Olympics - 2 per country rule

17 posts / 0 new
Last post
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763
Olympics - 2 per country rule

Because of a rule, in place at the Olympics since 2004, that limits each country to only two competitors among the 24 competing in the all-around final. In Wieber?s place will be the likes of Ashleigh Brennan from Australia, who finished nearly six points behind the reigning world champion. Wieber?s coach John Geddert called it an ?injustice.? Gymnastics coach/analyst/cheerleader Bela Karolyi agreed, telling NBC?s Bob Costas that it was ?absolutely unacceptable.? ?This is the all-around final,? Karolyi said. ?The first 24 should be in the competition, nobody else.?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/five_ring_circus/2012/07/30/jordyn_weiber_olympics_2012_the_two_per_country_rule_that_eliminated_the_united_states_most_decorated_gymnast_is_totally_indefensible_.html

The Olympic rule is that only 2 competitors from each country can compete in the all-around final. Thus, Jordyn Weiber was knocked out of the all-around competition.

Many people believe this is an injustice. Others believe this is fair because there are some countries that dominate a sport to such a degree that other countries have no chance. Why should a country send an athlete to a competition they have no chance of winning?

What do you think? Is the 2 per country rule a fair way to give the best from each country a chance or should it be the best in the world even if that means one country will win all three medals?

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 3 months ago
Joined: 05/13/02
Posts: 414

Ugh, that's a tough one Sad . Part of me feels that they should take the top 24 into the all-around, regardless of what country they're from. Do any of the other sports, like swimming, have that stipulation?

Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: 05/23/12
Posts: 692

I like that all countries can get a chance but I do think it's fairer for the top best athletes compete. Is there a reliable committee of judges in place to ensure all those who enter are actually qualified? If so, then I think that is fairer. It's heartbreaking to those in other countries who didn't qualify but maybe people from in those countries should spend the time training and working harder. Plus I think it'd be a real competition to allow those who are actually competition for each other.

Offline
Last seen: 3 months 6 days ago
Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2256

Yes, as much as I would love everyone to have a fair chance I still think the top 24 should compete regardless of what country they are from.

KimPossible's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3471

All arounds should have the best 24 gymnasts in the world....period. Weiber had the fourth best overall score out of all the gymnasts. It is totally wrong that she is not there. She should not be penalized for the fact that the USA team is so deep and strong. I feel really bad for her.

ClairesMommy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 3 months ago
Joined: 08/15/06
Posts: 2299

They have this rule but still there's no rule about professional athletes participating in the Olympics? What a contradiction. I don't particularly feel like watching Team Canada men's hockey, or Team USA men's basketball because the teams are so stacked. IMO the door can't swing both ways. If rules are put in place like the gymnastics rule, then make the Olympics a venue for amateur athletes only. Period.

Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763

"Claire'sMommy" wrote:

They have this rule but still there's no rule about professional athletes participating in the Olympics? What a contradiction. I don't particularly feel like watching Team Canada men's hockey, or Team USA men's basketball because the teams are so stacked. IMO the door can't swing both ways. If rules are put in place like the gymnastics rule, then make the Olympics a venue for amateur athletes only. Period.

There used to be a rule about profressional athletes until 1984.

1912: The International Olympic Committee strips Jim Thorpe of his gold medals.
By most criteria, Jim Thorpe was the greatest, most accomplished American athlete of the first half of the twentieth century (and possibly the entire century).
He’s a member of the College and Pro Football Hall of Fames, having played running back, defensive back, placekicker, and punter for Carlisle Indian Industrial School and several early NFL teams. He played Major League Baseball for the Giants, Reds, and Braves. And he even played on a barnstorming basketball team called the World Famous Indians.
But perhaps the most impressive athletic feat on Thorpe’s r?sum? is his performance at the 1912 Summer Olympics in Stockholm. Thorpe won gold medals in both the decathlon and pentathlon, winning four of the five pentathlon events and finishing in the top five of all ten decathlon events.
But 100 years ago Olympic athletes had to adhere to strict amateurism rules. Following the 1912 games the Worcester (MA) Telegram reported that Thorpe had played semi-pro baseball in North Carolina prior to competing in the Olympics. The Amateur Athletic Union (AAU), which back then was a big deal and more than just a haven for shady basketball coaches, recommended that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) retroactively void Thorpe’s amateur status.
In 1913, several months after the Stockholm Olympics, the IOC did exactly that, and stripped Thorpe of his gold medals.

Jim Thorpe in 1912 won the discus portion of the pentathlon and finished third in the discuss portion of the decathlon. He won gold in both events, before the IOC took away his medals less than a year later.
Thorpe never denied earning money (albeit very little money) for playing baseball, but he claimed that he was ignorant of the rules. His supporters over the years have noted that Olympic amateurism rules were applied and enforced capriciously and that Olympic rules allowed only 30 days to challenge an athlete’s eligibility. The AAU took much longer to file its complaint.
Advocates working on Thorpe’s behalf tried unsuccessfully for decades to convince the IOC to reverse its decision. Avery Brundage, IOC President from 1952 to 1972 was particularly stubborn. Brundage had competed with Thorpe in the decathlon and pentathlon at the 1912 Olympics, but he had no sympathy for his late Team USA teammate.
In 1982, 70 years after Thorpe’s dominance in the decathlon and pentathlon and more than 30 years after Thorpe’s death, the IOC reinstated his gold medals.

Interesting.

Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 months ago
Joined: 11/28/06
Posts: 848

I think the 2 per country rule is ridiculous. The US dominates gymnastics because it is such a popular sport here and we have a wide variety of talent to choose from. We (and other countries as well) should not be penalized because other countries do not share a similar talent pool. I hope the rule is changed for 2016.

ClairesMommy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 3 months ago
Joined: 08/15/06
Posts: 2299

Oh ya, figure skaters who turn pro aren't allowed to re-compete as amateurs in the Olympics. I wonder why that rule applies to some sports but not others.

And that's interesting about Thorpe. He played pro football and baseball, but was stripped of medals he won in track and field? That makes little sense to me. But I guess 100 years ago they decided if you were pro, you couldn't compete in any Olympic event.

The 2 per country rule is silly. All that hard work, you end up way ahead of competitors from other countries, just to be told 'sorry, what's good enough for others isn't quite good enough for you.'

KimPossible's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3471

Someone did make an interesting point elsewhere on the internet i frequent.

She was saying how the teams are already limited by their numbers and due to the depth of the American team, there are those who don't get to go to the olympics at all, because you can only send so many, but they could have easily qualified for the all-around if given the chance.

Her point was, as a competitor, you are often limited by the depth of your surrounding talent and thats kind of how competition works.

It was an interesting point and i could see how that makes sense but in this case, i think i would have liked to have seen the top 24 go, regardless of country representation. they all competed in the same qualifier together, which is different than competing elsewhere and then moving up a level. We are at the last level.

Spacers's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4104

During the London Opening Ceremonies, the announcers were talking about how some athletes are competing for a country other than their "home" country; there's less competition or better training opportunities, so they can actually *get* to the Olympics and have a shot at a medal that they wouldn't have staying at home. I Googled "olympic athletes switching countries" but most of the articles are about the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

I don't know why gymnastics is different than other sports where the qualifying rounds or preliminary rounds determine who will get to the finals. We were watching mens synchronized diving last night and they dropped the bottom four teams after five rounds, the top four teams continued to the medal round. And they were making a big deal about how Michael Phelps barely qualified, getting "the last spot," and Phelps said something like, at least the last spot is still a spot. The top 24 gymnasts should have moved on, regardless of their country affiliation.

Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763

I'm still not sure how I feel about it...

On one hand I completly understand. It's like spelling bees in elementry school. Each class gets to send 1 student to the school-wide bee. Then each school gets to send x number of spellers to the district level. Perhaps one of the very best spellers in the district isn't even at the district level because the were second best in their classroom. Thus they were eliminated way way back. But it does even the playing field.

Poltics works that way too. Some say if we did away with the electoral college WY, VT, and the other small states wouldn't matter. Others say we should get rid of it and if 51,000,000 voters want a candidate it shouldn't matter that the majority of those votes came from 4 states.

But i definitely think pros shouldn't be allowed to compete. That puts a totally different spin on some of the team sports.

Did you guys see Missy Franklin's interview? She won't do any endorsements or anything that would make her ineligible to be on her HS swim team? How would you like to be the rival school?

Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 months ago
Joined: 11/28/06
Posts: 848

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

I'm still not sure how I feel about it...

On one hand I completly understand. It's like spelling bees in elementry school. Each class gets to send 1 student to the school-wide bee. Then each school gets to send x number of spellers to the district level. Perhaps one of the very best spellers in the district isn't even at the district level because the were second best in their classroom. Thus they were eliminated way way back. But it does even the playing field.

Poltics works that way too. Some say if we did away with the electoral college WY, VT, and the other small states wouldn't matter. Others say we should get rid of it and if 51,000,000 voters want a candidate it shouldn't matter that the majority of those votes came from 4 states.

But i definitely think pros shouldn't be allowed to compete. That puts a totally different spin on some of the team sports.

Did you guys see Missy Franklin's interview? She won't do any endorsements or anything that would make her ineligible to be on her HS swim team? How would you like to be the rival school?

I think Franklin sounds like a great kid and her parents have done an awesome job of keeping her grounded with all her success. She wants what most teens want - to fit in and be "normal".

Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: 12/10/05
Posts: 1681

It absolutely should be the top 24.

Minx_Kristi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 01/02/09
Posts: 1261

First off, I just want to say that the USA gymnasts did amazing in the team final last night. I love Gabby, ha.

I think it should definitely be top 24 rather than the top 2 from each country. However, it is the Olympics and it has to be shown that there are representives from each country.

xx

Spacers's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4104

The representatives from each country competed in the elimination rounds. If you're not good enough to be in the top 24, why are you good enough to compete at the next level?

KimPossible's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3471

Its not the top 2 from every country. Its the top 24, but each country can *only* send 2. So if there are three from a country in the top 24...the lowest of the three doesn't go...and number 25 gets to.