[MClutterbuck]

Didn't read all the replies, short on time at the moment. However, the main issue I see here unfortunately started long ago when they began to let professional athletes into the Olympics. Ridiculous! Bunch of spoiled millionaires playing for their countries. I'm not sure if it was basketball or another sport that started it but when we put together the first Dream Team with Jordan, Magic and all these amazing basketball players to go play all the amateur best of other countries the Olympics took a serious downturn.


Golf in the Olympics is great, I'm all for it. Professional athletes, while they probably sell tickets, advertising and tv rights just shouldn't be allowed.

David, this is very romantic and I agreed for a long time, but it would probably have led to the dissapearance of Olympics as nobody wants to see third rate athletes. Olympics had to adapt to modern times.

[Kalen Braley]

Agreed ClutterBuck,

And the reality now is....the vast majority of Olympians are in fact not amateurs as they receive sponsorship money from corporations and government to train and compete.

[David Davis]

Marcos,


Your right of course and yes it's a romantic thought. I just miss as I think other have mentioned the thought of the Olympics being what it's all about for your sport. The thrill of victory and agony of defeat in spending a lifetime training for the pinnacle of your sport and highest honor of achieving the Gold Medal. Tennis was the same way when they included it in the Olympics allowing pros to play. Just sad moments in Olympic history as far as I'm concerned. As a result I don't even bother watch it anymore. If I want to watch the ultimate in basketball I watch the NBA playoffs and final, or perhaps better yet the Final Four D1NCAA's. Tennis the grand slams, Golf the majors etc etc. Sure it's good for the interest but the athletes don't share this interest and that detracts too much from the games to garnish my interest.

[Tom_Doak]

I remember when we went for the pre-presentation meeting, the chairman of the Rio Organizing Committee told us that the most important part of Rio's bid to host the Games was that they would host ALL the competitions in the city itself, and that ALL of the athletes would stay at the Olympic Village.  I wondered at the time if they would really be able to follow through on that, but it sounded like a neat vision to me.  Orgies aside, I think the world's best golfers would be fortunate to mingle for a few days with great athletes from other sports who are in it for the love of the game.


However, I agree that all the hopes of the golf business that the Olympics will be key to "growing the game around the world" is probably just wishful thinking and b.s.  Hopefully it will have a bit of impact in South America, and perhaps in whatever country or countries might produce an unexpected medalist.  But it sure isn't going to change the perception of the president of China, or overcome the fact that golf is less appealing in hot, humid locations.

[Tim_Weiman]

David Wilkie is plain ignorant about many of the matters he talks about in this article and is close to being a racist. This is one more in a series of idiotic comments about golf in Brazil. He only missed the moronic "they should have played it at Gavea".


1. There is a huge high and middle-high income segment in Brazil that can benefit from a public course. In Rio and surrounding areas only there has to be more than 1 million people that can afford golf.


2. Rio and Brasil in general need golf courses to attract tourism. The golf course if well managed could be a large boost to tourism in Brazil at a time they need it.


3. Contrary to another Olympic pool/stadium and much of the infrastruture created around Olympics and even Swimming competitions, the golf course will serve a clear purpose after completion of the games.


4. Athletes, no matter how professional, and no matter how important other tournaments they play in are relataive to the Olympics, are Olympians. Tell Manu Ginobili that he is not an Olympic Golf Medealist or an Olympian because he has 4 NBA rings and at the age of 38 will return to the Olympics after trying to get his 5th ring.


5. Tell Spieth he is not an Olympian because he will sleep away from the Olympic Village most nights he is at the games?


6. Tell excellent African and Indian golfers their countrymen are not "entitled" to have good golf courses.


7. Why does Scotland have the right to build hundreds of golf courses in a small country and Brazil and India can´t have a few dozen courses in huge countries if built responsibly?


8. Isn´t a privately funded golf course designed and built by Hanse, presumably under very strict guidelines with respect to what is appropriate environmentally better than a dump?

I must take exception to your point #3. The Los Angeles Swim Stadium, built for the 1932 Olympics in the shadow of the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, is still being used by the local community and will probably make it to its 100 year mark.


As late as the 1968 Olympic Trials it was still considered by some to be the best (fastest) pool in the world, but since its inception it has mostly been used by the community, not big time swimming competitions.

[MClutterbuck]

David Wilkie is plain ignorant about many of the matters he talks about in this article and is close to being a racist. This is one more in a series of idiotic comments about golf in Brazil. He only missed the moronic "they should have played it at Gavea".


1. There is a huge high and middle-high income segment in Brazil that can benefit from a public course. In Rio and surrounding areas only there has to be more than 1 million people that can afford golf.


2. Rio and Brasil in general need golf courses to attract tourism. The golf course if well managed could be a large boost to tourism in Brazil at a time they need it.


3. Contrary to another Olympic pool/stadium and much of the infrastruture created around Olympics and even Swimming competitions, the golf course will serve a clear purpose after completion of the games.


4. Athletes, no matter how professional, and no matter how important other tournaments they play in are relataive to the Olympics, are Olympians. Tell Manu Ginobili that he is not an Olympic Golf Medealist or an Olympian because he has 4 NBA rings and at the age of 38 will return to the Olympics after trying to get his 5th ring.


5. Tell Spieth he is not an Olympian because he will sleep away from the Olympic Village most nights he is at the games?


6. Tell excellent African and Indian golfers their countrymen are not "entitled" to have good golf courses.


7. Why does Scotland have the right to build hundreds of golf courses in a small country and Brazil and India can´t have a few dozen courses in huge countries if built responsibly?


8. Isn´t a privately funded golf course designed and built by Hanse, presumably under very strict guidelines with respect to what is appropriate environmentally better than a dump?

I must take exception to your point #3. The Los Angeles Swim Stadium, built for the 1932 Olympics in the shadow of the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, is still being used by the local community and will probably make it to its 100 year mark.


As late as the 1968 Olympic Trials it was still considered by some to be the best (fastest) pool in the world, but since its inception it has mostly been used by the community, not big time swimming competitions.

Tim, I did not mean to say that every Olympic building around the world gets little use. Many do serve a purpose for decades. Even in these cases, they normally replace another existing facility that is perfectly adequate for locals to train. In the case of this particular golf course, it brings something to Rio that was non-existent and if well managed will bring benefits for decades. I know there is a big "if" there.

[jeffwarne]

However, I agree that all the hopes of the golf business that the Olympics will be key to "growing the game around the world" is probably just wishful thinking and b.s.  Hopefully it will have a bit of impact in South America, and perhaps in whatever country or countries might produce an unexpected medalist.  But it sure isn't going to change the perception of the president of China, or overcome the fact that golf is less appealing in hot, humid locations.

I've never been a "grow the game" guy as I believe anything artificially stimulated suffers painful contractions later.
I've always felt golf grew best naturally by dwelling on the positive aspects of the game, the people involved, and the potential doors that could be opened-as well as the life lessons the game can teach.


I'm surprised and saddened so many golfers are against golf in the Olympics, It's not as if the Olympics are a squeaky clean event without scandal or controversy.
Would little girls even contemplate gymnastics if the weren't blasted ad nauseum on TV for two weeks every four years?
(will golf have special exhibition night after the event is over like gymnastics does?)
If it's not "growing" the sport of gymnastics, it's certainly stabilizing it.


Having golf on the world's stage along with other world popular sports; having countries where golf is not booming field an Olympic  golf team;creating facilities for their teams.
It's hard for me to see how that won't stimulate, if not grow the game worldwide.


I see absolutely no harm in golf being in the Olympics, and many, including me, are looking forward to watching.
It's not as if it's unprecedented. having been featured over 100 years ago in the Olympics.
A bit like the Masters, the field will be somewhat weak in depth, but there will be many worthy players-and it doesn't stop The masters from being the best event in the world.


I'd say it will be much more interesting and enjoyable than the TPC, the strongest field in golf.
or even the Ryder Cup which is closed to all but one country and a Continent-and has at times featured overly boorish unsportsmanlike behavior over the past few years in what is supposed to be an exhibition.


What I don't get is how a 62 year old ex swimmer who won one of about 50 golf medals given out in swimming 40 years ago has the gall to criticize one of the greatest sportsmen of all time with such strong terms as "absolute bullshit", and participate in a sport (golf) where his tiny country has HUNDREDS of golf courses, and deny a developing huge country the right to build a few and attempt to spur participation against admittedly difficult odds.
It's OK to respectfully not agree with Nicklaus-but not to call him out as if he doesn't believe what he's saying.


To deny a child the right to dream just because YOU think it is impractical and "bullshit" is wrong.


As far as living in the Village.
seriously?
10000 atheletes-100,000 condoms.
Sounds perfect if you're team USA female soccer player.
A married tour player not named Tiger Woods-not so much.


Sorry Steve.
Just reread Wilkie's comments.
Pure jealousy (everything was harder in my day [size=78%])[/size]
He should be celebrating his home country's finest sports asset-golf.
Not bashing it.
Let's let other countries decide what's best for them in their sports (and golf) development.


Ignorantly yours,
Jeff  (1979 men's one handed four hole relay champion)

[Niall C]

Jeff

You are coming at it from a golf perspective whereas Wilkie is coming at it from an Olympic perspective. If I read him correctly he believes that the Olympics is being devalued by including sports where an Olympic gold medal isn't the most cherished honour you can win, and in that respect I think he's 100% correct. For top golfers, the Olympics is a nice novelty which it would appear some of them can do without. At the end of their careers, will an Olympic medal be worth more than having a replica of the Claret Jug or whatever ? Very doubtful IMO.

Niall

[jeffwarne]

Jeff

You are coming at it from a golf perspective whereas Wilkie is coming at it from an Olympic perspective. If I read him correctly he believes that the Olympics is being devalued by including sports where an Olympic gold medal isn't the most cherished honour you can win, and in that respect I think he's 100% correct. For top golfers, the Olympics is a nice novelty which it would appear some of them can do without. At the end of their careers, will an Olympic medal be worth more than having a replica of the Claret Jug or whatever ? Very doubtful IMO.

Niall

Nial.
What you are saying is true-I'm not denying that.
But that ship sailed, a LONG time ago.
But Wilkie said far more than that-I addressed those remarks.
If/as the Olympics slip slowly from relevance do they start pulling sports down to the the standard being "the Olympics being the most important" and eliminating if an event becomes bigger-I think not.
I think it might be premature to state that winning the Olympics in golf isn't a major goal of golfers.
Maybe not today as the goals and dreams of this generation were groomed by The Masters and Claret Jug.
But who is to say in 10-20 years-IF we give it a chance-especially in developing countries where making the team might be more easily attainable as opposed to the PGA tour.

[MClutterbuck]

Agree with Jeff. If Wilkies had stopped at "Olympic Games to me should only include amateur sports where the Games are the highlight of a career" then we could debate what sports would still be included, but at least it would be a fair exchange of ideas.


What he said went way beyond that and was ignorant and racist.

[MClutterbuck]

The good part about this is that golf at the Games might be tinkered for Tokyo and they can come up with a true team event, with 2, 3 or 4 players a side.

[JLahrman]

He may have a point about the golf...but I'm calling bs on his Olympic village thing to be a "real Olympian"

The entire thing is a big hookup party with booze and debauchery galore....

http://espn.go.com/olympics/summer/2012/story/_/id/8133052/athletes-spill-details-dirty-secrets-olympic-village-espn-magazine

Reminds me of this classic report (NSFW, sort of): http://www.theonion.com/video/olympic-village-tour-see-where-the-athletes-live-t-35266

The Onion can sometimes be your most accurate news source.

[Niall C]

Jeff


I don't think you have to do a sport down to make the Olympics the biggest event in that sport. I think Wilkie was maybe saying the opposite. Olympics should go back to its core values and only have sports where the Olympic gold is the top prize. That would be to the benefit of the Olympics, and as an aside wouldn't necessarily do that particular sport any harm as it already has it's own pinnacle of achievement. That's certainly my interpretation.


I suppose in some respects tennis is a reasonable comparison to golf in so much as it has its own 4 slams and high earning superstars. Murray won gold last time and by all accounts Federer, who he beat in the final, was gutted as he's never won an Olympic gold. Could be wrong but I think the other big two played as well but how seriously they took it I don't know. Murray by all accounts was thrilled and I believe ranks it along side his two slams. Brits might agree with him but will tennis fans from elsewhere ?


Where the comparison to tennis falls however is that the big 4 in tennis are different nationalities and pretty well all the top players could be accommodated. Given that each country will be restricted as to how many players they can send, can you say the same of golf ? And if you don't have all the top guys there like you do at the majors, can it really reach the same level ?


Niall

[Niall C]

What he said went way beyond that and was ignorant and racist.

Please explain. I've read his comments several times now and fail to see where he is being ignorant and racist.


Niall

[jeffwarne]

Niall,
Nice that you interpret it that way-we all are entitled to our interpretations.
Too bad that's not what he actually said- even if that's what perhaps he meant.


He could've said "having sports where the Olympics is not the pinnacle is absolute bullshit"
but he didn't and went off on a hypocritical golf tangent.


I think an Olympic Medal in golf will turn out to be a big deal, and eventually the better players and schedule makers will see the light.
the first Masters was NOT a big deal then-

[Bruce Katona]

The Olympics are supposed to be about the spirit of amateur competiton on the biggest stage for all the world to witness.  80%-85% of all the Olympic competitors do not win a medal.  These 80%-85% attend the games to compete against the other best athletes in the world in their sport; its an achievement of a lifetime to be named to an Olympic squad representing your country.
 
I don't know how many of you have ever met an Olympic athlete - I have the please of meeting and knowing two, both of who competed for the USA:
 1. A swimmer from Harvard who won a silver medal in the Montreal Olympics.
 2. Our daughter's field hockey coach who competed in the Atlanta Olymics.  He wears his Olymic ring proudly every  day.
 
The Olympics (and FIFA for that matter) have become all about the money. No matter what you think of the current USA President's politics, he went to pitch FIFA to bring the World Cup back to the USA and was rebuffed with the cometition awarded to where - 2018 to Russia & 2022 to Qatar - I guess having the World Cup in the USA with the Leader of the Free World making the pitch wasn't enough for some of the voters.
 
The list of cities bidding for the Olympics becomes less and less as the Oympic Committee demands more and more facilities at greater cost. Many of these facilities can't be multi-purposed after the Games are complete and thus have a shelf life of a few weeks or a month. Here in the good ol US of A, we tend to not do things if its a money loser (money pit) or at least a break even where some social or community benefit can be gainded by improving community facilities. 
 
But what do I know....dumb American.

[JJShanley]

As someone who supported the English and American bids for two next WCs, I agree.  You have 30 ready-made WC venues in the U.S.  (The 30 stadia that do not host the Raiders, without taking into account college stadia) and England has a similar situation.


Does any other Olympic stadium get as much use as the 1996 Atlanta venue?

[Kalen Braley]

He may have a point about the golf...but I'm calling bs on his Olympic village thing to be a "real Olympian"

The entire thing is a big hookup party with booze and debauchery galore....

http://espn.go.com/olympics/summer/2012/story/_/id/8133052/athletes-spill-details-dirty-secrets-olympic-village-espn-magazine

Reminds me of this classic report (NSFW, sort of): http://www.theonion.com/video/olympic-village-tour-see-where-the-athletes-live-t-35266

The Onion can sometimes be your most accurate news source.

Ha ha, hilarious!!!

Agreed, the Onion wouldn't be so successful if most of its stories weren't so true to real life!!

[Tim_Weiman]

David Wilkie is plain ignorant about many of the matters he talks about in this article and is close to being a racist. This is one more in a series of idiotic comments about golf in Brazil. He only missed the moronic "they should have played it at Gavea".


1. There is a huge high and middle-high income segment in Brazil that can benefit from a public course. In Rio and surrounding areas only there has to be more than 1 million people that can afford golf.


2. Rio and Brasil in general need golf courses to attract tourism. The golf course if well managed could be a large boost to tourism in Brazil at a time they need it.


3. Contrary to another Olympic pool/stadium and much of the infrastruture created around Olympics and even Swimming competitions, the golf course will serve a clear purpose after completion of the games.


4. Athletes, no matter how professional, and no matter how important other tournaments they play in are relataive to the Olympics, are Olympians. Tell Manu Ginobili that he is not an Olympic Golf Medealist or an Olympian because he has 4 NBA rings and at the age of 38 will return to the Olympics after trying to get his 5th ring.


5. Tell Spieth he is not an Olympian because he will sleep away from the Olympic Village most nights he is at the games?


6. Tell excellent African and Indian golfers their countrymen are not "entitled" to have good golf courses.


7. Why does Scotland have the right to build hundreds of golf courses in a small country and Brazil and India can´t have a few dozen courses in huge countries if built responsibly?


8. Isn´t a privately funded golf course designed and built by Hanse, presumably under very strict guidelines with respect to what is appropriate environmentally better than a dump?

I must take exception to your point #3. The Los Angeles Swim Stadium, built for the 1932 Olympics in the shadow of the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, is still being used by the local community and will probably make it to its 100 year mark.


As late as the 1968 Olympic Trials it was still considered by some to be the best (fastest) pool in the world, but since its inception it has mostly been used by the community, not big time swimming competitions.

Tim, I did not mean to say that every Olympic building around the world gets little use. Many do serve a purpose for decades. Even in these cases, they normally replace another existing facility that is perfectly adequate for locals to train. In the case of this particular golf course, it brings something to Rio that was non-existent and if well managed will bring benefits for decades. I know there is a big "if" there.

To my knowledge, there was nothing like the LA Swim Stadium when it was built for the 1932 Olympics. But, to your point, when the 1984 Olympics came around, a new facility was built less than a mile away. Nonetheless, these two facilities serve two different purposes: the LA Swim Stadium is really now a community pool whereas the pool built for the 1984 Olympics (with private funding) is on the USC campus and is used by the university swim programs.


The situation in LA aside, if your real point is that facilities built for Olympic Games should be designed to benefit the community long after, I certainly agree.


Has this really happened very often? I don't have a clue.

[Kalen Braley]

The photos speak for themselves...

http://www.businessinsider.com/abandoned-olympic-venues-around-the-world-photos-2015-8

[MClutterbuck]

What he said went way beyond that and was ignorant and racist.

Please explain. I've read his comments several times now and fail to see where he is being ignorant and racist.


Niall

Niall, you can check out my 8 points above for some background on what I am stating. Especially 1, 2, 6 and 7.


To focus on just 1 paragraph of the article:


“I think it’s wrong for those players to say there aren’t enough Indians or Africans playing the game without realising the impact and environmental damage a golf course would do in those countries,” said Wilkie. “You just have to go to those underdeveloped countries in terms of golf and look at the amount of money it would take to build a golf course and the destruction it would cause of forests"  "It’s utter rubbish to pretend that, by making golf part of the Olympic Games, you’re going to attract a poor guy in India to play. They just can’t afford it."

I think he is being racist and xenophobic, as well as ignorant in dismissings Indians, Africans (and Brazilians in the context of the article) from the game of golf. He is ignorant because he does not understand there is a huge middle class that can play. He is ignorant because he does not understand jobs, and especially what a caddy program can do. He is ignorant because he believes a golf course, one golf course, in a country as huge as Brazil (or India or the whole of Africa) will destroy a forest when a few hundred golf courses exist in his small country. He is also condescending.

Both India and Africa (presumably Wilkies does not include South Africa) have produced world class golfers.

If private capital wants to build a public golf course in Brazil, and hopefulyl a caddy program, there is a huge mass of middle income Brazilians that can benefit from the facility. Likewise, poorer folks can benefit from a caddy program. Who knows, in a few decades we might have a Brazilian major winner such as Roberto De Vicenzo or Angel Cabrera, both of whom came from poverty.

In Argentina there is a very small town in the North, Resistencia, Chaco. By all accounts it is similar to anything in Brazil and with lots of forest around. Wilkies would have decreed no golf allowed there! However, there is a golf club there with an excellent caddy program. Two of the caddies have gone on to become 2 time PGA Tour winners. And a kid from their member youth program has also now won recently on the PGA. Three PGA tour winners in a decade growing up at the club!!! Not many clubs around the world can claim the same. Wilkies should be forced fed that story.

Finally, the existence of a golf course in Rio, open to tourism might very well provide economic benefits that might just allow an impoverished country to actually save more forest than the very few trees Hanse had to take out.

Now, I will be the first one to say the country is a mess and they might well likely mismanage the course as other countries have mismanaged facilities. Mess and all, the Football World Cup in Brazil was excellent. Lets give them a chance at golf.

[Jon Wiggett]

I don't see the racism in your example either.

[MClutterbuck]

So why again somebody from Scotland determines that a country that is 100 times larger than their own in area, and has 40 times the population of Scotland, and not even 5% of the number of courses, and that by all accounts is richer than Scotland was when the bulk of Scottish courses were built should not build one public golf course paid for by a private developer using a first class architect that will apply their own environmental standards on top of those of Brazil (which are actually quite strict)?


Because Brazilians are different and poorer and should be doing other things rather than golf...


 

[Jon Wiggett]

So why again somebody from Scotland determines that a country that is 100 times larger than their own in area, and has 40 times the population of Scotland, and not even 5% of the number of courses, and that by all accounts is richer than Scotland was when the bulk of Scottish courses were built should not build one public golf course paid for by a private developer using a first class architect that will apply their own environmental standards on top of those of Brazil (which are actually quite strict)?


Because Brazilians are different and poorer and should be doing other things rather than golf...

Brazilian is a nationality not a race to start with so you are confusing issues of nationality with race. Secondly, as far as I can see he is just expressing his opinion that maybe they might have other priorities other than building golf courses. He has not said they should not do something because of their race which would be racist. Wilkie's position is no more racist than saying someone cannot have an opinion because they come from Scotland. You may find such an opinion wrong or small minded but that does not make it racist.


Jon

[Mark Chaplin]

Wilkie has done rather well out of his gold.

As for Americans never having heard of him just remember US TV didn't even show Bolt live winning the 100m in London. It was shown 5 hours later. The Paralympics, are you aware every session in the stadium in London SOLD OUT, everyone wanted to see the superhumans in action?

The World Cup is a total disgrace, corruption is the only key to getting the tournament.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()