I made a concerted effort not to watch any of the Olympic broadcasts mainly due to stories like this:
The Financial Times finally ended its long running kowtow to China with an editorial that features this disgustingly accurate portrayal: “…the breathtaking cynicism of the Chinese authorities in declaring zones in three parks open for public protests and then persecuting, detaining or expelling from Beijing those who applied for permission to use them is a clear breach of promise made by China to help win the bid to host these [2008] Olympics back in 2001.”
Why glorify a regime like this any more than necessary? I understand why NBC and it's family of networks and affiliates wants to do it. There's billions of dollars in future business opportunities in China, so GE, the ultimate parent firm, needs to be there in a large way. Good for them.
The only events I had any interest in was:
Men's Baseball: USA wins Bronze, South Korea defeats Cuba for the Gold.
Women's Softball: USA wins the Silver, Japan gets the Gold.
Men's Basketball: USA wins the Gold.
Good for USA Basketball. It would have been so easy to crush them if they lost, but they didn't and even better, they conducted themselves with class all the way. Congrats to Lebron, Kobe, Carmelo, Jason Kidd, Chris Paul and Dwight Howard. The future looks bright for USA Basketball and the Gold is whee it belongs.
Not so good for Baseball in the last Olympic effort. The Olympics need the major leaguers more than the majors needs the Olympics. I doubt very much that being in the Olympics every four years promotes the game internationally enough for them to shut down the season for two-three weeks to send the big guns. That we did not even send big-time prospects or AAA players indicates that MLB doesn't see the need to be there either. I think they get more from promoting the World baseball Classic to those countries that have big leaguers and a history and tradition of baseball already.
Worse for the girls and softball unless they somehow find a way to get the sport reinstated. At least the "USA is too dominant" argument is out the window.
The only other items that caught my interest was the Michael Phelps gold medal chase, the Usain Bolt assault on the speed events and the Dana Torres story
For Phelps the interest was not so much that he succeeded or failed, but the extent to which he obliterated Mark Spitz numbers in common events. Proving once again that ATHLETES ARE BIGGER, STRONGER, FASTER & BETTER today than they've ever been. We should not be surprised or upset when young men or women of today destroy the records of the icons from prior generations. Phelps blew away Spitz numbers from 35 years ago. It really doesn't diminish what Spitz did in any way. He was the best to ever do it then, Phelps is now.
The Wall Street Journal Numbers Guy does an excellent comparison between the two swimmers, comparing and contrasting their achievments.
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/phelps-v-spitz-by-the-numbers-396/
USAIN BOLT
The Usain Bolt destruction of the 100 meter dash record may have been the most awesome individual performance of the Games. He destroyed the record while showboating the last 10-20 yards, theoretically costing himself another .10 second. This in an event where most experts have suggested that there would be no assaults on the record books, man had reached the limits of human potential, blah, blah, blah. Once again the experts have been surprised and have to recalibrate their stories. Where have we heard that before?
---------------
USAIN BOLT OLYMPIC SUMMARY FOR Wikipedia:
Bolt announced that he would double-up with the 100 metres and 200 metres events at the Beijing Summer Olympics, and the new 100 m world-record holder was the favourite to win both.[29][30] Michael Johnson, the 200 m and 400 m record holder, personally backed the sprinter, saying he did not believe that a lack of experience would work against him.[31] Bolt qualified for the final with 9.92 and 9.85 seconds in the quarter-finals and semifinals respectively.[32][33][34] In the Olympic 100 m final, Bolt broke new ground, winning in 9.69 s. This was an improvement upon his own world record, and he was well ahead of second-place finisher Richard Thompson, who finished in 9.89 s.[35] Not only was the record set without a favourable wind (+0.0 m/s), but also he visibly slowed down to celebrate before he finished and his shoelace was untied.[36][37][38] Bolt continued running past the post, enjoying his victory.[39] Bolt stated that setting a record was not a priority for him, and that his goal was just to win the gold medal, Jamaica's first of the 2008 Games.[40] Olympic medallist Kriss Akabusi construed Bolt's chest slapping before the finish line as showboating, noting that the actions cost Bolt an even faster record time.[41] IOC president Jacques Rogge also condemned the Jamaican's actions as disrespectful.[42][43] Bolt denied that this was the purpose of his mid-race celebration by saying "I wasn't bragging. When I saw I wasn't covered, I was just happy."[44]
--------------------------
DANA TORRES
As far as the Dana Torres story, I'm not sure I've read a better analysis of it than Elizabeth Weil's New York Times story from June 29th, "A Swimmer of a Certain Age".
Aside from a fascinating look inside some of the training protocols that are credited with getting Ms. Torres this far, the following Q&A is very, very thought provoking. Give it a look.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/magazine/29torres-t.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all
-------------------------
UPON HEARING THAT TORRES is likely to make the Olympic
team at age 41, many people have the same question:
How is this possible? Kinesiologists counter with a
different query: Why are you so surprised? “Dara is
extremely impressive, but she’s not as unique as
people think,” says Michael Joyner, a competitive
athlete and anesthesiologist at the Mayo Clinic who
writes scholarly papers about aging and sports. “Ted
Williams hit .388 when he was 39. Jack Foster did very
well in the Olympic marathon when he was 40. Karl
Malone earned a triple-double in an N.B.A. game at 40.
Jeannie Longo won a French time-trial championship in
cycling at age 47.” Torres’s events — short swims —
are also well suited to competitors of advanced age.
Compared to, say, running, swimming is more
technique-intensive and produces fewer injuries.
Sprints are also kinder to older athletes, in that
strength falls off more gradually than aerobic power.
In April, at 37, Mark Foster, a freestyle sprinter in
England, came out of retirement and earned a spot, for
the fifth time, on the British Olympic swim team. “For
those of us who pay attention to this stuff,” Joyner
said, “Dara’s performance is unusual but not totally
unexpected.”
So why do we assume a middle-aged swimmer must be all
washed up? Because for nonelite athletes, sporting
achievements fall off precipitously with age. Body
composition changes toward more fat and less muscle.
Strength and aerobic capacity decrease as well. But a
primary reason that athletic performance degrades in
adulthood is changes in priorities. People tend to
devote more time and energy to jobs and families than
to sports. Even committed athletes downgrade their
workout goals from achieving personal bests to staying
in shape. Academics refer to this reduction in
physical activity as hypokinesis. The phenomenon is
not limited to humans. A 1985 study showed that rats
with unlimited access to running wheels exercised less
as they aged. “But look at people who maintain
activity levels,” says Joel Stager, a professor of
kinesiology at Indiana University. “It’s a different
story! A lot of what we assume is aging is just
progressive hypokinesis. How many people at Dara’s age
have maintained their training consistently? I’m going
to say there are very, very few.”
-------------------------
Any way,great job China. My impression of your country has not changed one iota. Still an oppressive, dictatorial regime that unapologetically tramples human rights and makes no bones about it. No amount of smoke/mirrors or fireworks or Olympics sideshows can distract me from that.
"The reality is that the Chinese government's hosting of the games has been a catalyst for abuses, leading to massive forced evictions, a surge in the arrest, detention and harassment of critics, repeated violations of media freedom, and increased political repression," said Sophie Richardson of Human Rights Watch. "Not a single world leader who attended the games or members of the IOC seized the opportunity to challenge the Chinese government's behavior in any meaningful way.
I say AMEN! to that. The enduring legacy and eternal shame of these Games in my mind will forever be that, for two weeks, human rights and freedom were set aside or outright trampled in the chase for money and a share in the Chinese market. SHAME.
No comments:
Post a Comment