Options
Track cycling only gets 10 golds, Swimming 52, Athletics Track 31. Justified?
![[Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c4271d02e61460272259fdb49ec5936b.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 147 Forum Member
✭
I've loved the Olympics. Great memories especially for GBP, of which I am one. However, I have been disappointed that the IOC and cycling governing body, UCI, only allowed 5 events for men and women when £73million was spent on the velodrome. Sceptics say it was down to the dominance of Team GB but I'm not sure. Some changes, such as one competitor per nation in individual events does seem to restrict powerful nations, such as Team GB at the moment, but that was down to the UCI not the IOC.
Swimming or Athletics have no problem with a more relaxed view on how many entrants from the same nation can be entered in the same event. 3 entrants per nation per event should be the minimum for all individual events regardless of sport unless there is some selection, performance or time restrictions that should take precedence.
The IOC did restrict the number of track cycling events and that seems to completely contradict their view of other sports. Even shooting and archery get loads of medals and hardly anyone watches them so popularity is'nt the answer. Anybody have any idea why track cycling is so poorly served? Time restrictions seem unlikely as the track events lasted only about 6 days with most taking place in the late afternoon and evening.
I'm sure someone knows the reason and I'd love to hear it.
Swimming or Athletics have no problem with a more relaxed view on how many entrants from the same nation can be entered in the same event. 3 entrants per nation per event should be the minimum for all individual events regardless of sport unless there is some selection, performance or time restrictions that should take precedence.
The IOC did restrict the number of track cycling events and that seems to completely contradict their view of other sports. Even shooting and archery get loads of medals and hardly anyone watches them so popularity is'nt the answer. Anybody have any idea why track cycling is so poorly served? Time restrictions seem unlikely as the track events lasted only about 6 days with most taking place in the late afternoon and evening.
I'm sure someone knows the reason and I'd love to hear it.
0
Comments
We have got obsessed with track cycling because we do so well - most of the rest of the world is far more focused on these team sports, swimming and athletics.
Frankly I am amazed they have invented so many different ways of cycling round a track.
I read there were 42 different swimming races. Even so, if it is mid thirties that's still twenty more medals for swimming.
Apparently, I think it was Mark Cavendish said on the BBC the other night that there were only 10 events allowed int he cycling, which is why the UCI made it 5 apiece.
There is the theory that the rules were changed to avoid British dominance after Beijing, and most of the cycling pundits on the BBC agreed with that. If that's the case then the UCi has got it all wrong. They are basically punishing success. Can you imagine the furore if Michael Phelps had been told he wouldn't be able to defend his medals in 2012, or that the Americans and Jamaicans were only allowed to select 1 sprinter?
UCI have not come out of this Olympics very well.
They used to have Team Time Trials on the road but that's gone..............I think that when they introduce BMX and Mountain Bikes they reduce other cycling events
It does seem ridiculous only to have 5 track cycling events for men and 5 for women, particularly when they get rid of what is considered the blue riband event - the individual pursuit
Bit difficult to see what other events you could have in those team sports (you forgot football !)
I suppose you could have 5 a side football, beach soccer, kerby, keepy-uppy................:D
I would quite happily spend the next four years training for a place in the GB Olympic Kerby team!!
Love the idea.....:D
They used to have tandem bike racing...........:D
The last time it was held was 1964 with Italy winning Gold
Today there are 18 cycling gold medals
Back in 1964 there were 7............all for men. There was no womens cycling at all
they had..........
Road race
Team trial Trial (Road)
and 5 track events.......
Individual pursuit
Team pursuit
Sprint
One kilometre time trial
Tandem
GB got zero medals
Archery 4
Athletics 47
Badminton 5
Basketball 2
Boxing 13
Canoeing 16
Cycling 18
Diving 8
Equestrian 6
Fencing 10
Field hockey 2
Football 2
Gymnastics 18
Handball 14
Modern pentathlon 2
Rowing 14
Sailing 10
Shooting 15
Swimming 34
Synchronized swimming 2
Table tennis 4
Taekwondo 8
Tennis 5
Triathlon 2
Volleyball 4
Water polo 2
Weightlifting 15
Wrestling 18
Total events 302
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Summer_Olympics
Sure I have read that beach soccer is up for vote to be included in 2020.
I'd have :-
50m Freestyle
200m Freestyle
800m Freestyle
200m Medley
4x100m Freestyle
10k Open water
Men and Women, 6 events each, 12 medals in total. A much better use of Olympic time and 20 medals freed up for other sports
In athletics the most you'd probably ever see would be 3 events.
eg 100, 200, relay - 200,400, relay - 100, long jump, relay etc.
They were talking the other day that although Phelps may be known as the greatest swimmer of all time he may not be classed as the greatest olympian because of his ability to win multiple medals at a single games.
The US won fewer medals than the Soviet Union in 1956, 1960 and 1964. They beat the Soviets in 1968, roughly half of the US medals were from the swimming events.
The Soviet Union were weak in the swimming events, the US strong. The US dominated the swimming in 1960, 1964 and 1968.
The Olympics were broadcast live in the US for the first time in 1960, they paid almost as much as the whole of Europe for the rights.. By 1968 they paid 6 times more for the TV rights.
Smells a bit fishy, but who knows.
That said they really should bring back the 200 metre obstacle event in the swimming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swimming_at_the_1900_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_200_metre_obstacle_event
But who cares, GB remain the undefeated Olympic cricket champions and have held the title for over a century.:D
Is there a limit? Removing events doesn't "free" up medals, if they add more events they just make more medals.
According to the IOC they do not want to create more total events, any additional events will only be added by others being removed.
How does that work with them adding golf and stupid for 2016?
Those sports are replacing Baseball and Softball which were dropped after Athens. The IOC isn't the quickest organisation in the world, hence the 12 years to actually replace them.
As noted above, imagine if athletics limited the 100m competition to one from each country. No Usain Bolt.
And I forgot to say...
As a result of limiting countries to one entrant each, the olympics competition in that sport is no longer the pinnacle of that sport, there are plenty of other competitions which are of higher standard, because they have more of the best athletes competing. By going down the "one entrant per country" route, Olympic cycling risks becoming a second rate competition. Like Tennis, Golf, etc, the Olympic event is less important than the Majors