8/21 Why is it that a miserable 3rd world nation such as China has
more number of GOLD medals than USA, the world's wealthiest and
most technologically advanced nation in the entire world? We
spend billions and billions on advanced training,
advanced technology, and advanced scienticfic research on
our atheletes, and yet only 20 gold? For example, the runners
get to try out the altitude tank to simulate oxygen deprivation,
ball players try out really advanced computer simulations
on strategies/etc, and the scientists/nutritionists customize
the intake and monitoring of the atheletes based on advanced
instrumentations and advanced nutritional science. With
everything on our side, a low-tech nation such as China still
gets more gold medals. WHY?
\_ Because "western" nations do not treat 10 year old children like
fucking science lab test subjects. You'll note that the US wins
way more medals than other "civilized" countries like, say, France
or Japan or the UK. -John
\_ perhaps you should ask the chinese athletes whether they like
to be where they are as opposed to planting sorghum at
Big Cow village. US dominance of track and field, etc. is itself
the result of a big science project of selectively breeding
african slaves.
\_ Troll harder. I didn't realize Kim Collins was US? How
about Hailegebre Selassie? El Gerrouj? And as for field,
don't make me laugh. -John
\_ a few exceptions here and there doesn't make it
untrue. it's your characterization of china's
sports program that's laughable. many of them
are talented kids from poor villages who would
have ended up poor farmers for the rest of their
lives otherwise. Their parents are only too glad
to let them have the opportunity. they always
have the choice to refuse to let their children
go. if what you said is true, how come the
aussies hired two coaches from china, and
immediately they win gold and bronze at 10m diving?
the aussies must like being lab test subjects
then?
\_ We Japanese has less than half the population of US, but
half its medals. We are superior.
\_ W00t! Better invade China 'n prove it.
\_ Billions? We don't spend a penny of tax payer dollars on them.
\_ Using technology isn't always the best way to train. Haven't you
seen Rocky 4?
\_ They have 4 times as many people.
\_ Why do you care?
\_ Pretty sure this is a troll, but ...
- We're going to have more gold medals when the Olympics are done.
Much of the early standings are simply because of scheduling
(Australia, for instance, halfway through the Games has already
won most of the medals it'll win, because they're done with the
events they're good at. We tend to do well at, say, track and
field, which is only just starting.)
- The US spends no tax dollars on athletics (this is almost
unique among nations).
- Our govt. doesn't select promising kids at age 6? 8? 10? and put
them into special sports schools, as does China.
\_ Yes, in America we have overzealous parents that do that.
-dans
\_ You know the difference between tax dollars and parent's
personal dollars, right?
\_ Yes, the parents' dollars will not be wasted. -- ilyas
\_ Then the parents will probably not put their kid in
these types of programs, because most of these things
aren't economically viable in themselves. The effort
China puts in its programs appears to have national
prestige and propaganda as the primary purpose and
these are not things that parents would normally
spend their own money on for their country.
\_ That's sort of what I was driving at, yes. -- ilyas
\_ actually it's more and more like the US in China.
athletes get big endorsements, etc. But it's
still a good idea to get the government involved,
otherwise poorer kids with talent from the small
towns and villages would not have any chance to
succeed since the facilities simply ain't there.
- And as the previous poster pointed out, they have 4x as many
people (and are wholly willing to put large amounts of resources
into training them). Our athletes, when they reach world-class
level, have access to the best training methods in the world,
as do China's and 20 other countries ... we certainly have no
advantage over China or Australia or the UK or dozens of other
countries.
\_ as far as I know, our govornment doesn't really intervene
_at_all_ in most sports. I knew a guy in highschool who was
training as an olympic figure skater, and as far as I know
he never interacted with the U.S. government in any way.
\_ Son, that's why god invented athletic scholarships and
corporate sponsors.
\_ Yeah, but those usually don't come into play until you're
ALREADY real good; it's hard when you're ages 10 to 18
and are only just getting good. There's some sports that
are going to be really difficult for the US to continue
to compete internationally. How many universities in the
entire US sponsor men's gymnastics? 20. With ~10 gymnasts
per team, a 200-person pool for your entire national team
is not a deep pool at all (all US men's gymnasts went
to US universities; also many universities host foreign
students, making the pool even shallower ...).
\_ The olympic sports and college (i.e. NCAA) sports are
disjoint. Scholarships are not available for
non-collegiate sports. Corporate sponsorship is
basically a marketing play which means that in order to
be sponsored for a non-token sum, you must be an
established athlete with wide name recognition. -dans
\_ i hope my tax dollars never go into training athletes. get
over your stupid nationalism.
\_ I strongly agree with you, but I suspect that the pp
you're responding to would also agree that this is
a good thing.
\_ Well, consider the costs. Let's say we sent 500
athletes to Athens. Let's say we paid them each $200k/
year. That's $100M, or a little more than a quarter
dollar per American. Would I pay a few bucks to win a
few more medals? Yeah, probably. I'm philosophically
against funding the athletes, but in the eyes of
government, it's pocket change.
\_ but we don't do it, and we still win golds, so why
do it? Also, if they did it, don't expect it
to be given out evenly accross the sports. As a
fan of some of the more obscure sports, it would
really piss me off to see skiing get disproportionately
subsidised. If someone wants to subsidize sports
that people like to watch on TV, let the networks
who make all the money off of it do it.
\_ I wouldn't pay 1 penny to make the US teams win every
gold medal every time.
\_ there is plenty of information out there about
the societal benefits of athletic programs for
kids.
\_ Absolutely. Agreed. Sports in schools and
for kids in general is a great thing. Just not
subsidies for advanced sports research shit so
"we" can win medals in some over-commercialized
and corrupt dope-a-thon. -John
\_ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5635973/site/newsweek
"17,000 full-time athletes supported by provincial and city
governments" (compared to zero in the US)
\_ Because we are an imperial power in decline. Every time I point
this out, I get called an America-hater, but I just like to
see the world as it really is, not some Hollywood fantasy of it.
Expect China to pass us in many other things in the next 20
years.
\_ *laugh* There has never been a greater power on the planet. The
only power that is likely to ever be greater is if one day there
is a true single world government that supercedes all national
governments.
\_ Don't be so proud of your technological terror. The
ability to have a single world government is insignificant
next to the power of the Force. -geordan
\_ I haven't called you America-Hater but I am wondering if you are
the same guy as the 'nuanced worldview' guy who claims 90% of
stuff in the 'real world' is personal stuff and vendettas. You
sound like spiritual soul mates, and are both liberals, most
likely. And both wrong. America is stronger now than it has
ever been. America is stronger now than any imperial power at
any time in history, including Rome, Britain, HRE, Habsburg
Austria, anything. You are either a troll or an idiot.
\_ Nah, I will take the British Empire over America in terms
of power and accomplishments.
\_ Such as going to space and the moon, better health, longer
lives, a standard of living for the average citizen that
makes British Royalty of the past look like the lower
classes here now, no real enemies, safe to walk the streets
at night in most places, access to affordable and often
free education generally available, and a safety net the
British Empire never dreamed of. And that's just off the
top of my head. What were the British Empire's accomplish-
ments? Turning both Afirca and the Middle East into hell
holes intentionally? Thanks British Empire!
\_ errr ... the idea is to compare with contemporary
rivals. also, a lot of the things you mentioned
are not good benchmarks of strength and power.
Switzerland also doesn't have enemies, and has
safe streets, free education, safety net, etc.
That doesn't make it a powerful country.
\_ Playing Victoria teaches you a lot about power
dynamics at the time of the British Empire (even if
it's just a silly game). As Britain you did NOT want
the next 2-3 powers to gang up on you. Britain had
a pretty light touch as an imperial power, because
they had no choice. Britain had structural
weaknesses, foremost of which was their small
population and size (compared to the vast geographic
area of their holdings). US has no real weaknesses,
except for oil, and that's only a weakness because
there is no will to make it go away. -- ilyas
\_ US has plenty of weaknesses. Its power is
dependent on an economic system that requires
the willing participation of allies and other
countries in Europe and Asia. With the
introduction of guerilla warfare, occupying
other countries has also become prohibitively
expensive for America, as shown in Vietnam
and Iraq. Then there is still Russia, which
can wipe out the US with the push of a button.
\_ Fuck powerful countries. Their only use is to counter
other powerful countries that might fuck you over.
The nationalist bullshit even in the olympics annoys
the hell out of me, all those national anthems after
every event. To me it actually takes away from the
individual achievements, the way the athletes are
made to personify their countries. Ideally, most team
sports should be eliminated from the Olympics and
the focus put on individual performances like it was
in ancient times.
\_ I've seen you post this a number of times, and I've never
seen anyone call you an America Hater. Especially since
this has little to do with the subject, I think you're a
troll. How about, Neo-con Troll?
\_ neo-con troll? have you ever listened to NPR? maybe
they're all neocon trolls as well. what you've just seen
is the typical NPR listener in action.
\_ Yes, but he's trolling FOR Neo-Cons. Although, sure.
NPR Troll? Empire Troll?
\_ I think it has everything to do with the subject. China
is no longer a pissant third world country anymore. And
I detest the Neocons.
\_ All 7 of them? It isn't a huge movement. And yes, China
is still very much a pissant third world country. They
can't even retake their own break away province much less
pose any sort of threat to the US. If we were a brutal
conquering nation like they are we would have stomped
them decades ago.
\_ we ain't? where are all the indians then?
\_ Getting rich with their casinos.
\_ Good idea. Let's turn the Potala Palace
into a big casino.
\_ WTF does anything this guy is saying have to do with
conservatives, neo or otherwise?
\_ See above reply. The guy sounds like the's trolling
to make Neo-Cons angry. If you don't know why, look
up the definition of Neo-Con.
\_ The only reason China is ahead of America is because
America gave them a free gold:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/23/sports/olympics/23shooter.html
\_ What happened to the csuamotd/csuamotd login?
\_ The whole premise is false. For whatever reason, China has always
been strongest at the the items that got competed earlier, and
whichAmerica (and the west) by and large do not care and hardly
even consider as a regular sports (TABLE tennis???). If you
go back to olympic history, you will see the Chinese team get
a bunch of medals at the start, then get stuck there for the
rest of game, while the 3rd reich, the USSR , and Amerika
will have a steady and linear increase. They are the really
competitors in the olympics.
\_ yes but at least they dont have table tennis to 15 points,
to 21 points, 50 points and 100points.
\_ china is good at sports that require skills, intelligence
and precision. us is good at sports that require brute
power, cause us has lots of africa athletes.
\_ So basically any sport where you don't have to sweat or
move much.
\_ you do have to sweat. it's just that sweating like
a dumb mule won't by itself win you any medal.
\_ extremely weak troll.
\_ it may be a troll but it's also the truth. besides
the message it's replying to is also a troll.
\_ For the same reason lots of inner city kids are good in some sports.
It's a way out. 'nuff said. |
http://csua.com/feed/