Jump to content

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


ahjfcshfghb

Totallympics Fanatic
  • Content Count

    553
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Posts posted by ahjfcshfghb


  1. @heywoodu @dcro

    I edited the last paragraph. With a little inspiration, haha. 

     

     

    ......It’s a welcome development- but it also comes with a significant problem-  it would have made for a better competition, though, if the number of women was raised to meet that of the men, rather than sacrificing some of the male quotas that enabled many smaller nations, for example, to take part. If two women’s hockey teams, which total over 40 athletes, are added, that could take many male quotas from smaller teams and sharply decrease their numbers. As we saw with canoe slalom, the IOC was so reluctant to add extra athletes for a women’s C2 that it excluded men’s C2, which utterly decimated the event to the point that the International Canoe Federation no longer even recognizes it. It’s important to remember that when we have a conversation about gender equality, we must also consider that there might be some merit to keeping around traditional events of the past that don’t necessarily conform. Being cancelled after so much hard work, effort and care over the years to get to where you are is something that I hope no athlete, or event, should ever experience- and robbing the Olympics of staple events, or the many nations which participate for the sake of participating, will make the Olympics far less diverse and engaging. Yet another thing that makes the Olympics special that is vital we keep around. We must question if, perhaps, those two women’s hockey teams might be worth it after all.

     

    I know that controlling the number of athletes is an important thing, and perhaps, it is one of the main talking points that this all boils down to. If there were infinite athletes, or perhaps infinite time, there would be no need to debate whether events were unnecessarily taking up spots. But that is not our world, and I perhaps something like Synchronized Skating, with up to 20 members per team, might require an extra part of a building to accommodate. However, I would be surprised if numbers were the only reason that, say, thirty extra women can’t compete in women’s bobsleigh. .......

    • Like 1

  2. 6 minutes ago, heywoodu said:

    But I don't think the Olympics should serve as a way to start some event from scratch. Events should already be interesting and competitive enough to deserve a place in the Olympics, so basically the other way around compared to what the IOC tries to do. All women's Nordic combined has so far is a bunch of 15-year old girls starting it and a handful of older ones who are happy there is finally an international competition or two.

     

    I think my main problem is that it's bordering on insanity to finalize the list of events for the Olympics only 3 years before the Olympics. If you do it one cycle earlier, say 7 years, new events at least get the chance to grow up into something competitive.

    At least Female Nordic Combined exists, and I'm not saying it'll be perfect by any means, but it could evolve decently in four years, it would, I think, add more to the Games than mixed short track or ski jumping.

     

    Definitely agree on the 7 years thing


  3. 6 minutes ago, heywoodu said:

    I wouldn't know where one might get this published, but I definitely like it. Although I don't agree with everything, by the way. My opinion on women's Nordic combined is clear I think (it should be added at some point, but 2022 is way too early considering there's not even a decently filled Continental Cup yet, let alone a World Cup), and any women's bobsleigh event (monobob or 4-woman, no difference in that) should only be added after several years of World Cup races. Also, adding two women's ice hockey teams, sure, but not when it costs quotas for other events. Just have 46 more athletes at the Games, it's not a problem. Takes like a half building extra. 

     

    I suppose my reasoning for Women's Nordic Combined is, why not? It would only serve the get the event out there further. It's definitely a point to be made that the quality of competition will be way lower than the men's event, but we've seen that plenty of times. Women's hockey used to be Canada and US defeating everyone 10-0, and people still ate that up. 

    Bobsleigh doesn't even have a real following, but I was pretty much thinking, ok, if they're willing to build a monobob WC from scratch for four years, why not the four-woman? At least Nordic Combined has something. Though in saying that Bobsleigh kind of does too. 

    @dcro It really does all boil down to the athlete limits. It's a big shame, as I said. I should probably elaborate on that a bit more, though I'm trying to convince a wider audience with this, so I thought I'd focus on the gender equality angle as everyone can get behind that. Even if you're a total Social Justice Warrior, I just proved you can still find mixed events stupid... lol. But you could flip that back as well- supporters of women's hockey may say that it's pointless having quotas in biathlon for smaller nations if they're just going to lose all the time. The only way to please everybody and actually develop sports in smaller nations is to not cut quotas anywhere. 


  4. 2 hours ago, heywoodu said:

     

    Yes, they are. However:

     

     

    Look again :p They added a whole new women's event (that's not even 'a thing' yet apart from youth competition, but ok, I guess we'll be seeing women's monobob in the World Cup from now on, surely otherwise it wouldn't have been added so rapidly?)

    Yeah but that doesn't count. :p 

    Well, really, it'll just be the same pilot athletes going again. I doubt it'll actually add more women to the Games.


  5. I love how the IOC say they care about ‘gender equality’, yet they neglect to add:

    Women’s Nordic Combined

    Synchronized Skating

    Women’s Team Ski Jumping

    Heck, they could’ve even done something with luge or bobsleigh.

     

    Instead, they add a bunch of random mixed events that do nothing to add more women. Or even to make for a new format, except perhaps the one in snowboardcross. Nothing.

     

    Are they retarded?

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

  6. Hi- apologies if this is the wrong place to ask this but it seems to make the most sense. I have a friend in New Zealand who's interested in going to the 2022 Commonwealth Games representing a British Overseas Territory. His parents are from that Territory and born there (had British citizenship) but they moved to NZ, where my friend was born. He never got British citizenship even though his parents did and is instead a New Zealand citizen. 

    I looked at the Constitution and it said: 

    Subject to Byelaw 17(3), where a competitor was born in a Commonwealth Country which has common citizenship/passport with other Commonwealth Countries, the competitor may initially represent either the competitor's Commonwealth Country of birth; or the Commonwealth Country of birth of his or her father or mother who shares the same citizenship/passport.

    This is kind of confusing. Even though he was born in a Commonwealth Country with common citizenship (New Zealand shares with Niue etc) his parents were born in a British territory. He has NZ citizenship, while his parents, though also having NZ citizenship (sharing a passport) also have UK citizenship. But because of some weird rules around British Overseas Territory citizenship he never got the citizenship, and NZ and the British territory don't have a common passport. The word 'who' is quite confusing here as it could refer to either the parents, or the territories, sharing citizenship.
    I know plenty of people have represented UK territories despite never living in there. But these people, the ones I could find anyway, are British citizens born in Britain. Their parents' territory and the UK share a citizenship. NZ and UK territories do not, and that's the problem. 

    Do any of you know of any precedents where someone with connections to British territory but not born there, living there or a UK citizen represented that territory? The Federation wasn't able to say.

    Cheers


  7. On 2/28/2018 at 16:36, heywoodu said:

     

    I'm waiting to hear more about this... :d 

     

    And talking about biathlon with people in real life for the first time....I know, right?! That's such a relief! 

     

     

    It’s brilliant. I might go to Oslo now  maybe if I have time.

    Basically I waved a Russian flag at the Opening Ceremony and everyone wanted to know why, considering I’m American-Czech. It was all very funny.

    • Haha 2

  8. As a spectator, I’ll do it from that angle:

     

    Favorite moments:

    Gold medal hockey game/finding a German fan club at the game

    15k cross country 

    Any short track event

    Biathlon women’s relay 

    Actually being able to talk to people about biathlon in real life 

    Starting pin trading

    Getting on the Today Show audience/meeting the US team on it 

    Being interviewed by 7 Russian TV channels

    The events at Czech House

    Meeting the Eurosport biathlon commentators

    Getting Koshechkin’s autograph 

    Randomly meeting like 5 exotic athletes

    Being able to use discounts I’m not really eligible for :) 

     

    Disappointments:

    Opening ceremony- so freezing

    Buses- not enough in times of high demand, often waited an hour

    That I barely caught Ledecka’s medal ceremony (I ran in as the anthem was playing)

    The lack of atmosphere at some events 

    Struggling to understand volunteers 

    That I couldn’t resell tickets because I’m not Korean

     

    • Like 3
×