MONEY FOR MEDALS

[geomorph]

This might well have already been said, but surely for 2012 purposes we only need to maintain our 'good' (as in lots of gold medals) sports while we need to improve our less successful sports like athletics (and other less well known sports)

Keep the funding the same on cycling/sailing and increase funding where it can actually improve?

As I heard someone on BBC this morning say: This could be the hayday of British cycling, other nations will see what we're doing, work harder / better and catch up with us. By 2012 it may very well be a much more level playing field, so why not get ahead (or play catchup) in other sports while we're at it.

think Nopesport got there first on all these . Perhaps we can set up 'Nopesport Think Tank' and charge out ideas like Getty images does pictures

[Scott]

I think orienteering can learn from the examples of cycling and sailing by inventing more and more absurd classes of competition, thus dramatically increasing the number of medals on offer at future World Championships. I'd personally be quite keen to take part in an orienteering keirin, in which competitors follow a guy on a quadbike around the forest in an orderly line before attempting to outsprint each other on the run-in.

[geomorph]

I think orienteering can learn from the examples of cycling and sailing by inventing more and more absurd classes of competition, thus dramatically increasing the number of medals on offer at future World Championships. I'd personally be quite keen to take part in an orienteering keirin, in which competitors follow a guy on a quadbike around the forest in an orderly line before attempting to outsprint each other on the run-in.

it is definitely an oddity to those of us outside cycling

If Olympic participation is desired for O then we must get into the WOC all the existing formats eg night, score etc before that time, cos otherwise once you are in, and unless you are swimming, adding a new format means deleting an existing one.

[awk]

AWK wrote "I suspect that there are far more riders than orienteers in this country!"
Maybe for kids, but as far as a competitive sport is concerned I VERY much doubt it. You can't count all those that ride horses, only those that compete at dressage (very few,) show-jumping, and 3 day eventing. More of them all put together than orienteers?

Two things on that. First of all, so what if the vast majority are youngsters? I'm sure that we'd be grateful to have a profile with a bottom heavy pyramid. Overall there are about 12000 members of British Eventing, 17000 members of British Show Jumping and 13000 members of British Dressage, so individually each discipline has as many or more members than British Orienteering. Even allowing for some dual or even triple membership, that indicates a larger sport.

Secondly, even though I'm probably not a competitive cyclist by your definitions, and am not a member of British Cycling, Ivery much regard myself as a cyclist (through touring, audax, mbo etc). You may not count me, but I do, and I'm sure many/most riders do the same when it comes to equestrian! (And I too have doubts about the keirin as an Olympic discipline, especially when other more 'natural' disciplines were removed such as the TTs, and worry that it might be the result of shenanigans between the UCI and Japanese cycling. But it IS brilliant to watch! Of more concern is that there are only 3 female track events vs 7 male).

Similarly, how many pole vaulters, javelin throwers ... are there?

Relatively, probably not many - being just one discipline in one sport (yes I know that track and field is effectively a conglomeration of different sports, but that's not how it works). How many sprint orienteers are there?

Personally, I'm not overly bothered on the numbers game. After all, I don't think football should be in the games, nor tennis, as they are sports where the Olympics are not the number one competition. My point was to try and counter what looked like blind prejudice about sports outside our own relatively small sphere. That isn't to say I I don't think orienteering should be in the Games. I do, but respect other sports which are equally demanding in their own way. (BTW, without knowing it in detail, I've got more doubts about dressage because of the use of judging to score than because of numbers - faster, higher, further = yes. Judging = largely no in my view).

[geomorph]

. I've got more doubts about dressage because of the use of judging to score than because of numbers - faster, higher, further = yes. Judging = largely no in my view).

definitely not pure

[Ed]

I think you need to extend faster, higher, further a little bit:

faster, higher, further, stronger, more skilled, more accurate, more aesthetically pleasing

that should just about cover everything...

[Scott]

more aesthetically pleasing

I suppose we have to justify the inclusion of beach volleyball somehow.

[Gnitworp]

I think you need to extend faster, higher, further a little bit:

faster, higher, further, stronger, more skilled, more accurate, more aesthetically pleasing

that should just about cover everything...

You missed one: how about limbo dancing - lower

[Becks]

The irritating thing about the eventing, which is irritation shared by one of Scotland's ex top junior cross country riders who shares my desk in the lab, is that it's the monied ones who make it to the top, because they can afford to consistently buy the top pre trained and bred horses. Sarah hasn't ridden competively for three years now, as her last horse which she was top three in Scotland with was retired. As she could only afford to buy a pretty much blank sheet of a foal for £1000 or so, William Fox Pitt and crew can afford to spend £300000 or so on a proven horse straight off. Sure you still have to be able to work with it, but Sarah will be training her's up from scratch, which takes years, not months. She'll maybe be back at the top in another two years, if this horse actually turns out to be any good. But essentially the people without the money are relegated before the competition even starts, which is a real shame, as it potentially misses a huge amount of talent.

Saying that, it also annoys me that there is so much horsey stuff in the games yet we're not let anywhere near.

[awk]

We're totally in agreement there Becks, both on the money issue and on orienteering not being able to get there. I'm not anti-equestrian being there, just that we're not! As I said, I'd remove football and tennis and anything requiring judges to score (just look at the range of marks in diving for instance!). And on Ed's theme, I agree, yes you'd need 'more accurate' in there too, even if I hope that the others were tongue in cheek!

[Adventure Racer]

That isn't to say I I don't think orienteering should be in the Games. I do, but respect other sports which are equally demanding in their own way.

Be careful what you wish for. If it did ever make it in, then it would have to be spectator / TV friendly, which pretty much means Sprint, if not some modified mass start version. The by product of which would of course be that this is what all the top competitors would concentrate on, to the detriment of more traditional events. I'm unconvinced that inclusion in the Olympics is an undonditionally good thing for all sports (look how triathlon castrated itself to make it).

[Ed]

And on Ed's theme, I agree, yes you'd need 'more accurate' in there too, even if I hope that the others were tongue in cheek!

personally I really only have a problem with sports where 'more aesthetically pleasing' is the criteria for success. Yes, executing a synchronised swimming routine (or whatever) requires strength, skill and undoubtedly training, but success is still ultimately judged on a subjective basis. If e.g. in the diving the criteria was simply how many somersaults can you manage before hitting the water then at least you'd have something measurable.

At least in most sports where there is no absolute measurement of time/distance/weight then the competitions are head-to-heads so there is some kind of relative measurement performed with the best, based on the relative measurements up to that point, meeting in the final.

Faster, higher, further, stronger and more accurate can at any rate be independently measured (although the 100m sprint run as a time-trial might lack something as a spectacle!).

[awk]

(look how triathlon castrated itself to make it).

As someone who loves sprint racing, and would like to see more of it (admittedly not to the exclusion of other disciplines, far from it!), I don't have a problem with it being the Olympic discipline. Not being an aficionado of triathlon, how did it castrate itself? Quite a few sports seem to thrive on having Olympic and non-Olympic disciplines, with little detriment to the latter.

[EddieH]

AWK don't get me wrong. Like you I am not anti equestrianism, but am suprised at your numbers. However if you consider yourself a cyclist then everyone that has ever used a map on foot is an orienteer which means our sport numbers billions

[awk]

AWK don't get me wrong. Like you I am not anti equestrianism, but am suprised at your numbers. However if you consider yourself a cyclist then everyone that has ever used a map on foot is an orienteer which means our sport numbers billions

Most will not consider themselves orienteers, and will have little interest in orienteering. My point is that, like many others, I am an active cyclist, regard myself as one, but am not a member of British Cycling. Many riders will be in a similar situation.