Jump to content

The Real Olympics


jkrdevil

Recommended Posts

Ok, I was flipping through the channels and came to PBS were they had this show on called the Real Olympics were they compared the Ancient Games to the modren games, and there were a few things I found interesting.

1. The Sporting Events- The games then were much brutal (especially the wrestling) and sometimes led to the death of the competitors. However there were what I would called actual sports, in being there were no judging invovlved. There was a clear winner and a loser. There were none of these "fake sports" like Gyminastics, Syncrinatized Swimming, or figure skating. IMO, those type sports sort of cheapen the Olympics becuase I don't consider anything that envoloves judging a sport. It's not a sport when human bias is what determines the winner.

2. Just being here is great enough- I hate when the losers say this, it is total bs. (In fact it goes against the premis of sports becuase you play sports to win. It's Compitition). Back in the Ancient Games, there was none of this the winners were held as almost god-like (remember the ancient Olympics were a religous ceromony) while the losers were basically mocked out of the stadiums even by their own family.

3. Amateurism- This doesn't exist anymore (rightfully so), but before 1981 the olympics were supposed to be nothing but amateurs (Although the Soviets were pros). This wasn't the case in the Ancient gmaes, those were professional. The athletes must have trained for at least 10 mounths and must have a what we would call today a personal trainer in order to compete (they had to take an oath saying they trained, the oath in fact is the only thing that is almost directly taken from the Ancient Games). However that allowed the poor to compete. While the rich did have the advantage because they had more money, the poor could still compete and win becuase the olympics could luanch them into a professional career in athletics and become rich. The only reason why it was only amateurs is becuase when the modren olympics were created they didn't want the poor to be able to compete. By making it Amateurs only the poor couldn;t affors to participate.

The Ancient Games were about peace- This is another myth about the Olympics both modren and ancient. The Ancient games were a religous ceromony. War went on during the olympics and a few times Olympia was attacked (even by Greeks). I belive this is even a myth in the modren games. Those have been used for political gain all the time. The 1936 games were a bug promotion for Nazi Germany and Hitler and both the 1980 Olympics and 1984 Olympics were boycotted by countries in cold war politics.

The program went into other similarities like curroption (Nero, bought of the orgranziers so he could win the chariot race he didn't finish. And a Boxer payed off his opponets once in the Ancient Games). It seems as the modren Olympics becomes more modren they are becoming more simular to the Ancient Games.

Finally here is the thing I found most Ironic about the modren games. The Olympic Rings/flag, and the tourch relay are not from the ancient games. These things that we take today to mean peace and togetherness are really Nazi symbols. Both of these thing started in the 1936 Berlin or Hitler Games in which Nazi Germany used to promote itself and racism and predjudice (Which makes Jesse Owens winning so great). The olympics rings that were found in Olympia were actually plated there by the Germans. Also as I said the tourch relay is also a Nazi symbol, the original relay was the reverse route that the Germans would take a few years lter in WWII.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Modern Olympics were founded after baron Pierre de Coubertin saw a hmm village fayre in England somewhere (I forget exactly where!) And thought it would be good to have that sort of thing as an international competition. Many of the competitors ion the original 1896 games were people over on holiday or business, who thought it might be fun to enter!!

I knew the stuff about how the opening ceremony dates back essentially to 1936, interestingly though the film Chariots of Fire, based on the 1924 (I think) games shows a flame being lit!! (Not the only historical innacuracy in the movie by any means!) One thing Hitler was a genius for, or at least the Nazis were, was symbolism!

Anyways de Coubertin set up the games as a vehicle for friendly competition but the games have and did very quickly way out grown that ideal. If you are going to have a major sports competition that people want to watch 1 its got to include pro athletes , and 2 people are going to want to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as just being here being good enuff. I think you are missing the point. Getting to the olympics means you kicked a lot of @$$ in your home country. It is a huge accomplishment and while winning is better, getting there allready puts you into a very exclusive class.

i love the olympics. i cant wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. Just being here is great enough- I hate when the losers say this, it is total bs.

Go to the Olympics as an athlete.

Stand in front of 80,000 people holding your nation's flag as you stand among the greatest athletes in the world. If you finish 5th in the 100 meter dash, you still did your personal best and did it faster than about 7 billion other could have done. I'd love to just be there. Maybe for some winning is everything, (Mark Spitz for example almost pulled out of one of his swimming events in 1972 because he was projected to win silver and didn't want a "blemish" on his name. The only thing that kept him in was that his coach gave him either the option of staying in that race or being cut from the relay squad. As we know, he won gold in both of those.) but for others simply knowing that you are in the greatest company in the world is enough to bring grown men and women to tears.

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, making the olympics is a great accomlishment and all the olympians are world class athletes. Should they be gald to be there Yes. But you have to know they are lying when they say I don't care about winning a medal, I'm just gald to be here. You should be glad to be there but you should care about winning a medal. It's sports you play to win, you play to be the best. If I was that good to be an olympian and I didn't win, I would probably be pissed. Sure losing in the olympics is better thn not making it, but you go to win. How often do you hear the gold medalist go I don't care about winning the gold, I'm just happy to be here. You don't.

Like I said yes, it's better to lose in the olympics than not making it, however when you hear an athlete say that they are just trying to be nice and say the right thing.

The whole point of that part is the idea of the Olympics is not about winning is stupid. It's sports and you play to win sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.