Diann's Non-Sports Fan's Guide to the Olympics

A NON-SPORTS FAN'S GUIDE TO THE OLYMPICS

Some of the comments herein are serious, others are satyric.
Sometimes this is one-and-the-same.

For me, sports come in various categories, most of which fail to interest. This includes the mainstays of American civilization, for instance: football, baseball, basketball, hockey. Although those skimpy basketball shorts and long legs do have a certain titillation quotient. And, as for any sport like boxing, where one repeatedly attempts to lower one's opponent's IQ permanently, I have nothing but the most condescending of sneers to give it. Any person in the arena who thinks it is worth the money to be asking to have his (women are seldom this stupid) brains puréed into cream of wheat is a lost cause to begin with. The old saying, "evolution in action" applies here.

A year ago, I happened to turn on my TV, dusty as it was, and unintentionally channel-surfed to a station exhibiting extremely odd sporting events -- people in padded suits doing some of the silliest things for a chance to be on the tube, and probably to earn a bit of cash. This was amusing. Once.

Well, once every two years those of us who think sports should come along once in a blue moon can have their blue moon. In the winter, it's the Winter Olympics, generally hosted somewhere with snow so that skiers can have a good surface to slalom down. When it's over, I don't have to hear about the foibles of figure skaters for another four years, during which, presumably, someone will teach them some manners. Kneecapping isn't a recommended punitive measure for violators.

Two years later, along come the Summer Olympics. This year it's hosted somewhere where the heat and humidity will guarantee that the "S" is ideally honored, and that the runners will have pools of sweat to slip in. One would think a cool climate would be more appropriate for the energy which will be expended.

At any rate, if I remember to turn on my TV before August (always an iffy proposition), there are indeed certain sports which interest me. The archery, canoing/kayaking, diving, equestrian, fencing, gymnastics, and water polo will be of interest.

However I know quite well that even if I remember to watch the tube, the only events of the above likely to be available are the gymnastics and the diving. Archery? Forget it. Kayaking? Maybe ten seconds, if someone dramatically tips over, or if the Americans win the gold. No, it will be basketball, or boxing, both of which there are already too much of in non-Olympic settings. One can drive through any good-sized town, and if the weather is cooperative, one can spot any number of pick-up basketball games, played by TRUE amateurs. These are the real games, the ones which foster individual and team involvement over couch-potato tubeside coaching.

These are the Olympics, folks. Write your friendly neighborhood broadcaster, official sponsor to the Atlanta Olympics, and tell them you want to see archery, kayaking, fencing and water polo. Without subscribing to ESPN just for the two weeks.

Needless to say, in most cases I really don't care who wins events. I certainly don't root by accident of nationality. Mostly I look at the aesthetics of the event -- the grace, the form, the movement. Hoping that whomever truly is best gets to win, and that bad breaks are minimal. I do favor individuals who've come back from setbacks, whether physical injury or cultural disapproval. Those who think the world owes them a medal (or act like it) I find disappointing. Those who have had years of steroid-enhanced buildup I also shun (but here one can only guess, because only a few individuals are stupid enough to use steroids just prior to the events).

The Olympics have moved from an era where this was more or less truly Amateur athletics to a "professional" ambiance. I suspect we suffer the change, but we also can't do much about it. From state sponsored athletes which initiated the process to corporate sponsored athletes there really is little difference.

Meanwhile, though, why is it that we can determine scores down to three or four decimal places and STILL get the most banal of sports announcers??

A sports summary:

Softball:

See baseball. So the women throw the ball differently -- same sport.

Swimming:

Of some interest, but not essential. Rather do it myself.

Table Tennis:

Enjoyable game to play, and I like watching really good players play, but preferably at a bar or some other personal setting. It's hard to imagine camera work which can show the sport off to the advantage being right there and at hand.