What should the Olympics consist of? Let’s get one thing out of the way. I am not suggesting we go back to Corinthian amateurism. We are way beyond that – there are only two sports left where professionals are ineligible, and in the modern era we want to see the best competitors contesting at the highest level. So what should be included?
First and foremost are events that demonstrate objective individual athletic achievement in a manifestly natural discipline: running faster, jumping further, leaping higher, throwing further. What about the specific varieties of these? Racing over 100m, 200m, 400m, 800m, 1500m etc makes sense, especially when you know that individual athletes are never the best over a wide range of these. What about different throwing disciplines? Okay it is natural to throw round stones, flat stones and spears. So I accept shot put, discus and javelin. Hammer is more debatable but a case can be made. What about pole vault? Well it is a natural discipline, and the way it has hugely benefited from modern material technology only adds to the skill required and the spectacle.
But the proliferation of disciplines in some sports brings the Games into disrepute. Indeed, were it not for the huge well of enduring reverence they might have become a laughing stock. The main culprit is swimming. It is completely artificial to be forced to swim on your back, or not to be submerged for more than 15m, or to make all the up and down leg movements simultaneous, or to keep your elbows under the water. You can learn to rub your belly while patting your head, but it isn’t sport. There are real competitions for running 100m backwards, but we don’t want them in the Olympics. Of course swimming should be there and it should encompass different distances, but with no restriction on how you propel yourself. That would make swimming a reasonable Olympic sport and remove the farcical overabundance of events. We should take a similar look at sailing, rowing and track cycling. (Keirin starts with a silly man pootling round on a moped with his lunch.)
Multi-discipline events with contrived weighting schemes also fail the ‘manifestly natural’ test. Minor changes to the formula might produce different winners. Triathlon is a pure race but the lengths of the components are effectively artificial weightings. So no heptathlon, no decathlon, no triathlon.
For my next pruning, achievement should be objective. That means no subjective scoring. That’s right, no gymnastics, no diving and certainly no synchronized swimming. Not even boxing, where the judges are more akin to independent video referees trying to decide objectively how many punches they see that should count. The degree of subjectivity and uncertainty is just too great.
Before you even say it, you’re wrong. The Ancient Olympics did not include gymnastics, nor anything that was judged. Indeed, at first they were just running tournaments. Later, boxing and wrestling were included as well as chariot racing. Boxing wasn’t judged – you won by making your opponent surrender or by being killed! (Some of the other Ancient Games did include cultural events that were judged such as poetry competitions.)
What about strongly established one-to-one or doubles sports like fencing or badminton, or team sports like hockey? These are bound to have contrived rules, but should we allow them? With caveats perhaps. Firstly, no sport which already has a single prestigious international tournament regarded as the pinnacle of achievement. Second, only sports which enjoy widespread international participation. Third, no proliferation of events. So no football, baseball, polo or sumo. Tennis is a moot case.
What we could definitely do without is artificial team variations of individual disciplines. Specifically relay events in running and swimming and combined team events such as in fencing. Team cycling has a special justification because the team is greater than the sum of its parts.
Finally, the Olympics should be limited to athletic achievement. It would be plain wrong to include darts, snooker or poker. Here is a simple test. Can you imagine a fifty-year-old winning gold? If so, the activity shouldn’t be included. Golf should not be included. Neither should shooting nor equestrian.
The two activities I alluded to at the beginning are squash and contract bridge. Squash yes, bridge no.