Welcome to Totallympics, the home of Olympic Sports!

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to other members, get your own private messenger, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Login | Create an Account

Maxim Fastovsky

Which Sports have International Competitions more Important than Olympic Games?

30 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, dareza said:

football and tennis.

 

why tennis? I will use Novak as example. Even if he win gold medal at OG, in future more imporant will be his GS titles at all GS tournemants. GS titles are most important for all good tennis players.

I remember asking british tennis fans if they consider murray's win in london in wimbeldon as same as winning actual wimbledon, the answer was no, was much more important to actually win wimbledon year later

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Football

 

Golf and Tennis - Give it more time. I think an Olympic title in tennis has grown in kudos over the past 30 years and may grow to have equivalence in the mind of the top tennis players in the future. Certainly I'd take a bet that Federer and Djokovic would give up one of their GS titles for an OG singles title. Golf is only just about to return to the OG so it is no contest re the majors at the moment. Time may change it, as I think it is gradually in tennis, but it'll be a long time before we know. The signs aren't good however. Golfers, particularly the American ones, are massively pampered and reluctant travellers. In tennis the top tournaments take place in many different countries, while of golf's top eight tournaments (the 4 majors and 4 WGC events) six take place in the US. In the case of the WGC events this is because of the reluctance of the top American (and they are not alone) players to travel which doesn't bode well for their commitment to Olympic participation even without the zika virus.

 

Cycling - Road cycling probably, although for all other forms I would say the OG are the tops.

 

Boxing - Unless they dump the misguided introduction of professionals.

 

Rugby Sevens - In the purely sevens format definitely the OG, but across all forms of the game it is the RWC.

 

So football and golf unequivocally and some others with provisos.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freestyle and Snowboard - X-Games may be more important than Olympics in halfpipe, slopestyle and big air.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, George_D said:

Football, Tennis and Golf

Among others :p (like road cycling) 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For sure football (at least the men's event), tennis and golf. These are those sports who have more important competitions than Olympics (what hurts me) and it is seen in the attitude of athletes (in case of men's football it's the attitude of FIFA, which makes it junior competition instead of normal).

About rugby - it is sevens, which is less popular than fifteens. But for me it's ok, it's like introducing vaulting in place of dressage.

Boxing is for me the second sick sport in the Olympic programme (after weightlifting). No other sport has so many IFs. In this situation we cannot say, who really is the best.

Road cycling - I would say that Olympics are not the most important race (what hurts me again), but in opposite to football, tennis and golf we can see the best athletes racing for it. It's like second World Championships, which I think is still less prestigous than TdF, Giro or Vuelta.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Vojthas said:

For sure football (at least the men's event), tennis and golf. These are those sports who have more important competitions than Olympics (what hurts me) and it is seen in the attitude of athletes (in case of men's football it's the attitude of FIFA, which makes it junior competition instead of normal).

About rugby - it is sevens, which is less popular than fifteens. But for me it's ok, it's like introducing vaulting in place of dressage.

Boxing is for me the second sick sport in the Olympic programme (after weightlifting). No other sport has so many IFs. In this situation we cannot say, who really is the best.

Road cycling - I would say that Olympics are not the most important race (what hurts me again), but in opposite to football, tennis and golf we can see the best athletes racing for it. It's like second World Championships, which I think is still less prestigous than TdF, Giro or Vuelta.

World champs in road cycling is definitely not as prestigious as the Grand Tours or the Classics (Flanders, Paris-Roubaix mostly), although being world champion is a lot more prestigious than Olympic gold :p 

 

As for football, it's quite logical. It's by far the biggest sport in the world and it's World Cup is, apart from the Olympics, arguably the biggest sports event in the world. There's no use in trying to 'beat' that importance and adding regular football to the Olympics makes no sense, because the calendar is already overflowing with matches. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, heywoodu said:

As for football, it's quite logical. It's by far the biggest sport in the world and it's World Cup is, apart from the Olympics, arguably the biggest sports event in the world. There's no use in trying to 'beat' that importance and adding regular football to the Olympics makes no sense, because the calendar is already overflowing with matches. 

Then maybe there is no place for football in the Olympic programme? I think it should be the most important competition for everyone. If FIFA has their own big show, then what for do they need the Olympics? Maybe it's time to change it for futsal or beach soccer?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Vojthas said:

Then maybe there is no place for football in the Olympic programme? 

I've been saying that since the day I was born :d 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Jur said:

Surprised no one said boxing.

At least 4 people mentioned boxing :p 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Vojthas said:

Then maybe there is no place for football in the Olympic programme? I think it should be the most important competition for everyone. If FIFA has their own big show, then what for do they need the Olympics? 

 

Men's football doesn't need the Olympics...but maybe the Olympics need men's football for economic reasons (for example, about 20% of tickets sold in the last 3 Olympics were for men's football...4 millions tickets).

 

Now we can probably add to the list skateboarding, surfing, BMX freestyle...and all those X-Games events in which "performers" care more about their pants than an Olympic medal.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do women's football WCh isn't better than the Olympic tournament?

And I think now we have men's ice hockey in this list too.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20-6-2016 at 09:50, De_Gambassi said:

 

For some athletes, the biggest prize in their sport is not an option, so the olympics became their by default-objective. A cyclist like Tom Dumoulin is not going to win a GT anytime soon (even, if we've seen worse in cycling :p) , but he makes a great deal of winning the olympics.

 

Likewise, a young polish rugby players is never going to win the 15 a side rugby world cup (it'm crushing your dream here I know :p), but he might have a shot at participating to the Olympics and that objective might become his main goal.

 

It doesn't make the olympics the more important event of the lot, but simply the biggest event one athlete could successfully win/particpate to.

 

On 20-6-2016 at 10:59, heywoodu said:

Well yeah, there's a ton of cyclists who are among the best ever but still don't have a single chance to ever win a GT. Think of Cancellara, Sagan, Cavendish and so on. For time trial specialists (like Dumoulin), sprinters (like Cavendish) and one-day specialists (like Sagan, though of course he can sprint great too) winning a GT is not realistic, which also means winning a GT is not the biggest thing one can do in cycling unlike media loves to say :p 

 

Apart from that, I only remember Vino won the 2012 Olympic gold because of the controverse of him buying the gold medal, not because of the race itself. Tour de France (and in a smaller way the Giro and Vuelta) and especially the big classics like Flanders, LBL and Paris-Roubaix are in my opinion way, way bigger races to win. 

Not really contributing to this topic, but just wanted to highlight these comments, haha

Edited by Dennis
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dennis said:

 

Not really contributing to this topic, but just wanted to highlight these comments, haha

:lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor