Which Sports have International Competitions more Important than Olympic Games?

[AmericanHero40 241]

I was talking to a friend of mine and we got to the subject of competitons that are more important, right now we can only name 3

 

Football - World Cup, Euro obviously mean much more

Tennis and Golf - Majors

Possibly Ice Hockey now with the problems of the NHL inclussion on Pyongchang

and used to be Baseball since MLB players didnt show up and will have to get some sort of agreement if the federation wants baseball to be a bigger part of the olympics (probably wont happen since just like NHL it's in the middle of the MLB season , even towards the end of it)

[amen09 392]

Football and tennis 

[LDOG 2,468]

Rugby - sevens is seen as a phase to develop young players skills for many top nations of the sport. Some players become specialists in sevens, but most often it's because they weren't good enough to become top players in the XV game.

 

Boxing - top boxers become pros in most countries.

 

Cycling Road - Tour de France, Giro, etc are more important.

 

I would also say that men's basketball is starting to take the football path, in a few olympic cicles we could end up with a youth tournament while the world cup gains the most relevance (such is the plan of NBA).

[De_Gambassi 1,267]

Let's add Sailing to these lists (Vendée Glove, America's Cup, Volvo Race, etc.) and we are probably done.

 

[Pavlo 149]

as to cycling and tennis it depends, i think we will find athletes more eager on Olympics than Grand Slam or Le Tour. I think it`s too general to write like LDOG. As to boxing, hmm...olympic and pro are a bit different sports but sure, pro boxing is far more prestiguous.

 

I think golf and men`s football are the best examples in this case. Rugby 7s is also a bit different than other versions of this sport so i`m not sure if i can write that RUGBY has more important events than olympic 7s.

[De_Gambassi 1,267]

il y a 35 minutes, Pavlo a déclaré:

as to cycling and tennis it depends, i think we will find athletes more eager on Olympics than Grand Slam or Le Tour. I think it`s too general to write like LDOG. As to boxing, hmm...olympic and pro are a bit different sports but sure, pro boxing is far more prestiguous.

 

I think golf and men`s football are the best examples in this case. Rugby 7s is also a bit different than other versions of this sport so i`m not sure if i can write that RUGBY has more important events than olympic 7s.

 

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 ) , 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 ), 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.

Edited June 20, 2016 by De_Gambassi

[LDOG 2,468]

^it's always a matter of perspectives, of course. But my criteria to define prestige here is seeing if it is important to everyone involved in said sport.

 

Example: in Gymnastics, the olympics is the most important competition for every single top gymnast, not even one of them will be absent except for injuries. Meanwhile in Golf or Tennis a lot of top players are dropping out, something they wouldn't ever do for a major or GS, therefore, it's not the most important competition in those sport.

 

Same goes for boxing or rugby 7s regardless of the small differences, the best pros or union players could be in Rio if they wanted, but in majority they won't be.

[heywoodu 16,004]

1 hour ago, 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 ) , but he makes a great deal of winning the olympics.

 

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  

 

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. 

Edited June 20, 2016 by heywoodu

[De_Gambassi 1,267]

il y a 8 minutes, heywoodu a déclaré:

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. 

 

Same here. 

[Pavlo 149]

4 godziny temu, De_Gambassi napisał:

 

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 ) , 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 ), 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.

how could you?? , oh maybe u have the same opinion about polish golf and cricket? . You know, benefits of winning Olympics are in many countries quite big. You can also become a "legend" while winning world champs doesn`t give you this status. I think it`s individual matter.

As to the main question, yes - winning rugby world cup gives probably more "pride" than winning gold in rugby 7s but for rugby 7s players olympic gold is their goal...

Edited June 20, 2016 by Pavlo