The Olympic Thread!

lightningbolt · Post by **lightningbolt** » 30 Aug 2004 20:14

Shit Clay, you sure anwer his question!

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 30 Aug 2004 21:19

Yeah but considering our population Australia kicked butt!!

Damn I sound so patriotic.

- patiotism is fucked

The mens marathon was really cool! Religious nutters are great!!

I really like Max's drug olympics - It would be cool to see just how fast a we can make a human run with modern science etc! It seems a bit hypocritical that you aren't allowed to take drugs considering all the other things you can do to give athletes an advantage - better training regimes, better shoes, plus all kinds of different stuff - the reason Australia does so well for our population is because we spend so much money in sporting research and training. We are the leaders in the world in many areas of sporting research and we focus it onto creating the best athletes - so people who aren't already really good don't benefit as much as people like Ian Thorpe and Jana Pittman. So Australian athletes already have such a big advantage over athletes from countries like Indonesia that overall it is no surprise that we get a lot more medals than them despite them having ten times more people. So what is the problem with drugs? The playing field is already unequal - if the fact that drugs give people an advantage was really an issue they should make all athletes train in the same manner as well and wear the same shoes and the same equipment etc.

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 31 Aug 2004 08:35

The playing field is already unequal - if the fact that drugs give people an advantage was really an issue they should make all athletes train in the same manner as well and wear the same shoes and the same equipment etc.

Word to that. I always thought that it was particularly unfair that bicycle racers could use whatever bicycles their country chose to supply them with. My country in particular (and several others too, I'm sure) supply their athletes with bicycles that cost far more than my car, and I'm refering to the track-bikes here (track-racing bicycles do not even have gear shifters or brakes). It already seems like bullshit that some get to use state-of-the-art super high tech equipment and in theory they compete fairly against teams without a half-million dollar budget for bicycles. If teams are not limited by their expenditure on equipment, than I think it seems relatively fair that other teams that can't afford that equipment should choose a less expensive chemical alternative to give their athletes an advantage. I feel fortunate to play a game where equipment is as inexpensive as a modestly priced pair of tennis shoes and a couple of bean-bags.

Juana · Post by **Juana** » 31 Aug 2004 14:19

Carly Patterson rocks. I watched her compete last night. I think shes like the second women from the US to win the all around. I think, or maybe it just hasnt happend for like 20 years. Its one of them.

Though some think Carly's gold is more worthy because Mary Lou Renton won the year that the Russian's boycotted the Olympics (remember that?!) and it also was that same year that Russia had the best gymnasts and were contenders for the gold (as I understood it). But none-the-less, Mary Lou Renton rocked back then...I remember she got a perfect 10 in one event (vault?) anyway, Carly rocked too and definitely deserved gold. I missed the rhythmic stuff - that's my favorite...those rhythmic gymnasts would make insane freestylers IMHO.

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 31 Aug 2004 20:33

I missed the rhythmic stuff - that's my favorite...those rhythmic gymnasts would make insane freestylers IMHO

Yeah, I'd forgotten all about that too. What a gyp. I think some of what they do with the streamers is pretty fruity, but their skills of object manipulation, and their balance, grace, and flexibility are awesome. I wish I'd gotten to see some of it, since it doesn't come up much outside of the Olympics. I look to stuff like that for inspiration.