Has the Olympics lost its cachet? | Golden Skate

Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

M

mathman444

Guest
Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

The most popular spectator sport in the U.S. (football) is not represented in the Olympics at all, nor is the most popular sport world-wide (football, aka soccer). At the opposite end of the spectrum are minor sports that no one even knows exist, except once every four years when we see them briefly at the Olympic games, for example kayaking, archery and my personal favorite, the two-man luge.

Figure skating is in the middle. Our sport attracts a certain live and television audience for National and World Championships, and for a few other high profile events. Still, historically, many people tune in only for the winter Olympics -- at which figure skating is the marquee event.

It seems to me that in the last few years circumstances have conspired to bring the regular skating seasons into sharper focus and to diminish the role of the Olympics as the only show in town. Some of these factors are:

1. The judging scandals and the perception that Olympic victories are more about corrupt politics than about sport.

2. The success and popularity of skating icons such as Michelle Kwan, Irina Slutskaya, Todd Eldredge, Elvis Stoyko and Kurt Browning, with multiple National and World Championships but no Olympic gold medal...In contrast with...

3. The feeling that many recent Olympic champions were not really the best in the sport, only the luckiest on that day. This is especially true for those who disappear from the sport immediately after their victory.

4. We have so many blockbuster “entertainment event of the century” things going on all the time (the super bowl, March madness, Wimbledon, the Masters). The big sports people in the U.S. are not Olympians, but those who win major championships in their individual sports (Michael Jordan, Serena Williams -- she’s on TV right now! -- Tiger Woods.)

What do you think? Are the Olympics fading away as the big whoop of figure skating?

Mathman
 
J

Joesitz

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

Mathman - much of what you say is 'right on' and the question you pose is too. As Chris Evert said, we have Wimbleton, the Olympics are not necessary.

So I believe we need the Olys for such sports as kayacking and pushing that thing along the ice (like shuffleboard,forgot the name).

Figure Skating appeals mostly to women because it has a high show biz entertainment value. One gets a contest, a fashion show, music, interesting balletic movements, and grace. Hardly the factors in Ice Hockey or Down Hill Skiing.

There is too, a devoted fan base of figure skating which will go out of his/her way to see any form of figure skating. But the occasional TV viewer will watch a competition when it does not compete with another sport at the same time on TV, and without a lot of publicity (good or bad), during the Olys.

The publicity will be there!! The TV companies will provide any which way they can to produce revenue for their companies. Diet food and Insurance companies, etc., will keep figure skating alive on TV and the Olys. But, are the Olys in general fading? hmmm, maybe. It's nothing new on TV. It can't compete with what Ms Evert said and, of course, the World Series is untouchable. The Olys excitement may have waned.

Joe
 
N

nymkfan51

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

Mathman, this is a good question.
I still think that a majority of the people only watch figure skating at the Olympics ... although I think it's not as wide a majority as before. You are right about the fact that several very decorated skaters do not have Olympic gold ... but instead some that had the skate of their life just at the right time, and then pretty much became a non-factor in the sport after that. I wouldn't call them lucy necessarily, because they did deliver the goods when they had to.
For me personally, the fact that Michelle doesn't yet have an OGM ... diminishes the value of that somewhat. There is still Turino though ... I still believe!!!
 
J

Jaana

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

I would say that in sport (and also figure skating is supposed to be sport) the best of the evening should win. And in that event it means that the one who has won, is the best of the sport in that event. It should not have anything to do with the fact how decorated or not the athlete is before the Olympics. In figure skating though the earlier merits count more than in many other sports.

There are some cases in figure skating where the strong favourites were not able to deliver their usual level at the Olympics. Sometimes the same has happened to some skaters in more than one Olympics. My guess is that it has very much to do with the nerves for being in Olympics. Or injuries or maybe an athlete has made some wrong decisions in that very important Olympic season?

The Olympic winners in figure skating have not been unknown skaters without merits. If we for example think of Tara and Ilia, they both had won competitions before the Olympics. Tara has been a National Champion, World Champion and GP Finals Champion. Ilia was the Russian Champion twice, an European Champion, World silver medallist, GP Finals Champion and World Junior champion. Ilia was fortunate that he peaked in the right time. That does not mean just for the Olympics, he peaked in the right season. I think he got some extra iniative because of the Worlds 1997, where he was only fifth. Besides the Olympic season is the very one when athletes should try to peak, LOL.

The win at the Olympic is a big win, and the fact that an athlete is not e.g. a World Champion of several times, does not make the win any lesser. I would say that on the contrary it makes her/his win even a bigger one, because everything was planned and executed right in that season. It also means that some athletes rise to the occasion.

I believe that Olympic champions will still continue being those very rare people who were able to win an Olympic gold medal. What happened in SLC, does not alter that, in my opinion. And an athlete carries the glory and honour of being an Olympic champion during the life. It does not matter in what discipline she/he did win or whether it happened in summer or winter Olympics, or what happened after the Olympics. An Olympic champion is an Olympic champion, LOL.

About e.g. male Olympic figure skating champions staying in eligible skating after their win, it does not seem that many recent ones have stayed. Those who left after their Olympic win season: Curry, Cousins, Hamilton, Boitano (came back later but not successfully), Petrenko (ditto) and Ilia Kulik. Yagudin is/has been injured, nobody knows anything for sure about him. The only one who stayed was Alexei Urmanov who won in 1994.

And I also think that is is understandable that after an Olympic win, as the biggest goal in the career has been reached, a skater has to consider what she/he wishes to do most. Ilia Kulik for example was interested in doing choreography and to take his skating on another level, the pro skating, where he could concentrate on trying different things which were not possible in eligible skating.

Marjaana
 
R

RealtorGal

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

<span style="color:maroon;font-family:georgia;font-size:small;">Marjaana, I agree completely with your post. To say that the Olympics is diminished because Michelle doesn't have a gold medal is insulting to Sarah, Tara and anyone else who found it within himself/herself to rise to the special occasion and win on actual performance, not past achievements. Boo hoo. That is exactly what I have always loved about the Olympics: watching athletes do something special when it counts. That is why the Olympics is so special. I have always loved everything about the Olympics (except scandalous judging). Ever since I was a child, I have found myself GLUED to the TV for the duration. I, a mediocre athlete at best, always admired the determination and dedication of these athletes. Whether or not they win, just getting there impresses me, especially when athletes come from countries where competition is so stiff. Even now, at 40+ ;) to me, the Olympics has not lost its luster and appeal. The Olympic competitions still give me goosebumps, no matter what sport I'm watching!</span>
 
M

mathman444

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

I guess the point of my question was this: the bigger the sport, the less important the Olympic Games are to that sport. Michael Jordan has an Olympic gold medal, but it means far less to him than his 6 NBA championships and his multiple MVP awards. Has figure skating reached this level of popularity yet?

In the olden days, the big people in the sport were the Olympic champions: Dorothy Hamill, Scott Hamilton, Katarina Witt, Brian Boitano, Kristi Yamaguchi. Today Michelle Kwan has a larger and more loyal and boisterous fan base than Sarah Hughes, Tara Lipinski and Oksana Baiul put together. Is this evidence that figure skating has outgrown its dependence on the Olympics?

Mathman
 
R

RealtorGal

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

<span style="color:purple;font-family:comic sans ms;font-size:small;">Michelle is more popular BECAUSE she didn't win the gold medal at either Olympics. Had she won in Nagano, she would not be as popular as she is today.</span>
 
J

Joesitz

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

Mathman - I doubt this thread will continue with the question you posed. It will go on and on about how figure skating results will cause the entire Olympics to fold.:lol:

There will be no discussion of the Olympic sports versus the World Championships of those sports.

Certain sports do get a boost from the Olys: Track, Field Events; Diving; Swimming, Equestrian Events; Ice Hockey, Slalom skiing; Speed skating, etc. Their World events are not big on TV although if one is astute and if one is interested, they can be seen. ESPN does play a role here.

As for figure skating, I think it will remain the same as the highlight of the Olys but with much less interest than hitherto.
I do, however, see the large numbers of Oly watchers as being less. And yes, baseball, football (American), football (European), golf, tennis do not need the Olys.

Let's see what happens in Athens.

Joe
 
N

nymkfan51

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

Mathman ... to more clearly answer your question, no ... I don't think figure skating will ever be in the same league with the so called "big" sports. There is just not enough interest there. (except with women) I doubt the majority of the male population will ever have any real use for it. So I guess the Olympics will always be the World Series, Superbowl, etc. for skating.

RealtorGal ... the OGM being diminished was MY opinion only. I should have been clearer on that point. It has not a thing to do with any other OGM ... they were all wonderful in their own right. This was just my feeling with regards to Michelle.
 
T

tdnuva

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

Two different points I'm thinking about....

First of all the Olympics are more than just a high-level event. The idea behind the Olympics since 1896 was different. And I think especially for the not-top-scorers this idea will still be there, no matter which discipline.

Thinking about figure skating I wonder if the "value" of an OMG might become lower cause the skaters are somehow already part of a kind of pro world during their eligible career and obviously don't need that medal that much to improve their financial standing.
 
M

mathman444

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

RealtorGal, it was that very point that got me to thinking about this in the first place. Michelle became more popular for NOT winning the Olympic gold medal than she would have been if she HAD won it. If she had won in Nagano, she might have been remembered as just another Olympic winner.

tdnuva's point is well taken, too. During the first half of the twentieth century the idea of "amateurism" was firmly entrenched in the European class system. The nobility did not do anything for -- ugh! -- monetary recompense. Moreover, for the noble amateurs to compete with the common professionals would be to mingle the classes. On top of that, "specializing" in any one sport or activity was regarded as low class -- the sort of thing that you had to do if you worked for a living.

Now that idea has been turned upside down. Nothing is regarded as worth doing UNLESS it brings in the big bucks.

Mathman
 
T

tdnuva

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

<blockquote style="padding-left:0.5em; margin-left:0; margin-right:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; border-left:solid 2">During the first half of the twentieth century the idea of "amateurism" was firmly entrenched in the European class system.</blockquote>

Well I didn't think that far to the past. I just compared e.g. the Olympic drama around Janet Lynn vs. Beatrix Schuba or the triumph of Torvill & Dean, Kati Witt and Scott Hamilton in 84. Those events really mattered to the skaters, they changed their life more or less. This still is true in a way for Sarah Hughes 02 but when I think about Anissina & Peizerat I really wonder if winning gold or silver would have changed much. Same with thinking into the future. I have the impression that the skaters now don't really *want* the olympic gold they seem to rather calculate "cooly" if it's sensible to do more shows in the next year or compete in the eligible events.

Of course I might be wrong with my guesses about skater's wishes and feelings. ;-)
 
J

JHarland55

Guest
Re: Has the Olympics lost its cachet?

I am not sure about if the Olympics has lost it cachet. As far it being a competitions for amateur athletes no. There seems to be more pro's, ie/ hockey, basketball.
What about the cost cities and countries spend for what two weeks. Building new arenas that most never seem to get used much after the Olympics.
 
S

sk8tngcanuck

Guest
olympics

Joe,
" So I believe we need the Olys for such sports as kayacking and pushing that thing along the ice (like shuffleboard,forgot the name)."

That sport would be called Curling, and it is enormously popular here in Canada.
 
J

Jaana

Guest
Re: Olympics

Compared for example to a sport like tennis, figure skating is in a very different position. Figure skating has been historically a long time in Olympics and altogether there are only a few "big" international figure skating competitions (Olympics, Worlds, Europeans, Four Continents and GP Finals). And actually from these few, only the Olympics and Worlds are open for skaters from all countries to participate, so to speak.

Yes, for tennis I would definetely say that Wimbledon is in the position of the Olympics. Tennisplayers compete in all kinds of competition through the whole year (at least it seems to be so), and the important yearly tournaments are US Open, French Open, Australian Open and Wimbledon, which is the most important of them all. For a tennisplayer who has won everything else but not Wimbledon, it is the same matter as for a figure skater having won everything else but not the Olympic gold medal. It is not a matter of money in these days or how big fandoms some skaters may have without an Olympic win, it is a matter of that very extra special glory of having won the most important competition there is in one´s own sport. And of course there is also the glory of being one of the athletes who have been able to win for one´s own country one more Olympic gold medal.

I would think that most, if not every sport, has a competition which is seen as the most important one in that sport? Anyway, for some sports it is the Olympics and for some sports some other competition. For figure skating it is the Olympics, and from that reason I believe that figure skating in Olympics continues playing a big and important traditional role.

Marjaana
 
M

mpal2

Guest
Re: Olympics

I still don't see why the Olympic Gold has to be the ultimate goal for figure skating. The number of people you can send on the team is determined by the World Championships not the Olympics. That once every 4 years event is more about personal glory than Worlds, although that carries a great deal of personal glory as well. :)

As has been stated, the money aspect has changed the importance of that medal on the pocketbook. So how is that medal more important? I feel that the being great year after year scenario carries more weight (this holds true for any sport). The Oympics does wonders for the little know sports. They are even luckier if their Olympic champ turns out to be someone the next group wants to emulate.

As I've gotten older, the Olympics has lost it's shine. Which kind of makes me sad. At this point in my life, the Olympics has become one pain in the ass event to try to attend. You spend a lot of money to get what you want and still get stuck with a lot of things you don't want. Also, there is that running scoreboard of the medal counts. It's become a big load of "my country's better than yours".

I still watch to get a glimpse of sports I don't usually see, but my overall awe of the event has vanished. I can be happy for the "lucky" winners, but I will always see a difference between someone who won and a true champion which only time can measure.
 
J

Jaana

Guest
Re: Olympics

>I still don't see why the Olympic Gold has to be the ultimate goal for figure skating. The number of people you can send on the team is determined by the World Championships not the Olympics.>

What importance has the number of athletes of a country being determined in Worlds got to do with an Olympic win of one athlete? Besides, the athletes that get selected for Worlds, have first to skate well in their own Nationals to get selected for e.g. Europeans, and to to skate there well to get selected for Worlds, and to skate well in the Olympic season to get selected for Olympics, to get a slot to skate there... It looks to me very much that the ultimate goal is the Olympics, that is the highest on this pyramide. It would not be sensible to select skaters (slots for a country) on account of Olympics for next Olympics, four years is a long time. Also one year is a long time, and wasn´t that the reason why the qualifying rounds became necessary for all athletes in Europeans and in Worlds?

>I can be happy for the "lucky" winners, but I will always see a difference between someone who won and a true champion which only time can measure.>

Well, I don´t think that in figure skating there are "lucky" winners. There are athletes who work very hard to win at the Olympics, and who have been seen as contenders to win the title already before the competition. Besides in figure skating unknowns don´t win there (unlike in many other sports)... And how ever many other titles a skater may have, if there is not that of the Olympic champion, the biggest title is missing from the collection.

Marjaana
 
M

mathman444

Guest
Re: Olympics

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Those events [the Olympics of 20 and 30 years ago] really mattered to the skaters, they changed their life more or less. -- tdnuva[/quote]I think this is quite true. Dorothy Hamill has said about the 1976 Olympics, it was either win the gold medal and get a contract with Ice Capades (which she eventually bought), or lose and go back to school. Scott Hamilton's victory (despite being outskated by Brian Orser in both the short and the long programs) gave him a launching pad to go on to stupendous success as an entrepreneur and skating impresario. Katerina Witt's achievements made her a cold war heroine in her own country and endeared her to the West as well.

After Kristi's win in 1992, she sat down with her financial advisors to go over the money. She decided that she could make about an equal amount of money by staying eligible, and perhaps competing again in 1994, or by going pro immediately. Since the money was equal, she made her decision based on other factors.

So is it all about the money after all? I don't think so. Any competitor still wants to prove that he or she is the best in the biggest arena:

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>How ever many other titles a skater may have, if there is not that of the Olympic champion, the biggest title is missing from the collection. -- Jaana[/quote]Quite so.

And yet, at the end of the day, what do we remember about our favorite athletes? I will remember Michelle Kwan's performance of the Red Violin at the 1999 World's exhibition (having just lost the championship), her East of Eden at the Washington pro-am in 1998 and her Rachmainov short program at the 1998 Goodwill Games (both following her 1998 Olympic disappointment), her Fields of Gold at the Hershey's Kisses show in 2002, The Feeling Begins at 2002 Skate America, and the resplendent joy of the season just passed. I will delight in these memories long after I have forgotten how many medals she won.

Mathman
 
A

amyp3

Guest
Re: Olympics

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I can be happy for the "lucky" winners, but I will always see a difference between someone who won and a true champion which only time can measure.[/quote]:lol:

Lucky winners. True champion. Um, and gee, I thought anyone who wins a major championship like the Olympics is a champion.

If your definition of "true champion" is how many other gold medals someone has one, then I'm curious where your cutoff line is. Didn't Dorothy win just one (or two) Worlds? Didn't Kristi Y. just win one nat and one World title (or was it two), all in the space of a year? Or are Kristi and Dorothy true champions, but Tara, for example, isn't just because you don't like Tara? :p

How about Ilia Kulik and no world title? Urmanov and his attempts to come back and win a Worlds before injury ended it?

Is Sarah a "false champion?" Did she just fall off the turnip truck outside the Delta Center one day and say, "Kin ah be in yore little old skating competition?" Somebody said yes, and she just happened to stay on her feet while everyone else fell.:rolleyes:

As others have pointed out, you have to be awfully damn good to make the Olympic team, especially in certain countries. Sarah was an accomplished skater with much experience and many medals behind her already by the time she made the Oly team. And she gave one of the all-time magnificent performances at an Olympic FS competition.

She fits my definition of a "true champion" because a) she won an Olympic championship, and b) she has handled herself with great class

As for Mathman's original question, the answer depends upon if you're speaking of athletes, the general public, fans of particular sports, etc. I've always been an Olympics nut. But I think the Olympic movement has lost its original ideal in many ways, especially when they let the NBA, NHL and elite tennis players into the Games. OTOH I don't begrudge figure skaters now being allowed to earn all they do even though that makes them professionals as much as the tennis and b-ball players.

I still enjoy watching the OOOOOs for the novelty of sports you don't see often, and especially for the drama of someone going for a big prize that's only offered once every four years. But it may eventually lose more and more interest from the general public because there is so much sports TV competition. It won't seem quite the huge special event it once was.

And it's probably not quite as big a deal to certain athletes. But I think it's still the ultimate prize for many of them.
 
M

mathman444

Guest
Re: Olympics

About "luck." A judged sport like ice skating has a built-in catch 22. If one competitor is clearly the best, so that there is no real competition at all -- well, as a sporting event that's a dud. On the other hand, if the event is closely contested, so that, for instance, one skater wins by a five to four split of the judging panel, this naturally leads to controversy and cries of "kill the umpire." I think that in this latter case -- remember that these are all highly trained and experienced judges who are not fans of any particular skater -- there is an element of good fortune, if only in the judges draw.

The ladies event at Salt Lake City provides the clearest possible example. Of the nine-judge panel, 5 thought that Sarah Hughes skated best in the free skate, and 4 thought that Irina Slutskaya did. If any one of those five judges had been left off the panel by the luck of the draw, then Irina might have been named the gold medal winner instead of Sarah. This consideration is independent of the actual performances, and has to do only with which countries' names were pulled out of a hat from the judging pool.

By the same token, Irina won combined first and second place votes from 5 judges, to only 4 for Michelle. Again, if the luck of the draw from the judging pool had gone slightly differently by one judge, Michelle might have placed second in the long and first overall. Again, this has nothing to do with who skated the best the night.

So who really did skate the best? Five judges go this way, four that. That's figure skating.

Mathman
 
Top