This year, Olympic medals will be awarded for breakdancing, and it literally makes me sick to my stomach.
This issue really evokes my emotions, because of how much I love sports. I think sports are a vitally important part of the human experience. I guess dance is, too, but we're not talking about dance, in and of itself.
Dance isn't a sport. Period. Ever. Nobody can change my mind about this. Dance is potentially expressive, beautiful, socially useful, entertaining, etc. But it IS NOT A FUCKING SPORT.
Only sports should be in the goddamned Olympics, and shoving non-sports into the mix is shameful and disgusting. It's a wad of spit in the face of every great athlete who has ever taken the field. It's a disgrace to the Ancient Greek tradition that the Olympics are attempting to continue.
I don't give a fuck that there are already competitions for breakdancing. Or ballroom dancing. People can hold competitions for whatever they want. I actually think competitions shouldn't be held for entirely subjective and artistic activities, but people can do whatever the fuck they want.
But not in the fucking Olympics. This shit makes me sick.
And before you start pointing out the other subjective, judged events that are already in the Olympics: THEY SHOULD ALL BE REMOVED, TOO. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. NONE OF THEM BELONG.
No more gymnastics (rhythmic or otherwise). No more figure skating and ice dancing. No more skateboarding. No more surfing. No more synchronized swimming. No more freestyle skiing. No more diving. No more BMX. No more ANYTHING that requires judging.
You might browbeat me into admitting that some of those subjectively judged activities are sports, but you will never convince me that they belong in the Olympics.
Olympic sports should be restricted to those which are determined by means of a clock, a measuring tape, the accumulation of OBJECTIVELY scored points, or a physical beating.
Even some of those should be on the chopping block. Some of the points-scoring events are too subjective. If a sport relies too much on fallible human judging, it should be excluded.
The vast majority of the events should be arbitrated only by the cold, merciless, absolute judgment of the clock or the measuring tape. Therein lies the truest purity of sport.
Honestly, the best thing to do would be to reset everything to the REAL tradition of the Olympics. Almost nothing, other than running, jumping, and fighting. With an absolute minimum of rules to get in the way, and all the athletes competing in the nude. Just sandals on their feet. No space-age materials to help anyone. Nothing for anyone to hide. Just human muscle and determination, on display at the greatest possible level.
But it's all a forlorn dream. Instead, we have to have our stomachs turned, as a bunch of revolting little shitheads wobble and headspin.
The ancient Olympians are going to be spinning in their fucking graves.
EDIT: YES, I AM AWARE THAT THE FIRST COUPLE MODERN OLYMPICS FEATURED NON-SPORT ACTIVITIES, LIKE SCULPTURE AND PAINTING. THAT DOESN'T CHANGE MY VIEW. INCLUDING ART IN THE MODERN OLYMPICS WAS A RIDICULOUS MISTAKE. JUST BECAUSE IT WAS DONE BEFORE DOESN'T MEAN IT SHOULD BE DONE NOW.
Username does NOT check out.
Honestly it never has, this dude has some of the worst takes and will never walk away from even a mild disagreement
Also, saying gymnastics don't belong in the Olympics is not just an unpopular opinion, it's crazy talk.
Like, in what world does one say that Simone Biles is not an Olympian.
Yeah, I've seen them around Lemmy a few times and they're always freaking out about something they're angrily wrong about 😄
ayy I saw you on HN the other day.
HN?
oh yes, what's Lemmy ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
...this place? 🤷
Maybe imperative “chill, dude”
I love this thread. Chill Dude tell us more of your opinions we need content
I mean, that IS the purpose of the Unpopular Opinion community, right?
I'm not doing anything weird. I'm just doing it right.
You are definitely doing it right.
They've posted multiple essay length unpopular opinions here before.
I'm reading through them now its amazing. Nothing political so far, nothing bad, just very strong opinions on relatively innocuous things and he's managing to make so many people angry... He's like an artist
I kinda love how mad you are about this
Best unpopular opinion post I've seen so far.
I wonder if the upvote/downvote ratio is like that because people don't think it's unpopular or they're tarded and vote because they dislike the opinion lol
I have always held that the up votes are for well written, thoughtful posts regardless of if I like the opinion. This is not really well written or thoughtful. It has a certain unhinged vibe to it.
I did up vote for the passion and because I sort of love a little chaos, but it was a tight choice.
But the options aren't upvote or downvote, it's upvote, downvote or no vote. I think unless I want to signal something specific, I just don't vote.
That's a contradiction. Also, the ancient greeks didn't have the concept of sport were super into dancing - spartans especially - so this whole argument is void.
I'm sorry that something you say you enjoy (the olympics) makes you so angry.
Just wait till he finds out that the ancient Greeks didn't have a winter Olympics
What if we measured who could breakdance the furthest.
Oh, shit. Now we're talking. The 10,000 meter headspin would legitimately be the greatest distance race of all time. It would probably have a non-zero fatality rate, but that's not my problem.
Pop-and-lock-a-thon anybody?
Poor Chang ...
Whew, this left spittle on my screen from the sheer, unhinged rage of the typing :)
Legit though, solid unpopular opinion!
But dude, gymnastics is a core sport going back to the minoans. And there were trumpet competitions back in the older Olympiads. Trumpet champions existed, and were determined by judges.
Hate to break it to you, but as much as I also dislike subjective sports competition, the Olympians of old would not be spinning in their graved.
Now, I agree that there has to be some limit to what is and isn't an actual Olympic event. And I'm not a big fan of judged events in general; they should be demonstrations, performances rather than competitions because they'd be better that way, you'd see cooler shit being done by peak human athletes.
But you might as well insist that only men compete if you're going to try and use the pan Hellenic games as your standard.
My Olympic pet peeve is about how damn hard it is to find coverage of most individual sports. You might get lucky here and there seeing highlights of archery or biathlon, or stuff like judo. But they'll show entire soccer matches without cutting away for anything but commercials. That's infuriating to me. I'd rather watch hours of break dancing because it's at least about the athleticism of the competitors rather than some team where even the best individuals get over shadowed.
First of all well done at posting an unpopular opinion. Are you aware how much you've contradicted yourself?
I think all sports have more subjectivity than you are admitting. How often have you heard someone yell at an umpire or referee seen as unfair?
Obviously you're never going to escape the subjectivity of events in which humans participate and the application of those rules, unless we want to just program machines to compete for us.
I think a better approach to what OP is saying is that there shouldn't be a competition in the Olympics where the method of scoring itself requires subjective determination.
Basketball: you throw the ball through the hoop, you get points.
Football: you get the ball in this cage, you get a point
Freedom Football: you get the ball over this line, you get points.
Baseball: you circle the diamond, you get a point.
Curling: your rock, uh... lands in a circle I guess? And that gives you a point, or points?
Cricket: you... run between posts?
Etc.
Point is, while each of the above does require some amount of subjective judgement to determine if each team/competitor is following the rules, the winner of the game usually doesn't depend on it.
Compare that to, say, figure skating or high diving or gymnastics, where the score depends completely on how well other people think a competitor did.
Gymnastics, high diving, etc. have a very strict scoring system as well. There's a very objective way to score how things are done, it just looks subjective to people who weren't involved in those sports.
Most sports look weird and subjective if you were unfamiliar with the rules, but after many decades, are extremely codified and much more objective than they appear.
Anyone that wants things to be simpler or more pure probably don't understand the reasoning and history behind the rules.
That being said, like any rule set, a lot can be gained from starting from scratch. You just need to have a deep understanding of the way things are in the first place, otherwise you'd be making a lot of the same mistakes.
If figure skating was objective then the 2002 judging scandal couldn't have happened.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Winter_Olympics_figure_skating_scandal
Strict, yes, but not objective.
No one is checking the height and diameter of the splash a high diver makes when she enters the water, or the exact angle a figure skater's foot makes when he lands a triple lutz, or what the decibel level is for a cheerleading team. All of those are judged based on years of observation, but at the end of the day it's still people's opinions of the performance.
If you hit a hole-in-one on a par 4, everyone agrees your score is -4. If you do a floor mat routine, one judge might think it was absolutely perfect and give you a 10 and one judge might think it was sloppy and give you an 8. And you can't argue one was right and the other wasn't, because it still comes down to the opinion of the judges.
All of those require significant judgment. A dew examples:
Basketball: how many points is the shot worth/were they behind the 3 pt line? Was that a foul? Was it a flagrant violation that requires an ejection? The latter two apply to most in your list.
Baseball: more than others in your list, this requires subjective calls. Balls/strikes, safe/out, home run/off the wall, etc.
US Football: was that a first down/where should the ball be placed? Touchdowns in particular have specific rules about the ball crossing the plane that can take a long time and significant deliberation.
Edit: I’d also reject your claim that outcomes don’t depend on these calls. Many games come down to close calls.
I would like to make clear that what I am talking about is scoring points being objective, not all the minutiae of a competition. While there will always be a need for judging on a moment-by-moment basis (which, as I said, is because you can't ever have a totally objective method of scoring games) all of those things have a clearly defined method of scoring that can be measured.
We can look and see where the shooter's foot was when he shot. We can see if the ball left his hands before the shot clock ran out.
Yes, that's why replay cameras exist and why coaches can challenge referee calls. It's not uncommon for the refs to think they see a play happen one way, but the camera shows it actually didn't.
Specifically re: your comments on baseball, you're right. But the method of obtaining points in baseball is objective: a runner has to leave third base and touch home while the ball is in play.
And even then, the humans making the robots are going to try to skirt the intent of the rules... Heck, even PvP computer games, which are probably as objective as you can get, need to be patched constantly to stop people using unintended quirks to their advantage.
Maybe there's no such thing as an objective sport?
About the videogames: if you mean bugs, I don't think anyone considers them fair game. They are mistakes from the organizers (developers) and should invalidate the results. It's like if there was a 2 meter deep hole in the middle of a football field, the rules don't consider that scenario but it's obvious that that match shouldn't be valid.
There are objective sports. Those that are not constrained by the physical world, like chess are 100% objective. Theoretically you don't even need a board, each of the players could simulate it in their head and just communicate their moves.
Even if not 100%, I'd say some sports are close to that, in the case where the rules could be verified by a computer and 3D models that exactly represent all the elements of the game (to reasonable precision).
I don't know of any 100% objective game that doesn't rely on luck though (I'm sure some exist). Even in simple games like archery, golf or bowling, there are factors that the players cannot control or measure, like wind. They can measure wind in the place where they are, but they can only assume what the wind is in the path of whatever they are throwing. In chess, black and white players are not equal, and who is which color is random.
I think there's a difference between judging for the score and enforcing the rules as best you can.
As I said, most team sports do not fit my stringent definition, as well as most of the current versions of the formerly pure sports.
I believe we should strive for as few rules as possible, with as little subjective interpretation as possible. Like I keep saying, I think the ideal should be for the winner to always be determined by the clock, the measuring tape, or the last opponent left standing.
I truly believe subjective judgement degenerates the purity of athletic activity. The fact that subjective umpires bring so much disharmony and bile is evidence that I am on the right track. The more we can remove the referees from the proceedings, the better sports will be.
You should just make up a new word for what you're calling 'pure sports'. There's no definition of 'sports' that even implies your concept of 'purity' is valid.
“Pure” isn’t even the right word. More like “unchill dude” sports, a category that only one person cares about, named appropriately.
Make that two people. I fully agree with OP, and I think my definition of sport would be nearly identical to theirs.
Middle aged libertarian bro watching activities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herald_and_Trumpet_contest
Also breakdancing is awesome. Hope they add beatboxing soon.
Then I guess the whole thing was a forlorn dream, for a huge portion of its history.
There was always a mirage on the horizon, where we ALMOST had a true celebration of athletes. But it was always in the process of being diluted and degenerated by sick-minded morons.
Too bad there isn't a melodrama event- you'd be a gold medal contender ;)
Well, fuck me then, I guess I should just go kill myself.
Sport is just dance for performers too lazy to train hard enough to make it in the Arts.
This is a very thorough and well thought out post.
I couldn't disagree with it more regarding the modern olympics (I think there's a lot of value in subjectivity judged sports as well as objectively judged), but I respect your reasoning, and would love to see a revival of the ancient olympics like you propose. So why not both? Keep the modern commercial games their own thing (because at this point there's too much money in it for anyone to stop it) but bring back the traditional Greek games.
Completely separate thought: which category does boxing fall into? Matches are often won through points given by judges. Actually that's the same with wrestling, a traditional olympic event.
OP repeatedly attacks boxing while praising pankration. The rationale? Pankration "doesn't have scoring," which is a patently false claim based on my 3 minutes of googling.
It absolutely is not, it's nonsensical rambling that had no need to be longer than a paragraph or two.
What he just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in his rambling, incoherent post was he even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in the fediverse is now dumber for having read to it. I award him no points, and may God have mercy on his soul.
Just so you know, I have reread my own dumb shit, and I realize it's pretty dumb.
But, ya know, this is the "Unpopular Opinion" community. Not the "construct the most airtight and perfect argument that could ever be delivered before the Supreme Court" community. Take that into account, before you roast me to death, pal.
Oh, I was quoting Billy Madison for funsies, I didn't want to roast you to death.
Oh, right. I actually think I might have gotten away with never seeing all of that movie. I think I saw it on TV with commercials one time, and fell asleep during it.
Not because it was boring. I was a young fella and I did that "I'm going to stay up for 43 hours and only crash when I have to" kinda thing.
No worries, Lemmybro.
Thanks. Please tell all this to the guy who keeps insisting that he has rhetorically owned me, because I'm not following the dictionary definition of "sports." I'm defining my own terms, as to what a "pure sport" is. There is nothing wrong with that, from a linguistic or rhetorical basis. And yet, he thinks that he can just win the argument by saying "you're not using the dictionary definition of sports, so you're stupid lol."
It's pathetic.
As for boxing, it's a whole awful thing. Emotionally, I want boxing to just go back to the way it was in the classical era. No points, just fighting until someone can't fight anymore. But intellectually, I realize that concussions exist. On the other hand, that means the modern version, with the soft gloves and head protection is actually WORSE, because it trades a less bloody fight for a more dangerous and harmful one.
The folks who have reintroduced bare-knuckle boxing might have the best option going. It's as potentially bloody as ever, but the fighters have to protect their hands, so they can't break each other's brains with full-power swings. It's basically an endurance thing. Take any and all point-scoring out of that equation, and you'd have the version that I'd like to see in the Olympics.
Some people are so desperate for a gold medal they'd die in the ring before giving up. Need that time/round limit.
That DID happen in the original Olympics, and the Greeks were cool with it. I mean, I'm not necessarily cool with it...but they really were.
Yeah not acceptable today.
Yep. People have degenerated to a disgusting state of weakness.
That's not Olympics then, that's a death match.
True enough. I don't actually want that, at the end of the day.
Personally I wouldn't mind the Olympics going back to being an excuse to watch oiled up naked muscley guys do things like in ancient Greece. But I do think dance would go really well with that.
Anybody wants to do a naked, greased-up victory dance after they win the Pankration, that's fine with me. But don't judge the dance. Dance isn't for competing.
Good unpopular opinion! I'm skeptical the modern games/organization would survive if you tossed the judged events out though. And a quick search shows there were a few subjective events in ancient games, too. Maybe there's another organization with competitions that suit your interests better?
You do you, man, but I feel like getting this het up over a competition you'll never be involved in, have any control over, or be forced to watch, is kind of a waste of lifespan. Are you happier for it? Healthier? Wealthier? Kinda seems like it's just burning more than one second off your life per second for no benefit.
Also, tradition is just peer pressure from dead people, and they told me in school not to give in to peer pressure. We didn't have breakdancing as an event, and now we do. The only constant is change.
OK I’m listening
Wait until he finds out about all the judges in fighting and wrestling.
In the comments, you talk a lot about judges. So, baseball should be banned too, right? Since balls and strikes are a human call? And of course, they have to call people safe or out, sometimes determine if a ball actually left the park, etc.
And basketball, would every shot be worth the same number of points, since we don’t have judges to say whether someone was behind the 3 point line?
And any sports would be a free-for-all with no penalties? Since judges make those calls, right? Sure, you can call them umpires or refs, but they are still judges.
And fighting would require a complete knockout to win? What if someone lays down and pretends because they don’t want to fight any more? Who makes that call? You need to objectively knockout (or maybe you want killing?) to win. I’m just confused as to how that works without a judge.
Home slice, you try break dancing and then tell me it's not a sport.
Preaching to the choir (or maybe replying to the wrong comment?). I think OP is 100% wrong, just trying to see his logic through to the end.
As I said, I would indeed throw out most team sports, which rely on too much subjective interpretation of rules.
As I have said multiple times, I believe we should strive to base the victor as much as possible on MEASUREMENTS. Like the measurement of time or distance.
As for fight sports, I really believe the Pankration should be contested. I realize modern people don't have the stomach for it. But, ya know, I have been complaining about degeneration all this time. People have become what they've become, and I can't do anything about it, other than fucking complain.
So, just to be clear, cheating should be allowed because penalties are subjective? In a race, I could trip my opponents?
Sadly, pankration has scoring. Any better ideas?
You mentioned fighting as acceptable, but boxing has judges?
I have a MAJOR problem with the complexity of modern judged boxing. It should be judged exactly the way the ancients did. Just watch for illicit weapons, biting, kicking, or gouging.
The truly ideal fight sport should be the Pankration, but people are WAY too soft to have that shit, at this point. So compromises have to be made.
Who determines whether it was a bite or an accidental touch of my teeth on your shoulder?
I support your idea if they also introduce an Olympics with mandatory performance enhancing drugs. I want to see the true best of the best, not the best of the straight-edge kids.
I agree with this opinion.
How do you feel about subjective refereeing and following the letter not the spirit (eg basketball refs or using fouls intentionally)?
Or ski jump, where your score is added to your distance.
Hah just do what I do and don't give a shit about the Olympics. Unless there's some really cool opening ceremony I'm not watching any of it. England had the best one I've ever seen.
Couple of questions… Why does it matter to you that some people consider it a sport? Does the very idea being contrary to your opinion, make the sports you consider as such any less sports? The first antique olympics had horse racing. Where does shooting, curling, archery, golf, equestrian, etc, fit in this definition? If no, why does dance bother you so much all of a sudden, and why not as much anger towards them?
What’s that “Ancient Greek tradition” you seem to want to protect the purity of, and why does or should it matter? There’s been events that were added, tested out, and many removed subsequently, throughout the olympics’ history. It’s not the first time some event doesn’t make unanimity as far as everyone liking the event. Some people threw a hissy fit when snowboarding and later skateboarding were included, for example. Who gets to decide if an event fits in there? Is the practice of trying it out and reevaluating next olympics that terrible?
It’s not like modern olympics are some sacred and pure untouchable event underlining human performance for the sake of it. Unless you've avoided the subject on purpose, which would be surprising considering your position here, the CIO itself isn’t made out of saints doing it all for the love of sports either…
There's no problem with horse racing. It is judged by the clock. It is objective.
As I said in my post I WANT ALL THE SUBJECTIVELY JUDGED EVENTS OUT. NOT JUST THE DANCE-RELATED ONES. That means a lot of the team sports, too, because many of them have FAR too many finnicky, subjectively-interpreted rules.
I think the Olympics should only include sports arbitrated by THE CLOCK or THE MEASURING TAPE or THE LAST OPPONENT LEFT STANDING.
Did you not read any of this in my post? Did you really just read the title?
I was ready to downvite you but decided to not vote at all. I don't necessarily agree with you but I appreciate you being consistent in your ideas. Before I read the body of the text I assumed you would be mad at breakdancers but ok with gymnasts, which would have earned you a downvite for hypocrisy but now I see that you have a more specific view on this after reading everything. Fair enough.
The fact that you actually read the body of my post (rather than accuse me of hypocrisy after just reading the title) gives me the slight amount of hope that will keep me going, to further torture myself by being on the Internet for another day.
So, like, I don't know whether to thank you or insult you. :P
My question was more about how does it pass as a “sport” in your eyes while dance doesn’t? Equestrian as a whole also absolutely has judge/point based events, and isn’t limited to racing horses.
Literally none of the ones you quoted (“shooting, curling, archery, golf, equestrian, etc”) are judged particularly subjectively though, so not sure how your… very loud and angry answer relates to the question I asked. It’s also a pretty wide ask, and I’m curious how you suggest this would go. I honestly can’t think of many sports that doesn’t have some level of subjective judgement in certain situations outside pure athleticism, so aren’t you basically just conflating athleticism and sports as far as olympics goes, and that’s it? Can’t think of much more subjective than being at the whim of a horse’s health, fitness and good will, for example.
Based on what? There were a couple of questions I literally asked in my previous comment that would have helped clearing your views on this, for example, regarding why you feel the olympics as an event have this sanctity or aura that needs protecting.
You’re saying this, while having skipped most of the questions I asked, most of them exactly in response to the things you’re now saying I didn’t read. Note how my previous comment was purposefully a bunch of questions rather than me posing an opinion. I was merely trying to poke at the limits of your reasoning, to see if there are counter-arguments to be made.
Even re-reading my previous comment, I still feel like most of them were specifically on things you did not address in your original post. I therefore have a lot of trouble assuming anything but that you’re not looking to have a conversation but to have people to shout at, which I’m not interested in at all…
There are multiple Olympic sports that are essentially forms of acrobatic dance. Figure skating, the gymnastics floor exercise and rhythm gymnastics come to mind
So you didn't read my post AT ALL??? I mentioned that shit.
No subjectively judged activity should be in the Olympics. Period. No exceptions.
Doesn't matter how long any subjectively judged event has been in there, it was a mistake the whole time.
It appears that you don't understand how scoring works in those events. Maybe you should start there.
I understand that scoring is subjective, in those events. I reject them, on that basis.
Do you know what the word "subjective" means?
I don't care what those subjective events' rulebooks try to do, to somehow "fix" the nature of subjective judgment. That is a fool's errand. It cannot be done.
Therefore, I retain my opinion that judged events have no place in the realm of true sports. I reiterate my position: the only real arbiters of sport should be the clock, the measuring tape, and the sole opponent left standing.
Like I said, I am only marginally okay with most scored-point games. Most of them are degenerated, from the basis of true sports. Too much "oooh, but was the referee right? Did the ball go over this line? Did that guy's foot go over THAT line? Did someone get a boo-boo from another guy's elbow, when he shouldn't have? I'm not suuuuure."
That's degenerated. That's impure. Everything should be done to simplify rules and reduce things to pure, measurable quantities, devoid of any subjective judgment.
Which events aren't subjective by your rules?
What if I'm faster than every Olympic runner today, but only after 123m? Isn't that objective? The whole 100m distance was just a random round number decided by someone a long time ago.
What if I'm faster over 3m, because I have a much better reaction time to the start gun. Should we remove the start gun?
What if I'm faster because I can beat them up and then run while the rest of the field is unconscious? Objectively, I can reach the finish line faster because I can stop the rest of them.
High jumpers are only able to get that high because there's a super soft crash mat that lets them throw their bodies in dangerous ways in any other situation. Does that make any sense? It's not objective either.
Every single event, even "pure" events have psudo-random rules to make them sports.
I think that's the entire point. You have a 100m race. You're faster at 123m, train for the 200m or the 100m. Those are the distances that are recognized, period. This is a great unpopular opinion, but one I agree with complete. I've had this exact same argument in my house every Olympics. If it requires a special judge to tell me who's better, it doesn't belong.
Events that are judged by THE CLOCK or THE MEASURING TAPE or THE LAST OPPONENT STANDING.
How many goddamn times do I have to say it? I feel like you're just deliberately refusing to read it, at this point.
None of your listed exceptions and excuses change the fact that those events you're talking about are judged by the clock and the measuring tape.
Obviously, there should be rules against engaging in combat or trickery, in running or jumping activities. The fact that objectively determined events can and should have rules doesn't make me a hypocrite.
Rules against punching, tripping, or kicking opponents in a race are not subjective. You either punched or you didn't. And you can write the rules to absolutely rule out people trying to make it appear accidental. I'm not sure what the exact rules are about incidental contact in footraces, but the rule can and should basically say that anyone who engages in contact with another runner is disqualified, regardless of whether they claim it to be accidental.
That way, everyone will do their absolute best to avoid contact. And if someone is such an asshole that they are willing to disqualify themselves in order to take someone else out of the competition, so be it. We should be wiling to accept some innocent people getting disqualified, in order to avoid the degeneration of subjective nonsense.
As for the crash mats, I do think the ideal version of the high jump wouldn't have them. I think true, non-degenerated sports should be done with the absolute bare minimum of equipment. At the same time, though, there is nothing subjective about the crash mat existing. Everyone jumps on the same mat, and it doesn't alter the actual outcome of the measured height that wins the competition.
So by your exact definition here, a break-dancing competition that says you get 5 points for being able to do a step out during a routine is an objective measure.
So break-dancing is a legitimate sport that could be used in the Olympics.
Obvious troll response. Judges are required to determine if a participant has done whatever a "step out" is, correctly. As I said in my post, I reject ALL subjectively judged events.
None of them are true sports. Not true enough to be enshrined at the most important global sporting event. As I said, only events arbitrated by the CLOCK or the MEASURING TAPE or the LAST OPPONENT STANDING should be included.
Yes, yes, you want to watch sweaty men groping each other. We get it, calm the fuck down.
Yikes.
I'm going to choose to focus on your username and laugh. I dunno if you are that unaware, or incredibly self-aware.
Breakdancing has always been a competitive sport.
I can't tell how you feel about boxing
Did the guy go down? Did he stay down? That's a point.
Is he breathing? Does he have a pulse? Then the fight isn't over yet.
LET'S PROVE WHO THE BEST COUNTRY IS! ULTRAMODERN ULTRAVIOLENCE!
I'd rather just add full contact violence to existing competitive sports. Ooh, combat dancing, give dancers swords and they fight either elimination rounds or Battle Royale.
Elimination by death. Two men enter, one man leaves.
We could make everyone happy here if we give all the so-called 'not sports' competitors swords.
You know, at least you were consistent in then going after all judged competitions.
I agree fully, and my wife can attest that I've expressed this exact same sentiment, with equally animated language, on multiple occasions over the years.
Good to hear. Although I do hope that means you didn't upvote. A lot of people don't understand how Unpopular Opinions is supposed to work. :)
You'll take your popular opinion downvote, and you'll like it!
As long as I can upvote this comment, in disagreement!
Also, I find it interesting that at least a couple of the people who REALLY HATE my opinion are taking vague pot-shots at me, implying that I'm some kind of hyper-masculine, macho-macho, caveman-style motherfucker, who only holds this opinion because of GRRRRR REAL-MAN MACHO ENERGY.
But here you are, with your wife agreeing. Uh-oh...I guess, according to some of these people, she's got a lot of internalized misogyny issues to work through. :P
I think it would be better to convey your disgust through interpretive dance - you might qualify for the Olympics and then go on to win gold!
I think bellringing should be an olympic sport just to spite you
Ok, boomer 🤣🖕🏽
Is it an actual event or is it just one of the fluff events that will only be done for this one year, like bowling in the '88 Summer Olympics? They do this kind of thing all the time and it's more like a half-time show event than part of the rest of the games and athletics.
Also: Isn't the ribbon a regular Olympic event in gymnastics? That shit is basically just dancing. Dancing is an athletic ability that sometimes even uses gymnastics and contortion. Certainly more athletic than bowling is (or even shotput and javelin throwing).
In other words... you want the olympics to be boring AF.
I concur - the olympics should be boring AF.
You just about had me convinced until this
These are sports. They require judging, sure, but they also require significant human skill, strength, and talent to execute properly. Skateboarding for example requires balance, coordination, and leg strength, and Olympic Skateboarding requires you to be the best at those things (usually, anyway).
Thanks for the real unpopular opinion though!
It's economics, my dude - girls prancing around in their panties sell tickets. Girls playing basketball don't.
Are they going to be break dancing in panties?
I'de assume they will also have some kind of leotard, but yes.
I mean, I've seen some of the women's uniforms Nike put up and if they're going to have crotch floss for some events I can't see why they'd leave this out.
Eventually. It's inevitable.
And how does that apply to the breakdancers? Ain't nobody gonna be aroused by their cringe-ass bullshit.
You seem pretty aroused by it ;)
How would you handle the juicing problem?
100% with you.
Judges should only exist to enforce rules were followed not interpret the winner.
The Olympics succeeded in driving me away long before this bullshit. You couldn't pay me to watch any event.
Ice dancing and figure skating have been Olympic sports for a long time so what's the difference?
Sigh.
PLEASE read the body of my post. I specifically said that I want all those other subjectively judged events to be removed, too.
Can I please ask you if you did read the body of the post, and you just somehow missed my huge list of existing events that I want removed?
Or did you just read the title and immediately respond?
I don't even care if that's what you did. I just want to know.
I did read it, but I somehow forgot that part by the time I made my reply.
I can understand where you are coming from with your post. It does seem odd to have subjective events next to events that have objective winners. That being said, I really don't watch or give 2 shits about the Olympics at all. I think they are a drain on whatever community they are held in. They should just do an Olympic island or something.
Ya know, you're one of a very few really honest people I've met on Lemmy. Kudos.
You just convinced me. Brilliant.
[ 62% upvoted]
You might think that 38% of people actually agreed and downvoted, but it's astonishing how many people can't understand the simplest of concepts
Some of yous shouldn't be allowed on the internet 😂
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dressage
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_at_the_Summer_Olympics
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curling
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_dance
HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POINT OUT THAT I ALREADY SAID I WANT ALL THE SUBJECTIVELY JUDGED EVENTS OUT????
Are you people allergic to fucking reading?
READ MY FUCKING POST AGAIN. FUCKING READ IT.
It's physically impossible for a human being to stay awake while watching sport, you can't expect anyone to stay awake while reading a rant about sport.
Then I'd ask you not to respond to something you haven't read.
I don't think that's an unreasonable request.
Dude you haven't even read the definition of the word sports!
I'd ask you not to swear at strangers on the internet over something thoroughly unimportant, which is why I felt it's justified to sass you.
Nope. This is an adult space. I can and will use any words that I choose. You are free to block me, if you don't like seeing certain combinations of letters, for some reason.
Or you could grow the fuck up.
Oh, but you fine with ice skating, swimming, and skiing all having dance as a major part in them, but not that "Urban" thing! Perhaps the issue is in the mirror.
I mean, you didn't read the post did you?
Not only did I read it, I understood what the words meant, unlike the OP.
Did you not read my post AT ALL?
I specifically said I want ALL THE SUBJECTIVELY JUDGED EVENTS OUT.
I'm going to quote myself:
Now can you fucking explain to me WHY YOU CHOSE NOT TO FUCKING READ THAT SHIT?
It was right there on the screen. Why the fuck didn't you read it?
Tell yourself whatever you need to remain in denial.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
You're insisting that I'm just mad at breakdancing, because I'm on some kind of racist shit? If that's what you believe, come right out and say it, like an adult.
Really think about the other sports I want out, on the basis that they're subjective. They are ALL THE WHITEST FUCKING SHIT THAT ANYONE HAS EVER DONE, IN THE WHOLE FUCKED-UP HISTORY OF WHITENESS.
The only way you could get something whiter into the Olympics than Figure Skating would be if you included Olympic Gentrification.
If you think my opinions are motivated by some kind of anti-urban, pro-white shit, why would I want all of this peak-level white shit removed, huh?
I mean, to put a real fine point on it, if we stripped the events back just the ones I want, it would be a majority Black medal harvest, every Olympiad.
The events I think should be included are absolutely dominated by people of color. That's just how it is. So, again, if I was a racist dipshit, I would be engaging in a very stupid line of argument, here.
Wow...
But man what an entertaining post this is! Please keep up the energy OP!
And? What's that "wow" about?
Please explain.
I just loved your "I'm not racist, but if I was I'd say this" rant. Seemed worthy of a 'wow'.
Also have you ever bothered to look up the definition of the word 'sports'?
Cool.
I thought maybe you were one of those people who's still on that outdated "colorblind" model of anti-racism. Like, you think we're not supposed to notice people's race, under any circumstances. And therefore, you were like "OMG, HE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO MENTION THE FACT THAT BLACK PEOPLE WIN A LOT OF RUNNING MEDALS!!!"