[Coco with marshmallows]

So, who's watching what this year?

For myself so far its been:

Weightlifting - watching women 15 kilos lighter than me clean and jerk weights I can't bench is awesome.

Judo - scrappy as ever.

Beach volleyball - judge me all you want, but you can't fault the music they're using to get the crowd going.

[Binder of Demons]

Was wondering who'd start this thread. I was just too lazy.

Been watching as much as i can. The womens cycling road race today was nailbiting, and gave Team GB their first medal. Gutsy ride.

Watched some of the swimming yesterday as well. The last leg of the individual medley by the Chinese girl (16 years old) was truly remarkable. I heard one of the Irish commentators put in perspective. She swam her last leg, just 1/10th of a second slower than Phelps did in his race!!

Saw the couple of Irish boxers who competed yesterday too, and they were both impressive.

But to be honest, I don't really care how the Irish team does as long as KATIE TAYLOR wins the gold medal in boxing. She's been the world champion at least the last 3 years, and is so modest and unassuming, I just hope she gets to top it all off with an Olympic Gold. Otherwise you get people disparaging her accomplishments for the last few years. But that's not til next week.

[Coco with marshmallows]

One thing i will say - the worst aspects of corporate sponsorships appear to be rearing its ugly head.

I've yet to see a single full stadium/crowd in any of the events. Granted that's to be expected for some of the more esoteric stuff, but i'd have expected gymnastics to get a much bigger crowd than it has been getting.

Also, and I know this next part is irrelevant to foreigners - damned impressed by the BBC coverage.
Since i'm old enough to remember when the olympic coverage consisted of highlight packages and the 'big' events only, being able to watch any of them at all is an enjoyable experience.

[Slow Ben]

Yeah, I'm really enjoying watching sports I normally wouldn't care to. Water polo is on right now, that shit looks hard.
Also enjoyed watching men's volleyball this morning. The shortest guy on the US was 6'5" like I am and he looked tiny out there.
As always I'm amazed at how athletic all these people are, especially the gymnasts.

[Beezulbubba]

The men's Team Archery finals was pretty badass. Italy won the gold against the United States on the last shot. Noooooooo! congrats to Italy though.

[amphibian]

Slow Ben, on 29 July 2012 - 06:52 PM, said:

Yeah, I'm really enjoying watching sports I normally wouldn't care to. Water polo is on right now, that shit looks hard.
Also enjoyed watching men's volleyball this morning. The shortest guy on the US was 6'5" like I am and he looked tiny out there.
As always I'm amazed at how athletic all these people are, especially the gymnasts.

It's amazing. However, I still think LeBron James is the best athlete in the world. Mijain Lopez (giant Cuban wrestler) might be up there at the pinnacle though. He'd have way more press if he didn't engage in match fixing in the world championships.

Tedy Riner too. 6'8", 280 lbs of pure muscle and makes everybody else look silly.

And of course, Lochte, Phelps and the other swimmers.

[Ulrik]

Except football, Im rather "accidental" viewer, but... man, 4x100m swimming was a hell of a drama! USA leading from Phelps´ escape, AUssie favourites dropping and brutal finish by France for the win! And Im really not swimming fan
(well, and our former gold olympic shooter is nice chick and I am shooting fan, so...)

This post has been edited by Ulrik: 29 July 2012 - 08:31 PM

[LadyMTL]

I always try to watch swimming, diving, track and field and gymnastics. I've always loved diving and gymnastics and over the last 2 or so summer games have gotten more and more into the swimming competitions. With track, on the other hand, I tend to pick and choose what I watch...the 100m and the 4x100m relay are always exciting but I can't get worked up over the marathon (even though Canada has an Olympic champion marathoner, yay Simon Whitfield!)

That said, I have found myself glued to the TV this weekend, watching everything from tennis to beach volleyball. I tell myself "turn off the freaking TV and go outside" and yet I don't.

[amphibian]

Ulrik, on 29 July 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

Except football, Im rather "accidental" viewer, but... man, 4x100m swimming was a hell of a drama! USA leading from Phelps´ escape, AUssie favourites dropping and brutal finish by France for the win! And Im really not swimming fan

Yannick Noah, the guy who swam last, swam a 47 or a 46. That's right on world record pace and it was amazing to see him go from being a half body length behind to surging forwards for the win. Wow.

[Tapper]

So far, cycling (for men - magnificent race, but the 6-man-a-team rule (huge deviation from standard cycling rules), the lack of earpieces and/or the lack of time updates really hurt peleton-domination based sprint teams (like Germany and Team GB) and worked very much in favor of a big escapee group as commandeered by the Swiss and Spanish), would have loved watching the women, too - as we had a favorite in Marianne Vos , some swimming (4x 100 women as the main event for me, once again due to Dutch favorites, silver only this time, but Ranomi Kromowidjojo is a hot, hot favorite imho for medals).

I am eagerly awaiting the athletics, love gymnastics (but prefer the elegance of the women over the power and control of the men), can't get enough of diving, including the paired jumps, and the indoor cycling is going to be a feast as well (with GB likely to take most of the medals). I will say that I am always amazed at which sports aren't Olympic or demonstration only. I mean, rugby's going to be really tough with very little recuperation time, so that not being Olympic's understandable, but there are big sports missing, or variations that are odd (in the past, there used to be swimming distances that wouldn't be swam in WC and regular tournaments, for example).

I'd be happy to watch some wrestling, boxing and judo, perhaps a smattering of sailing, too, but I certainly won't be staying home for them.

[worry]

Maia Irraz, on 29 July 2012 - 09:41 PM, said:

I always try to watch swimming, diving, track and field and gymnastics. I've always loved diving and gymnastics and over the last 2 or so summer games have gotten more and more into the swimming competitions.

I'm basically the same here, and a sampler with the other things going on. Kinda also hoping the US basketball team gets beat somehow, after what Kobe said about the Dream Team. The past few Olympics, NBC has been obsessed with showing tons of rowing events for some reason, so I hope that changes.

Edit: Though I do like the canoeing and kayaking, which are presumably quite separate disciplines from the longboats.

This post has been edited by worrywort: 30 July 2012 - 03:34 AM

[amphibian]

I profoundly question the structure of women's gymnastics. Why would the people of a sport build it in such a way that makes 16 to 19 year olds the very best at it? It makes no sense from a physical maturity standpoint (some or most aren't even adults, much less in their true physical prime), it makes no sense from a business standpoint (very few repeat gymnasts who are stars to build upon for the next Olympics) and it makes little sense from a morality standpoint.

[amphibian]

If the US gets beat, it'll be Spain that does it. So cheer for the Spanish to really gel and to get incredibly lucky with jump shots.

[worry]

I will do so, and if Pau Gasol beats Kobe I will grin like a porpoise.

[Ulrik]

I must say, that I dislike synchronization diving (or what is it called) and disciplines judged by esthetics... just saw final and some poor Malaysian girls got same average points for really good jump, same as totally botched jump of famous Canadians. What the hell? Really, if you cant count it on stop watch or goals, its not clean

[Tapper]

amphibian, on 30 July 2012 - 03:30 AM, said:

I profoundly question the structure of women's gymnastics. Why would the people of a sport build it in such a way that makes 16 to 19 year olds the very best at it? It makes no sense from a physical maturity standpoint (some or most aren't even adults, much less in their true physical prime), it makes no sense from a business standpoint (very few repeat gymnasts who are stars to build upon for the next Olympics) and it makes little sense from a morality standpoint.

That isn't exactly the point, either. There are quite a few tournaments going around the world per season, some for relatively big bucks for the sport.

The one point I agree with you is the physical growth bit and that is mainly due to the extreme stress put on joints and ligaments - which in this case is very, very severe. The point is probably that an older athlete can't stretch/ over-extend as far or as much as a younger girl can.

Regarding morality and the 'exploitation of minors' that you may hint at: I doubt you'll disagree that most top sporters start at a very early age when their body is still developing and work on dedicated training and competition schedules that aren't 100% healthy either (or forego education for physical development). They're often taught (by their parents/ coaches) to develop a top sport mentality of winning first while at an age where fun is the prime motivator for a kid.

Secondly, any youngster would probably be allowed to compete with their elders if they were good enough, too (soccer has a fair share of 17-19 year old prodigees who are also still building their muscle structure, gaining weight and physically developing), tennis (especially on the ladies' side) has plenty of child prodigies who have been playing several years of Challengers before going to Grand Slam tournaments (even if they exit round 1), and swimmers can be very young, too (once again, look at the aforementioned Kromowidjojo, who debuted at the EC at age 15 in the swimming sprint).

[worry]

There might be a meat grinder mentality -- closer to ballet than even many other sports -- that is in tandem with the physical wear and tear you mention, and I think that's what amph was getting at. It's not just about starting young so much as wearing out young, and that being built into the process. Obviously people wear out in all sports (and there's occasionally a high school football player dying form heat stroke or whatever). And while some sports certainly require targeted physical development on top of skill, there are some physical "development" regimens that just aren't healthy -- you do occasionally see some of the physical problems and related neuroses in women's gymnastics that you see in ballet, modeling, and pageantry.

On the other hand, I agree with you that there are financial rewards out there for some top tier gymnasts (from tournaments and from sponsorships later on), and also while I'm bothered by eating disorders and the like, I don't care so much about the general wear and tear elements of the sport. Jackie Chan, Sammo Hung, and Yuen Biao all started at the Chinese opera school at the same age kids here start 1st grade, and it was rigorous and downright brutal, and probably not particularly fair or moral, but it's served them all well nevertheless.

In summary, I agree with everyone.

[Fid]

With a partner into horses, we have had plenty of equestrian stuff so far as well as the cycling (big fans of tour de France) - pleased for Lizzie Amitstad yesterday. Off to Greenwich next Tuesday for dressage - I will probably find it a paint drying experience after 6 hours - but good to experience the olympic atmosphere. Then enjoy the track cycling and the athletics - before the final ceremony - quirkier then the opening?

[amphibian]

Tapper, on 30 July 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

That isn't exactly the point, either. There are quite a few tournaments going around the world per season, some for relatively big bucks for the sport.

More money can be made if the stars stick around longer. Look at the worlds of soccer, basketball, NFL, racing and so on. Stars are good for the sport.

Quote

The one point I agree with you is the physical growth bit and that is mainly due to the extreme stress put on joints and ligaments - which in this case is very, very severe. The point is probably that an older athlete can't stretch/ over-extend as far or as much as a younger girl can.

So you change the emphasis from the stretching to something else. The men do gymnastics until they're 30ish. Women soccer players and basketball players go until their 40s almost. Track and field athletes go until their 40s almost. The general idea here is that in all these other sports, fully adult women, in their athletic prime, are competing and the sport is structured in such a way that they aren't physically barred once they hit 20 or 21.

Quote

Secondly, any youngster would probably be allowed to compete with their elders if they were good enough, too (soccer has a fair share of 17-19 year old prodigees who are also still building their muscle structure, gaining weight and physically developing), tennis (especially on the ladies' side) has plenty of child prodigies who have been playing several years of Challengers before going to Grand Slam tournaments (even if they exit round 1), and swimmers can be very young, too (once again, look at the aforementioned Kromowidjojo, who debuted at the EC at age 15 in the swimming sprint).

An outlier being young isn't a problem. We're facing a situation where anyone over 20 in elite female gymnastics is the outlier. None of these women are reaching their true physical primes and they essentially have one Olympic cycle to work within. Most, if not all, of the other sports for men and women allow for multiple cycles.

The days of Larissa Latrynina (the USSR gymnast) doing the 1956, 1960 and 1964 Olympics are long gone. Only three U.S. women have ever competed in three Olympics and Dominique Dawes and Amy Chow were the last to do it in '92, '96 and '00. What's noteworthy is that quite a few of the Magnificent 7 gymnasts from the U.S. were trying to get that second or third Olympics, but couldn't make it due to injuries. Since that 2000 cycle, it's been largely one and done with almost every U.S. medalist trying briefly to come back after retiring and failing.

[Tapper]

Quote

So you change the emphasis from the stretching to something else.

Come on Amph, that is too easy an argument to make and you know it. The sport is about grace, not strength. In circus sports, the emphasis for women is equally on grace, as is ballet. The one thing easily changeable is ask them to stand up straight instead of with a very hollow, unnatural back, but other than that, very little can be done without changing the essence of the sport entirely.

amphibian, on 30 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said:

The days of Larissa Latrynina (the USSR gymnast) doing the 1956, 1960 and 1964 Olympics are long gone. Only three U.S. women have ever competed in three Olympics and Dominique Dawes and Amy Chow were the last to do it in '92, '96 and '00. What's noteworthy is that quite a few of the Magnificent 7 gymnasts from the U.S. were trying to get that second or third Olympics, but couldn't make it due to injuries. Since that 2000 cycle, it's been largely one and done with almost every U.S. medalist trying briefly to come back after retiring and failing.

Did you take into account that only since 1974 is there an age limit (then 14) which has been raised to 16 as late as the 1990s?
I agree with you that the sport is extremely unhealthy for female athletes. However, if a 20 year old is going to be consistently outscored on just about everything by a 16 year old, 20 year olds won't compete. If you set an age limit at 20, a lot of gymnasts will not make it to that age to begin with, and they'll be rotated out at 22, 23 max.

Taking women's soccer as an example is somewhat unfeasible, as that sport is very much in development still. Men don't last that long (keepers excepted), and if the sport ever reaches the same heights as the men's do, they'll notice the same.