My point is that there are plenty of chances for "the best" to qualify so if they don't, they can't really be considered the best. Even Taekwondo with it's limited fields still produced medalists from Europe, Asia, Africa, the Americas. The African medalists all came through the continental qualifier. Can't see how that's a bad thing.
Wrestling, a sport I've no interest in so won't claim to be an expert in, gave individuals 3 chances to get in? World champs, continental champs and then a world qualifier? I think that's enough chances for any athlete who thinks they can medal
I know women's football is often held up as a bad example (only 3 European teams) but for the sport, it's clearly better to have a team from Africa in there. Zambia wouldn't have got in last time but they finished 3rd in their group and hopefully that sort of stuff can help develop the team. There could be no suggestion of having a world cup without an African team, so why should there be an Olympics without one?
I don't think either of us will change our minds on this, but I@m happy to see as many nations compete in as many sports as possible. I don't think any medal winners will ever feel their medal is devalued in any way