Mine was probably the Coe-Ovett middle distance showdown in Moscow. And who could forget Alan Wells, the last white man to win the 100m

That would be the same for me. Can't remember anything of the 76 olympics. Also Daley Thompson and Zola Budd/Mary Decker from 84.

For winter olympic sports the only Canadian I can recall is Steve Porborski and the only British Eddie the Eagle.

Yup Eddie the Eagle.

I do hate the overkill they have with with Torvill and Dean back in Britain. That is the good thing with having a new gold medal winner to focus on.

I watched Zola Budd run at Crystal Palace live once.

And being a winter athlete is part time? No performance planning? Training is year round, not necessarily on snow, but in related disciplines that complement winter training, such as cycling for speed skaters, sprinting for mechanical sliding sports.

So what's your point? It takes as much work and dedication to succeed at the highest level in shot putt, skiing, sprinting or cycling etc.


I'm a certified national coach in half a dozen sports, with a sports science background, and have worked at elite athlete level as a high performance coach in both summer and winter disciplines in Canada. I count many Olympians, including gold medalists, as friends and aquaintences. I think I've reasonable knowledge of high performance sports without having stepped on an Olympic podium myself.

Oakvillian has eloquently responded to much of your other points, so I won't re-hash them.



Perhaps you could expand on your assurance?

They do go on about T&D.

I went to a couple of athletics meetings at Gateshead in the 80's. There would have been plenty of international athletes there - I think one may even have been GBvUSSRv etc but the only athlete I clearly remember is Linford Christie. Was a pleasant way to spend a sunny Saturday afternoon.

My first Olympic memory was watching Lynn Davies in the long jump in Tokyo. That was 1964. I feel old.

I'll summarize quickly as we have moved on.

It is harder to win an event that has more participants. Because of this I view a medal in the Summer games as being on a higher pedestal than the winter games. I have seen no evidence here to change my stubborn mind.

In my opinion before an event is awarded Olympic status there should be a criteria around participation by volume f person and number of countries. There does seem to be for team games I'm not sure if there is clear rules for individual sports. Again my opinion has not been shifted.

I don't dispute the hard work or dedication of these athlete in any of the games. The Winter Olympics is a games of minority sports. Again no evidence here or in existence to prove otherwise.

In conclusion I enjoyed watching the games (not as much as the Summer Olympics) and my proudest moment as a Brit stands with the bronze in Snowboarding. Good to see we are a force in Curling and Skeleton (despite my questioning it's inclusion).

Each point in turn:

Running is a natural function of humanity. It's not taught, merely honed to it's peak ability. Skills such as those performed on a half pipe or on skates are not natural. They require learning from scratch. I know which I have greater respect for someone being able to perform flawlessly. Perhaps there are less participants involved in technical events (of which the Winter Olympics has many), because of the very nature of their difficulty?

Choosing sports based on participation rates is elitist. Not all countries have ideal climatic, geographic or economic conditions to develop participants in sports you deem most appropriate for Olympic inclusion. You could argue that athletics is a minority sport - this article certainly thinks so:

http://www.insidethegames.biz/blogs/...olympic-legacy

"In 2011 the Association of British Athletic Clubs asked world-renowned athletics statistician Rob Whittingham to take an independent look at track and field participation focusing on the key adult competition age of 20 to 34. His findings were that fewer than 2,000 people regularly participated in track and field athletics. That is 0.1 per cent of people participating in what the public might term "real" athletics compared to Sport England's figure for their definition of "athletics".

Both winter and summer games have minority sports - how many people have easy access to a velodrome, a handball court, or fencing equipment? Are they any less relevant to a games?

For countries that are geographically alpine in nature, isn't it disingenuous to say, 'I'm sorry, you're a minority, your sports don't have enough participants to merit inclusion any longer' ?

Should we remove all minority sports from both games because they're perhaps not relevant to you, your background and upbringing?

Some sports inclusions appear odd decisions to me (beach volleyball is one), but society changes over time, and staying current and relevant isn't easy to resolve or achieve. Just enjoy the skills and talent for what it is, the best in the world in whatever event.