this discussion of Olympic coverage (now that the unacceptable slant has been erased), my dad finished 6th in the world (for Canada) in the high jump in London, 1948. Brag, brag, boast, boast.
Reply
post #18 of 26
4/10/08 at 8:03am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerome Grate
That's exactly what I meant those people who had regular jobs who trained as amateurs for the olympics.

I'm not sure we're on the same page here. It's my understanding that people who had any need of regular jobs were they type of people the amateur rule was trying to exclude. The idea was to keep the games as sort of a gentleman's pursuit. That forced gifted but poor amateurs to work around the rule by doing everything but the most obvious thing, competing in their chosen sport (or any other, for that matter) for money.

I view things like this as a silly relic of the past, whether they are in the Olympics, college sports or anywhere else.
Reply
post #19 of 26
4/10/08 at 8:57am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Another thing that would help is to get rid of most of the events that have been added in the past bunch of years. Generally I think they should get back to the Olympic roots and only sports of individuals testing their physical abilities should be in the games. Almost no team sports (baseball, basketball, field hockey, hockey, soccer) or anything that uses motorized vehicles (waterskiing). Bowling, curling and table tennis take skill but come on. Reminds me of that commercial "Couch potato - Professional athlete (with the addition of a bowling ball)".

I know that times change but I think the inclusion has hurt more than helped. With so many events to cover it seems like for TV stations (especially the US stations) they are stuck in analysis paralysis on what to cover so they cover almost nothing and what they do cover is not done well.
Reply
post #20 of 26
4/10/08 at 11:18am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

KurtEP, never thought of it that way, you learn something everyday.
Reply
post #21 of 26
4/11/08 at 3:48am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Unfortunately, as someone who enjoys sports like boxing, weightlifting and wrestling (all obviously very popular and mainstream these days), I'm usually frustrated with the coverage.
Come to the UK - we get heavy coverage of all of these [well, maybe not quite so much wrestling].


I think it's worth noting that the number of professional athletes is less than you might think. The big name athletes may get paid ludicrous amounts of money, but they're a minority of the total competitors. If you're a competitor in one of the less glamorous athletic events, and certainly if you're doing a more obscure sport like shooting, archery, etc, prize and appearance money won't pay the bills.

Where I do think the Games fall into farce is where there are clear and unambiguous amateur and pro faces to a particular sport and the pros are allowed in. E.g. tennis since it's been reintroduced has been a complete joke [though IMHO it's a joke anyway - can anyone think of another game where you're allowed a little sit down every couple of minutes?].

Also, drugs definitely tarnish the image of the Games. It's not whether the drugs have any real effect or not - they're banned, and therefore using them is cheating, pure and simple. To see these cheats serve a two year ban and then be allowed back in is a complete insult to those competitors who've trained fairly.
Reply
post #22 of 26
4/11/08 at 10:25am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Where I do think the Games fall into farce is where there are clear and unambiguous amateur and pro faces to a particular sport and the pros are allowed in. E.g. tennis since it's been reintroduced has been a complete joke [though IMHO it's a joke anyway - can anyone think of another game where you're allowed a little sit down every couple of minutes?].
Um... OK Andrew

--
H
Reply
post #23 of 26
4/11/08 at 10:29am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrew markworthy
E.g. tennis since it's been reintroduced has been a complete joke [though IMHO it's a joke anyway - can anyone think of another game where you're allowed a little sit down every couple of minutes?].

Hockey. Which is one of the greatest sports in the world
Reply
post #24 of 26
4/11/08 at 3:49pm

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrew markworthy
I think it's worth noting that the number of professional athletes is less than you might think. The big name athletes may get paid ludicrous amounts of money, but they're a minority of the total competitors. If you're a competitor in one of the less glamorous athletic events, and certainly if you're doing a more obscure sport like shooting, archery, etc, prize and appearance money won't pay the bills.

I'm not working under the impression that everyone who could be an Olympic competitor will be able to make megabucks as a pro athlete (although your point is well taken, most people probably do think that). However, the amateur system led to absurdities like Jim Thorpe losing his medals because he played a few seasons of minor league ball. A lot of athletes are fairly well rounded and could conceivably get a minor league baseball tryout, or perhaps play a season or two of professional football before turning to something like shot put or weightlifting. The amateur system is simply a classist system that has no place in today's world.

The drug issue is something altogether different, and I don't have a solution, although I'm starting to think that they should be allowed, as the cure seems worse than the disease in many instances. Besides, what is an unfair advantage? In my opinion, it's anything that would pose a serious health risk in the long term for short term success. Does blood doping (as in the Tour de France) pose any real risk? It may increase performance, but so does weight training and things like HIIT training that didn't exist 100 years ago. Should they also be banned? The only thing that bothers me are things that could result in premature death or physical damage, but many sports do that even if you're clean. Talk to an older football player (even college) about his knees or hips sometime if you don't believe me.
Reply
post #25 of 26
4/12/08 at 12:30am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

Quote:
However, the amateur system led to absurdities like Jim Thorpe losing his medals because he played a few seasons of minor league ball.
I think that more accurately, that was an absurd interpretation of amateurism. E.g. in golf, which has very rigid amateur status rules, you're allowed to be a pro sportsman in another sport and still play amateur golf. It's the sport you're competing in that should matter, not what else you do. Otherwise, how on earth could gym teachers compete in sports?

Incidentally, with regard to earlier remarks about the Ancient Greeks keeping out the lower classes. This only applied to some city states. Others were far more egalitarian.
Reply
post #26 of 26
4/12/08 at 2:26am

Re: The 2008 Olympics

I believe domestic coverage of the Olympic Games appropriate reflects the preferences of the American people. Some folks may prefer uninterrupted coverage of sporting events, but a disproportionate number of viewers watching the Olympic Games are not sports fans, and aren't watching for the "sports value", but rather are watching for the "human interest value". The games include so much coverage over such a short period of time that broadcasting it the way CBC does here in the United States would be a disservice to the owners of NBC.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: TV Programming
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › TV Programming › The 2008 Olympics