politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Rio’s over and so to Tokyo and beyond
Comments
-
Semenya won silver at London. The winner was certainly non-hyperandrogynous, whether she was clean is another matter.MaxPB said:
Well not really, he has been beaten to the gold a few times. Semenya will never be beaten by non-hyperandrogynous woman. It is physically impossible without doping. Phelps has already been beaten fair and square.DanSmith said:
Could make the same argument about the men competing against Phelps.CD13 said:"That is why Lynsey Sharp is getting so upset. However hard she goes away and trains, however hard Jenny Meadows goes and trains, they are never going to be able to compete with that level of strength and recovery that those levels of elevated testosterone bring.
0 -
I caught a bit of Michael Johnson talking about the issues for 100m vs 200m sprinters.Sandpit said:
Yes, agree. It's a really horrible race to run, too far for sprinting and too short for distance running techniques.Pulpstar said:The women's 800 metre is probably the event you can change the most through drugs/hyperandrogeny as it is both aerobic and anaerobic by necessity; also a way more 'pure' race than the oft tactical 1500.
It's basically who can slow down the least, against everything the body is telling you!
IIUC, he said Bolt's very upright tight technique was perfect for 100m - but really tough for 200m, as the natural desire to roll when running put huge pressure on his chest/stopped him from using the 100m stance in the last 100m.
That's why he was a zillion x better than Expert On Everything And I'm Better Than You Denise Lewis0 -
What there needs to be for androgynous cases is a demarcation line, however it's defined. If Semenya is essentially male then she should be competing in the men's competition; if not, then she can carry on as she is. It sounds to me as if it's the definitions that need changing rather than any penalty system introduced (or reintroduced).MaxPB said:
I think the difference is that Caster Semenya is genetically closer to a man than a woman, she has a working (though not descended) pair of testes, she doesn't have a uterus, all she is missing is a penis and she'd be in the male events. It gives her (and other hyperandrogynous women) a huge advantage over women who are biologically born as 100% female.david_herdson said:
Indeed. The argument is not dissimilar to that put forward quite widely before WWII that certain races should be excluded because of their genetic advantages. That was no doubt a smokescreen for other reasons but that's beside the point; the results suggest that certain races *do* seem to have advantages in certain disciplines / sports. Should they be given weight penalties too? The whole notion enters the realm of absurdity when you start trying to discriminate between 'legitimate' and 'illegitimate' natural advantages.Philip_Thompson said:
Ultimately though Caster has done nothing unnatural, immoral or wrong herself. So she's born with an anomaly that makes her better? I'm sure there's things in Usain Bolt's genetics that have assisted him too. I'm sure Paula Radcliffe herself has some genes that assisted her.Ishmael_X said:
What puts this close to lunatic country, is that if they are told to take medication they then face dq for *not* taking performance-altering drugs.
If there's enough interest in a sport that they take 1, 2 and 3 in the 800 metres why not have a separate competition for them?
If you want to rule out every anomaly then where do you draw the line. Caster is not a cheat and the Court of Arbitration for Sport had ruled on this beforehand. It's wrong to tarnish her victory now when she hasn't cheated.
And this is before genetic engineering better athletes is feasible.
I don't think it is unfair to say they either need to create a separate event for this category (maybe at the Paralympics?) or use the medication that the IAAF prescribed before.0 -
Bolt lost at Athens, lest we forget. While hormones are very potent, there is an associated power curve. Men's peak testosterone levels are in their late teens. However, the best road cyclists tend to be in the 27-34 range and so on. Sprinters peak earlier than that.Theuniondivvie said:
Semenya won silver at London. The winner was certainly non-hyperandrogynous, whether she was clean is another matter.MaxPB said:
Well not really, he has been beaten to the gold a few times. Semenya will never be beaten by non-hyperandrogynous woman. It is physically impossible without doping. Phelps has already been beaten fair and square.DanSmith said:
Could make the same argument about the men competing against Phelps.CD13 said:"That is why Lynsey Sharp is getting so upset. However hard she goes away and trains, however hard Jenny Meadows goes and trains, they are never going to be able to compete with that level of strength and recovery that those levels of elevated testosterone bring.
0 -
Salmond opposed intervention in the Bosnian war? Any link to that?CarlottaVance said:
A somewhat uncharitable view of Nicola's visit to the Balkans (which I though 'brave', since Salmond opposed intervention at the time....)malcolmg said:
Nonentity regional party teamleader seeks publicityTheScreamingEagles said:BTW - I see Ruth Davidson is channelling what Mike wrote on August 4th
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, has become the most senior party figure to float the idea of an early election as she cited concerns about rebellious backbenchers.
She said the “usual suspects” on the backbenches could “cause problems” for Mrs May and added there was a clear “temptation” to call an election sooner than 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/21/ruth-davidson-says-early-general-election-is-tempting-and-warns/0 -
Not my field of expertise but has she got two x-chromosomes or an x and a y-chromosome?david_herdson said:
What there needs to be for androgynous cases is a demarcation line, however it's defined. If Semenya is essentially male then she should be competing in the men's competition; if not, then she can carry on as she is. It sounds to me as if it's the definitions that need changing rather than any penalty system introduced (or reintroduced).MaxPB said:
I think the difference is that Caster Semenya is genetically closer to a man than a woman, she has a working (though not descended) pair of testes, she doesn't have a uterus, all she is missing is a penis and she'd be in the male events. It gives her (and other hyperandrogynous women) a huge advantage over women who are biologically born as 100% female.david_herdson said:
Indeed. The argument is not dissimilar to that put forward quite widely before WWII that certain races should be excluded because of their genetic advantages. That was no doubt a smokescreen for other reasons but that's beside the point; the results suggest that certain races *do* seem to have advantages in certain disciplines / sports. Should they be given weight penalties too? The whole notion enters the realm of absurdity when you start trying to discriminate between 'legitimate' and 'illegitimate' natural advantages.Philip_Thompson said:
Ultimately though Caster has done nothing unnatural, immoral or wrong herself. So she's born with an anomaly that makes her better? I'm sure there's things in Usain Bolt's genetics that have assisted him too. I'm sure Paula Radcliffe herself has some genes that assisted her.Ishmael_X said:
What puts this close to lunatic country, is that if they are told to take medication they then face dq for *not* taking performance-altering drugs.
If there's enough interest in a sport that they take 1, 2 and 3 in the 800 metres why not have a separate competition for them?
If you want to rule out every anomaly then where do you draw the line. Caster is not a cheat and the Court of Arbitration for Sport had ruled on this beforehand. It's wrong to tarnish her victory now when she hasn't cheated.
And this is before genetic engineering better athletes is feasible.
I don't think it is unfair to say they either need to create a separate event for this category (maybe at the Paralympics?) or use the medication that the IAAF prescribed before.
Looks like a woman to me.0 -
How is Justin Gatlin still competitive at 34 then :innocent face:John_M said:
Bolt lost at Athens, lest we forget. While hormones are very potent, there is an associated power curve. Men's peak testosterone levels are in their late teens. However, the best road cyclists tend to be in the 27-34 range and so on. Sprinters peak earlier than that.0 -
The problem is that in the world of feelings before reality those definitions will never happen. I think having them compete in a special event in the Paralympics is the fairest solution. Low-T men and high-T women could compete in it. Might be a bit of a freak show to start with, but over time it will give people who don't fit in anywhere an event or events to compete in against people who won't beat them too easily (men's events) or agaonst people who they will beat far too easily (women's events).david_herdson said:What there needs to be for androgynous cases is a demarcation line, however it's defined. If Semenya is essentially male then she should be competing in the men's competition; if not, then she can carry on as she is. It sounds to me as if it's the definitions that need changing rather than any penalty system introduced (or reintroduced).
0 -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/307225.stmTheuniondivvie said:
Salmond opposed intervention in the Bosnian war? Any link to that?CarlottaVance said:
A somewhat uncharitable view of Nicola's visit to the Balkans (which I though 'brave', since Salmond opposed intervention at the time....)malcolmg said:
Nonentity regional party teamleader seeks publicityTheScreamingEagles said:BTW - I see Ruth Davidson is channelling what Mike wrote on August 4th
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, has become the most senior party figure to float the idea of an early election as she cited concerns about rebellious backbenchers.
She said the “usual suspects” on the backbenches could “cause problems” for Mrs May and added there was a clear “temptation” to call an election sooner than 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/21/ruth-davidson-says-early-general-election-is-tempting-and-warns/0 -
Hint: she was Russian.Theuniondivvie said:
Semenya won silver at London. The winner was certainly non-hyperandrogynous, whether she was clean is another matter.MaxPB said:
Well not really, he has been beaten to the gold a few times. Semenya will never be beaten by non-hyperandrogynous woman. It is physically impossible without doping. Phelps has already been beaten fair and square.DanSmith said:
Could make the same argument about the men competing against Phelps.CD13 said:"That is why Lynsey Sharp is getting so upset. However hard she goes away and trains, however hard Jenny Meadows goes and trains, they are never going to be able to compete with that level of strength and recovery that those levels of elevated testosterone bring.
0 -
''Indeed. The argument is not dissimilar to that put forward quite widely before WWII that certain races should be excluded because of their genetic advantages.''
Its quite dissimilar because we are talking about sex here, and not race.
AS I say, defend it if you like, but women simply won't bother to compete in events that feature people with this condition. Nobody will be interested.
IN a way, the whole Olympic ethos of men's and women's events runs counter to the modern leftist agenda of destroying traditional gender politics.
And that is why this is such a massive problem.0 -
Weren't the rumours that she had both XX and XY present? Having a working set of testes means she must have XY chromosomes present. That's why she has been classed as intersex.Philip_Thompson said:
Not my field of expertise but has she got two x-chromosomes or an x and a y-chromosome?david_herdson said:
What there needs to be for androgynous cases is a demarcation line, however it's defined. If Semenya is essentially male then she should be competing in the men's competition; if not, then she can carry on as she is. It sounds to me as if it's the definitions that need changing rather than any penalty system introduced (or reintroduced).MaxPB said:
I think the difference is that Caster Semenya is genetically closer to a man than a woman, she has a working (though not descended) pair of testes, she doesn't have a uterus, all she is missing is a penis and she'd be in the male events. It gives her (and other hyperandrogynous women) a huge advantage over women who are biologically born as 100% female.david_herdson said:
Indeed. The argument is not dissimilar to that put forward quite widely before WWII that certain races should be excluded because of their genetic advantages. That was no doubt a smokescreen for other reasons but that's beside the point; the results suggest that certain races *do* seem to have advantages in certain disciplines / sports. Should they be given weight penalties too? The whole notion enters the realm of absurdity when you start trying to discriminate between 'legitimate' and 'illegitimate' natural advantages.Philip_Thompson said:
Ultimately though Caster has done nothing unnatural, immoral or wrong herself. So she's born with an anomaly that makes her better? I'm sure there's things in Usain Bolt's genetics that have assisted him too. I'm sure Paula Radcliffe herself has some genes that assisted her.Ishmael_X said:
What puts this close to lunatic country, is that if they are told to take medication they then face dq for *not* taking performance-altering drugs.
If there's enough interest in a sport that they take 1, 2 and 3 in the 800 metres why not have a separate competition for them?
If you want to rule out every anomaly then where do you draw the line. Caster is not a cheat and the Court of Arbitration for Sport had ruled on this beforehand. It's wrong to tarnish her victory now when she hasn't cheated.
And this is before genetic engineering better athletes is feasible.
I don't think it is unfair to say they either need to create a separate event for this category (maybe at the Paralympics?) or use the medication that the IAAF prescribed before.
Looks like a woman to me.0 -
He's timed that particular debating point well!PlatoSaid said:Mark Wallace
Owen's running a campaign based on the premise that he isn't proud of Britain now. Captain Competence strikes again. https://t.co/LR6Ke4kzlj
One thing Smith does demonstrate is that no matter how bad things are they can always get worse. I'm starting to think that Smith is a secret Corbynite.
0 -
MaxPB said:
I've just been talking to my gf and we're both putting £75/m aside for the next 4 years into a new joint account so we can go to Tokyo in 2020 and get opening ceremony tickets as well as a few days at the pool, and few evenings at the velodrome. Not that bothered about athletics now that Mo, Usain and Jess aren't going to be there.
I wonder how easy it will be to get tickets for an away olympics, remembering how next-to-impossible it was London? The reasons that so many seats are empty are many more than their being unsold, after all.MaxPB said:I've just been talking to my gf and we're both putting £75/m aside for the next 4 years into a new joint account so we can go to Tokyo in 2020 and get opening ceremony tickets as well as a few days at the pool, and few evenings at the velodrome. Not that bothered about athletics now that Mo, Usain and Jess aren't going to be there.
0 -
"In December 2014, a documentary aired on German TV in which Savinova allegedly admitted to using banned substances on camera. In the video the speaker's face is out of focus and her voice is dubbed into German.[1] In November 2015, Savinova was one of five Russian runners the World Anti-Doping Agency recommended to receive a lifetime ban for doping during the London Olympics"Theuniondivvie said:
Semenya won silver at London. The winner was certainly non-hyperandrogynous, whether she was clean is another matter.MaxPB said:
Well not really, he has been beaten to the gold a few times. Semenya will never be beaten by non-hyperandrogynous woman. It is physically impossible without doping. Phelps has already been beaten fair and square.DanSmith said:
Could make the same argument about the men competing against Phelps.CD13 said:"That is why Lynsey Sharp is getting so upset. However hard she goes away and trains, however hard Jenny Meadows goes and trains, they are never going to be able to compete with that level of strength and recovery that those levels of elevated testosterone bring.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariya_Savinova#Doping_allegations
0 -
As I have posted before , the whole drug taking issue is ridiculous .david_herdson said:
Indeed. The argument is not dissimilar to that put forward quite widely before WWII that certain races should be excluded because of their genetic advantages. That was no doubt a smokescreen for other reasons but that's beside the point; the results suggest that certain races *do* seem to have advantages in certain disciplines / sports. Should they be given weight penalties too? The whole notion enters the realm of absurdity when you start trying to discriminate between 'legitimate' and 'illegitimate' natural advantages.Philip_Thompson said:
Ultimately though Caster has done nothing unnatural, immoral or wrong herself. So she's born with an anomaly that makes her better? I'm sure there's things in Usain Bolt's genetics that have assisted him too. I'm sure Paula Radcliffe herself has some genes that assisted her.Ishmael_X said:
What puts this close to lunatic country, is that if they are told to take medication they then face dq for *not* taking performance-altering drugs.CD13 said:On the Caster issue, Paula (of ‘I’ll have a quick pee behind the nearest tree, nobody will notice’ fame) Radcliffe is forthright …
If there's enough interest in a sport that they take 1, 2 and 3 in the 800 metres why not have a separate competition for them?
If you want to rule out every anomaly then where do you draw the line. Caster is not a cheat and the Court of Arbitration for Sport had ruled on this beforehand. It's wrong to tarnish her victory now when she hasn't cheated.
And this is before genetic engineering better athletes is feasible.
Scientists discover that Vitamin Q14 present in minute quantities in everybody is an aid to high jumping .
Upper Bongo athletes have abnormally high levels of Q14 and regularly win all the High Jump comps - are they cheating ?
Scientists discover that the Umbug Tree which only grows in the Upper Bongo has nuts with very high levels of Q14 .
It is found that Kew gardens has 2 specimens of this tree brought back from Africa in 1860 . The nuts are fed to UK athletes who win High Jump medals - are they cheating ?
The US spends 100 million dollars buying up all the worlds production of humbug nuts and feed them to US athletes wo now win all the medals - are they cheating ?
Russian scientists produce Q14 in the laboratory give pills who now win all the medals - are they cheating ?0 -
Bollocks. People will always be interested, no male sprinters in the UK can compete with Bolt over 100 metres but that doesn't mean that nobody is ever interested in sprinting.taffys said:''Indeed. The argument is not dissimilar to that put forward quite widely before WWII that certain races should be excluded because of their genetic advantages.''
Its quite dissimilar because we are talking about sex here, and not race.
AS I say, defend it if you like, but women simply won't bother to compete in events that feature people with this condition. Nobody will be interested.
IN a way, the whole Olympic ethos of men's and women's events runs counter to the modern leftist agenda of destroying traditional gender politics.
And that is why this is such a massive problem.
Most athletes compete against their nearest competitors and their own personal best. The existence of an elite that is even better doesn't put them off.0 -
Titter.......
More than 200 schools built in Scotland under private finance initiative (PFI) schemes are now at least partially owned by offshore investment funds.....
Although published data does not confirm the exact number of PFI schools owned wholly or partly offshore, it is clear they represent the vast majority.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-37135611
0 -
Michael Johnson is a proper class act, a real catch for British TV athletics events. He's really missed when watching the international feeds.PlatoSaid said:
I caught a bit of Michael Johnson talking about the issues for 100m vs 200m sprinters.Sandpit said:
Yes, agree. It's a really horrible race to run, too far for sprinting and too short for distance running techniques.Pulpstar said:The women's 800 metre is probably the event you can change the most through drugs/hyperandrogeny as it is both aerobic and anaerobic by necessity; also a way more 'pure' race than the oft tactical 1500.
It's basically who can slow down the least, against everything the body is telling you!
IIUC, he said Bolt's very upright tight technique was perfect for 100m - but really tough for 200m, as the natural desire to roll when running put huge pressure on his chest/stopped him from using the 100m stance in the last 100m.
That's why he was a zillion x better than Expert On Everything And I'm Better Than You Denise Lewis
He was the Bolt of his era, yet remains humble and is great at articulating the complexities of the various disiplines in ways that a layman can understand. He also provided the analysis on the nights his two world records fell.0 -
It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
0 -
Ah, you've conflated Serbia's Kosovan war with the entirely separate Bosnian war & Srebrenica massacre four years earlier.CarlottaVance said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/307225.stmTheuniondivvie said:
Salmond opposed intervention in the Bosnian war? Any link to that?CarlottaVance said:
A somewhat uncharitable view of Nicola's visit to the Balkans (which I though 'brave', since Salmond opposed intervention at the time....)malcolmg said:
Nonentity regional party teamleader seeks publicityTheScreamingEagles said:BTW - I see Ruth Davidson is channelling what Mike wrote on August 4th
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, has become the most senior party figure to float the idea of an early election as she cited concerns about rebellious backbenchers.
She said the “usual suspects” on the backbenches could “cause problems” for Mrs May and added there was a clear “temptation” to call an election sooner than 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/21/ruth-davidson-says-early-general-election-is-tempting-and-warns/
Good work.0 -
I'm not sure about Semenya's exact condition, but here's an extract about the most common DSD:MaxPB said:
Weren't the rumours that she had both XX and XY present? Having a working set of testes means she must have XY chromosomes present. That's why she has been classed as intersex.Philip_Thompson said:
Not my field of expertise but has she got two x-chromosomes or an x and a y-chromosome?david_herdson said:
What there needs to be for androgynous cases is a demarcation line, however it's defined. If Semenya is essentially male then she should be competing in the men's competition; if not, then she can carry on as she is. It sounds to me as if it's the definitions that need changing rather than any penalty system introduced (or reintroduced).MaxPB said:david_herdson said:Philip_Thompson said:
Ultimately though Caster has done nothing unnatural, immoral or wrong herself. So she's born with an anomaly that makes her better? I'm sure there's things in Usain Bolt's genetics that have assisted him too. I'm sure Paula Radcliffe herself has some genes that assisted her.Ishmael_X said:
What puts this close to lunatic country, is that if they are told to take medication they then face dq for *not* taking performance-altering drugs.
If there's enough interest in a sport that they take 1, 2 and 3 in the 800 metres why not have a separate competition for them?
If you want to rule out every anomaly then where do you draw the line. Caster is not a cheat and the Court of Arbitration for Sport had ruled on this beforehand. It's wrong to tarnish her victory now when she hasn't cheated.
And this is before genetic engineering better athletes is feasible.
I don't think it is unfair to say they either need to create a separate event for this category (maybe at the Paralympics?) or use the medication that the IAAF prescribed before.
Looks like a woman to me.
"There are a variety of intersex conditions or DSDs (differences of sexual development). The DSD that probably imparts the largest athletic advantage is called 5-alpha reductase deficiency or 5-ARD. Children born with 5-ARD have a Y chromosome, but have a deficiency in the enzyme that is used to convert testosterone to dihydrotestosterone or DHT. In turn, DHT is responsible for the development of external male genitalia, hence babies with 5-ARD are often assigned female gender at birth. After puberty, girls with 5-ARD have T in the low-normal male range, and hence have a huge athletic advantage over other women."0 -
BTW, DHT is most responsible for male pattern baldness.John_M said:
I'm not sure about Semenya's exact condition, but here's an extract about the most common DSD:MaxPB said:
Weren't the rumours that she had both XX and XY present? Having a working set of testes means she must have XY chromosomes present. That's why she has been classed as intersex.Philip_Thompson said:
Not my field of expertise but has she got two x-chromosomes or an x and a y-chromosome?david_herdson said:
What there needs to be for androgynous cases is a demarcation line, however it's defined. If Semenya is essentially male then she should be competing in the men's competition; if not, then she can carry on as she is. It sounds to me as if it's the definitions that need changing rather than any penalty system introduced (or reintroduced).MaxPB said:david_herdson said:Philip_Thompson said:
Ultimately though Caster has done nothing unnatural, immoral or wrong herself. So she's born with an anomaly that makes her better? I'm sure there's things in Usain Bolt's genetics that have assisted him too. I'm sure Paula Radcliffe herself has some genes that assisted her.Ishmael_X said:
What puts this close to lunatic country, is that if they are told to take medication they then face dq for *not* taking performance-altering drugs.
If there's enough interest in a sport that they take 1, 2 and 3 in the 800 metres why not have a separate competition for them?
If you want to rule out every anomaly then where do you draw the line. Caster is not a cheat and the Court of Arbitration for Sport had ruled on this beforehand. It's wrong to tarnish her victory now when she hasn't cheated.
And this is before genetic engineering better athletes is feasible.
I don't think it is unfair to say they either need to create a separate event for this category (maybe at the Paralympics?) or use the medication that the IAAF prescribed before.
Looks like a woman to me.
"There are a variety of intersex conditions or DSDs (differences of sexual development). The DSD that probably imparts the largest athletic advantage is called 5-alpha reductase deficiency or 5-ARD. Children born with 5-ARD have a Y chromosome, but have a deficiency in the enzyme that is used to convert testosterone to dihydrotestosterone or DHT. In turn, DHT is responsible for the development of external male genitalia, hence babies with 5-ARD are often assigned female gender at birth. After puberty, girls with 5-ARD have T in the low-normal male range, and hence have a huge athletic advantage over other women."0 -
''Bollocks. People will always be interested, no male sprinters in the UK can compete with Bolt over 100 metres but that doesn't mean that nobody is ever interested in sprinting.''
That is a titanically bad example. Being beaten by Bolt is one thing. Being beaten by an athlete returning from a drugs ban is something completely different. Ask any athlete.
0 -
But Semenya hasn't taken any illicit drugs. If she had she should be banned. She has genes that assist her, I'm sure Bolt does too.taffys said:''Bollocks. People will always be interested, no male sprinters in the UK can compete with Bolt over 100 metres but that doesn't mean that nobody is ever interested in sprinting.''
That is a titanically bad example. Being beaten by Bolt is one thing. Being beaten by an athlete returning from a drugs ban is something completely different. Ask any athlete.0 -
Yes, male genes, in female events.Philip_Thompson said:
But Semenya hasn't taken any illicit drugs. If she had she should be banned. She has genes that assist her, I'm sure Bolt does too.taffys said:''Bollocks. People will always be interested, no male sprinters in the UK can compete with Bolt over 100 metres but that doesn't mean that nobody is ever interested in sprinting.''
That is a titanically bad example. Being beaten by Bolt is one thing. Being beaten by an athlete returning from a drugs ban is something completely different. Ask any athlete.0 -
If you assume a natural distribution of talent for any event within any population, I am not convinced that the expected relationship between national population size and number of gold medals, all other things being equal, would be linear?Indigo said:Re: Rio
Surely we should be considering GMPC (Gold Medals per capita) in any fair comparison
0.44 ... UK
0.20 ... Germany
0.14 ... USA
0.13 ... Russia
0.01 ... China
The problem with this approach is we come some way down the table from the Bahamas with 2.58 gold medals per capita !0 -
If that's the case she should be classified as such. The Court of Arbitration for Sport has ruled that not to be the case.MaxPB said:
Yes, male genes, in female events.Philip_Thompson said:
But Semenya hasn't taken any illicit drugs. If she had she should be banned. She has genes that assist her, I'm sure Bolt does too.taffys said:''Bollocks. People will always be interested, no male sprinters in the UK can compete with Bolt over 100 metres but that doesn't mean that nobody is ever interested in sprinting.''
That is a titanically bad example. Being beaten by Bolt is one thing. Being beaten by an athlete returning from a drugs ban is something completely different. Ask any athlete.0 -
Reductio ad Godfrey Bloomin' heckMarkSenior said:
As I have posted before , the whole drug taking issue is ridiculous .david_herdson said:
Indeed. The argument is not dissimilar to that put forward quite widely before WWII that certain races should be excluded because of their genetic advantages. That was no doubt a smokescreen for other reasons but that's beside the point; the results suggest that certain races *do* seem to have advantages in certain disciplines / sports. Should they be given weight penalties too? The whole notion enters the realm of absurdity when you start trying to discriminate between 'legitimate' and 'illegitimate' natural advantages.Philip_Thompson said:
Ultimately though Caster has done nothing unnatural, immoral or wrong herself. So she's born with an anomaly that makes her better? I'm sure there's things in Usain Bolt's genetics that have assisted him too. I'm sure Paula Radcliffe herself has some genes that assisted her.Ishmael_X said:
What puts this close to lunatic country, is that if they are told to take medication they then face dq for *not* taking performance-altering drugs.CD13 said:On the Caster issue, Paula (of ‘I’ll have a quick pee behind the nearest tree, nobody will notice’ fame) Radcliffe is forthright …
If there's enough interest in a sport that they take 1, 2 and 3 in the 800 metres why not have a separate competition for them?
If you want to rule out every anomaly then where do you draw the line. Caster is not a cheat and the Court of Arbitration for Sport had ruled on this beforehand. It's wrong to tarnish her victory now when she hasn't cheated.
And this is before genetic engineering better athletes is feasible.
Scientists discover that Vitamin Q14 present in minute quantities in everybody is an aid to high jumping .
Upper Bongo athletes have abnormally high levels of Q14 and regularly win all the High Jump comps - are they cheating ?
Scientists discover that the Umbug Tree which only grows in the Upper Bongo has nuts with very high levels of Q14 .
It is found that Kew gardens has 2 specimens of this tree brought back from Africa in 1860 . The nuts are fed to UK athletes who win High Jump medals - are they cheating ?
The US spends 100 million dollars buying up all the worlds production of humbug nuts and feed them to US athletes wo now win all the medals - are they cheating ?
Russian scientists produce Q14 in the laboratory give pills who now win all the medals - are they cheating ?0 -
Salmond had clearly learned nothing from Srebrenica.....how's that hole you're digging going?Theuniondivvie said:
Ah, you've conflated Serbia's Kosovan war with the entirely separate Bosnian war & Srebrenica massacre four years earlier.CarlottaVance said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/307225.stmTheuniondivvie said:
Salmond opposed intervention in the Bosnian war? Any link to that?CarlottaVance said:
A somewhat uncharitable view of Nicola's visit to the Balkans (which I though 'brave', since Salmond opposed intervention at the time....)malcolmg said:
Nonentity regional party teamleader seeks publicityTheScreamingEagles said:BTW - I see Ruth Davidson is channelling what Mike wrote on August 4th
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, has become the most senior party figure to float the idea of an early election as she cited concerns about rebellious backbenchers.
She said the “usual suspects” on the backbenches could “cause problems” for Mrs May and added there was a clear “temptation” to call an election sooner than 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/21/ruth-davidson-says-early-general-election-is-tempting-and-warns/
Good work.0 -
''It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.''
If you are arguing that we should do away with separating men's and women's sports altogether, well its a brave suggestion. Very brave.
0 -
There all manner of weird and wonderful chromosomal issues:MaxPB said:
Yes, male genes, in female events.Philip_Thompson said:
But Semenya hasn't taken any illicit drugs. If she had she should be banned. She has genes that assist her, I'm sure Bolt does too.taffys said:''Bollocks. People will always be interested, no male sprinters in the UK can compete with Bolt over 100 metres but that doesn't mean that nobody is ever interested in sprinting.''
That is a titanically bad example. Being beaten by Bolt is one thing. Being beaten by an athlete returning from a drugs ban is something completely different. Ask any athlete.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Klinefelter_XXY
There was a Spanish athlete in the 80s who was stripped of her medals due to this syndrome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_X_syndrome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XYY_syndrome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XXXY_syndrome0 -
Actually, the IAAF has ruled that to be the case, but CAS ruled that intersex women should have a two year period in which to show how they would affect women's events after which the IAAF can choose to reimpose the testosterone reduction medication if they feel it gives them an unfair advantage over fully female competitors. CAS didn't rule on genetics, they ruled on the competitive side and said that the IAAF had acted without gathering enough evidence.Philip_Thompson said:
If that's the case she should be classified as such. The Court of Arbitration for Sport has ruled that not to be the case.MaxPB said:
Yes, male genes, in female events.Philip_Thompson said:
But Semenya hasn't taken any illicit drugs. If she had she should be banned. She has genes that assist her, I'm sure Bolt does too.taffys said:''Bollocks. People will always be interested, no male sprinters in the UK can compete with Bolt over 100 metres but that doesn't mean that nobody is ever interested in sprinting.''
That is a titanically bad example. Being beaten by Bolt is one thing. Being beaten by an athlete returning from a drugs ban is something completely different. Ask any athlete.0 -
Not sure how you got to that. All I want is a bit more sensitivity and decision making from the authorities that protects the individual.taffys said:''It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.''
If you are arguing that we should do away with separating men's and women's sports altogether, well its a brave suggestion. Very brave.
0 -
''But Semenya hasn't taken any illicit drugs. If she had she should be banned. She has genes that assist her, I'm sure Bolt does too. ''
To my mind the extension of your argument is a unified racing free for all which essentially means no participation by what we now know as 'women' in any olympics in future.0 -
Is Team GB with the national lottery now like Chelsea with Abramovich?0
-
Q. Salmond opposed intervention in the Bosnian war? Any link to that?CarlottaVance said:
Salmond had clearly learned nothing from Srebrenica.....how's that hole you're digging going?Theuniondivvie said:
Ah, you've conflated Serbia's Kosovan war with the entirely separate Bosnian war & Srebrenica massacre four years earlier.CarlottaVance said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/307225.stmTheuniondivvie said:
Salmond opposed intervention in the Bosnian war? Any link to that?CarlottaVance said:
A somewhat uncharitable view of Nicola's visit to the Balkans (which I though 'brave', since Salmond opposed intervention at the time....)malcolmg said:
Nonentity regional party teamleader seeks publicityTheScreamingEagles said:BTW - I see Ruth Davidson is channelling what Mike wrote on August 4th
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, has become the most senior party figure to float the idea of an early election as she cited concerns about rebellious backbenchers.
She said the “usual suspects” on the backbenches could “cause problems” for Mrs May and added there was a clear “temptation” to call an election sooner than 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/21/ruth-davidson-says-early-general-election-is-tempting-and-warns/
Good work.
A. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/307225.stm
Always a joy to witness your elastic relationship with dates and geography, and provide a bit of necessary schooling.0 -
For 99.99%+ (and for once, we can use that accurately), it's not an issue. We're talking one athlete out of more than 10000 in Rio, never mind all those other athletes who didn't qualify. I fully accept that it needs to be done humanely and sensitively but at the same time, the decision reached needs to be fair to all involved and that will inevitably involve debate.Jonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
In fact, that it's so rare is unfortunate because the general case becomes hard to separate from the specific, given that there is at present only one specific worth considering.0 -
Indeed, I think that's the core of the issue. We should classify female events as XX and male events as XY. Deviation from that can have Paralympic events for each different classification if there are enough competitors. Making it impossible for XX women to win events through legitimate means is not right.John_M said:
There all manner of weird and wonderful chromosomal issues:MaxPB said:
Yes, male genes, in female events.Philip_Thompson said:
But Semenya hasn't taken any illicit drugs. If she had she should be banned. She has genes that assist her, I'm sure Bolt does too.taffys said:''Bollocks. People will always be interested, no male sprinters in the UK can compete with Bolt over 100 metres but that doesn't mean that nobody is ever interested in sprinting.''
That is a titanically bad example. Being beaten by Bolt is one thing. Being beaten by an athlete returning from a drugs ban is something completely different. Ask any athlete.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Klinefelter_XXY
There was a Spanish athlete in the 80s who was stripped of her medals due to this syndrome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_X_syndrome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XYY_syndrome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XXXY_syndrome0 -
''Not sure how you got to that. All I want is a bit more sensitivity and decision making from the authorities that protects the individual.''
Well you said its great the human race doesn;t fit into neat classifications (Presumably you meant 'men' and 'women'. If its so great then why have classifications at all?).0 -
As I've said repeatedly, make the Olympics open to all. One competition open to males, females, those with AIS or steroidal synthesis enzyme disorders and drug abusers.
No females would have much of a chance, but you can't make a proper omelette without ...0 -
We have a men's 100m and a women's 100m, due to the genetic differences in their bodies.
So, should we have a "white" 100m and a "black" 100m to be fair to different races?
0 -
The debate should not be focussed on an individual. I can't think of other circumstances would it be okay to talk openly about someone's gonads. Politics doesn't count.david_herdson said:
For 99.99%+ (and for once, we can use that accurately), it's not an issue. We're talking one athlete out of more than 10000 in Rio, never mind all those other athletes who didn't qualify. I fully accept that it needs to be done humanely and sensitively but at the same time, the decision reached needs to be fair to all involved and that will inevitably involve debate.Jonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
In fact, that it's so rare is unfortunate because the general case becomes hard to separate from the specific, given that there is at present only one specific worth considering.
The Olympics has a specific problem to solve, because it rewards genetic specialisation. This is likely to become more common in future.
Speaking of specialisation, it would be great to see an Olympic event for the genetic all-rounder, Mr & Mrs Average. Someone who is amazingly right down the middle, neither slow nor fast etc. :-)
0 -
That's Corbynite waffle that could easily be put alongside 'no person left behind' (a decidedly un-Olympian slogan).Jonathan said:
Not sure how you got to that. All I want is a bit more sensitivity and decision making from the authorities that protects the individual.taffys said:''It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.''
If you are arguing that we should do away with separating men's and women's sports altogether, well its a brave suggestion. Very brave.
What does "a bit more sensitivity and decision making from the authorities that protects the individual" mean in practice in this case?0 -
Only in Ireland
Irish Times
Squatters living in derelict Dublin prison face jail terms https://t.co/sDoyelMpIj0 -
If we have separate male and female competitions, you need to define the limits. We are reluctant to do so. My view is unpopular, but given sensitivities about gender, it's the only way forward.0
-
The heptathlon and decathlon are great examples of being events in which one can win overall without winning any single individual event.Jonathan said:Speaking of specialisation, it would be great to see an Olympic event for the genetic all-rounder, Mr & Mrs Average. Someone who is amazingly right down the middle, neither slow nor fast etc. :-)
0 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mOEU87SBTUJonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.0 -
We separate by gender, why not age too? Wouldn't it be fun to have an over 40s, over 60s and over 80s classification for some sports.
I love to tune into the 100m for the over 80s.0 -
No, it'd be entirely boring. Billions tune in to the Olympics to watch the exceptional; not some bloke doing a glorified gym workout.Jonathan said:
The debate should not be focussed on an individual. I can't think of other circumstances would it be okay to talk openly about someone's gonads. Politics doesn't count.david_herdson said:
For 99.99%+ (and for once, we can use that accurately), it's not an issue. We're talking one athlete out of more than 10000 in Rio, never mind all those other athletes who didn't qualify. I fully accept that it needs to be done humanely and sensitively but at the same time, the decision reached needs to be fair to all involved and that will inevitably involve debate.Jonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
In fact, that it's so rare is unfortunate because the general case becomes hard to separate from the specific, given that there is at present only one specific worth considering.
The Olympics has a specific problem to solve, because it rewards genetic specialisation. This is likely to become more common in future.
Speaking of specialisation, it would be great to see an Olympic event for the genetic all-rounder, Mr & Mrs Average. Someone who is amazingly right down the middle, neither slow nor fast etc. :-)
It's the same reason why Quentin Wilson never got why Top Gear became more successful once they stopped reviewing Vauxhall Cavaliers.
Edit - I think you might have been joking. I'm not sure whether the fact that I didn't notice reflects worse on me or you.0 -
I've suggested on Left Foot Forward that Usain Bolt could self-identify as a woman and win gold medals for the next twenty years. That would satisfy the Guardian readers.0
-
No, because we compete as nations - not races.MarkHopkins said:
We have a men's 100m and a women's 100m, due to the genetic differences in their bodies.
So, should we have a "white" 100m and a "black" 100m to be fair to different races?0 -
Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.0
-
I'd be up for a spot of pasty eating.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
0 -
Create a simple rule, stick to it and put a stop to endless debate unfairly focussed on individuals who have their private bits dragged through the media. Ie the opposite of "Corbynnite waffle".david_herdson said:
That's Corbynite waffle that could easily be put alongside 'no person left behind' (a decidedly un-Olympian slogan).Jonathan said:
Not sure how you got to that. All I want is a bit more sensitivity and decision making from the authorities that protects the individual.taffys said:''It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.''
If you are arguing that we should do away with separating men's and women's sports altogether, well its a brave suggestion. Very brave.
What does "a bit more sensitivity and decision making from the authorities that protects the individual" mean in practice in this case?
If anything, I think it is you who secretly desire to wear one of those funny caps and create a public committee called the "the people's gender assignment tribunal".0 -
What a narrow minded view. We should have the Caring Games - where those who emote the most get to feel really good about themselves. There are no winners or losers as that'd demean their self-worth.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
0 -
This is the problem with the tyranny of the concept of 'gender' - something that is a modern creation with no real basis in reality.CD13 said:If we have separate male and female competitions, you need to define the limits. We are reluctant to do so. My view is unpopular, but given sensitivities about gender, it's the only way forward.
If what is reported is true, it is clearly wrong that someone who was born without a womb or ovaries and who has internal testes competes as a woman.0 -
You clearly have never played Croquet, a bitter, brutal sport.PlatoSaid said:
What a narrow minded view. We should have the Caring Games - where those who emote the most get to feel really good about themselves. There are no winners or losers as that'd demean their self-worth.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
0 -
It's rather rough on the 99.99% born XX with the ability to make body mass of an XX having to compete against somebody who is kinda XX but with the ability to make the muscles of an XY. Caster Semenya is a gold medal winner because life's lottery has given her a huge advantage. Whilst not cheating as such, she doesn't compete on a level playing field.david_herdson said:
For 99.99%+ (and for once, we can use that accurately), it's not an issue. We're talking one athlete out of more than 10000 in Rio, never mind all those other athletes who didn't qualify. I fully accept that it needs to be done humanely and sensitively but at the same time, the decision reached needs to be fair to all involved and that will inevitably involve debate.Jonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
In fact, that it's so rare is unfortunate because the general case becomes hard to separate from the specific, given that there is at present only one specific worth considering.0 -
What the..?
China takes out a full page ad in the Times today, exclaiming the virtues of Chinese Olympians!
http://order-order.com/2016/08/22/times-runs-full-page-ad-for-china-heroes/0 -
The PB collective should enter a wine tasting teamRichard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
0 -
You played with John Prescott?Jonathan said:
You clearly have never played Croquet, a bitter, brutal sport.PlatoSaid said:
What a narrow minded view. We should have the Caring Games - where those who emote the most get to feel really good about themselves. There are no winners or losers as that'd demean their self-worth.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
The Olympics is about competition - having men winning female Gold, Silver and Bronze because of PC gender politics is daft.
There's no comparison with having Phelp's big feet or long body, or Bolt's long legs and height.0 -
You would need extra long ribbons so that the medals could get over the abnormally large noses.Sandpit said:
The PB collective should enter a wine tasting teamRichard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
0 -
What a joke – mind you, the Times will appreciate the advertising revenue…Sandpit said:What the..?
China takes out a full page ad in the Times today, exclaiming the virtues of Chinese Olympians!
http://order-order.com/2016/08/22/times-runs-full-page-ad-for-china-heroes/0 -
"A bold headline emblazoned with the Chinese flag praises “China Heroes” such as weightlifter Long Qingquan and table tennis champion Ding Ning."Sandpit said:What the..?
China takes out a full page ad in the Times today, exclaiming the virtues of Chinese Olympians!
http://order-order.com/2016/08/22/times-runs-full-page-ad-for-china-heroes/
What an ace name!0 -
I have just come across a rather excellent term used by the arrogant astronomer Fritz Zwicky. He was famously difficult to get on with, and termed his colleagues "spherical bastards - bastards whichever way you looked at them..."0
-
China isn't too bad at sports, especially when compared to it's population rival India. I think only getting two bronze medals in the gymnastics will sting the most for them !0
-
Known to his friends as Seconds Away, Round One...PlatoSaid said:
"A bold headline emblazoned with the Chinese flag praises “China Heroes” such as weightlifter Long Qingquan and table tennis champion Ding Ning."Sandpit said:What the..?
China takes out a full page ad in the Times today, exclaiming the virtues of Chinese Olympians!
http://order-order.com/2016/08/22/times-runs-full-page-ad-for-china-heroes/
What an ace name!0 -
''What an ace name! ''
Could we take out an ad in the People's Daily?
0 -
MarqueeMark said:
Known to his friends as Seconds Away, Round One...PlatoSaid said:
"A bold headline emblazoned with the Chinese flag praises “China Heroes” such as weightlifter Long Qingquan and table tennis champion Ding Ning."Sandpit said:What the..?
China takes out a full page ad in the Times today, exclaiming the virtues of Chinese Olympians!
http://order-order.com/2016/08/22/times-runs-full-page-ad-for-china-heroes/
What an ace name!
0 -
Not sure about wine tasting or tiddlywinks but generally croquet is split between men and women at the highest levels (men having generally better perceptual ability). Certainly the winners of the President's cup and Chairman's Salver for the last 'n' years have been male - and special women's competitions were held.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
That being said, one of the most famous historical croquet players was Dorothy Steel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Steel. (Although many here will remember John Prescott's recent contribution at Dorneywood))
Technical advances in croquet in recent years have been amazing - a few years ago a triple peel (putting your partner ball through the last three hoops while making your own winning break) was notable. These days, Quadruple peels are hardly mentioned, Sextuple peels are commonplace and there have even been cases of Octuple peels (putting the ball through the last 8 hoops as you make 12. Bear in mind you can only hit (roquet) and take croquet from (contact shot) each ball ONCE between making each hoop.0 -
There's no subject PBers are beyond appropriate expertise in.weejonnie said:
Not sure about wine tasting or tiddlywinks but generally croquet is split between men and women at the highest levels (men having generally better perceptual ability). Certainly the winners of the President's cup and Chairman's Salver for the last 'n' years have been male - and special women's competitions were held.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
That being said, one of the most famous historical croquet players was Dorothy Steel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Steel. (Although many here will remember John Prescott's recent contribution at Dorneywood))
Technical advances in croquet in recent years have been amazing - a few years ago a triple peel (putting your partner ball through the last three hoops while making your own winning break) was notable. These days, Quadruple peels are hardly mentioned, Sextuple peels are commonplace and there have even been cases of Octuple peels (putting the ball through the last 8 hoops as you make 12. Bear in mind you can only hit (roquet) and take croquet from (contact shot) each ball ONCE between making each hoop.0 -
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/22/brexit-means-brexit-when-is-big-question
Welcome to Brexit ! It ain't gonna come cheap.0 -
The other thing that occurred to me is that now we're actually good at the Olympics it might be time to raise the bar for honours from four golds for a knighthood to five golds. If we're still as good in Tokyo then raise it again to six. It was fine to set the bar at four golds when were weren't very good but we are now in a different place with performance, giving out the highest honour needs a higher bar.0
-
Whereas examining an athlete's sexual phenotype may be considered intrusive, is the same true of the determination of their genotype?0
-
Anything is better than zero golds and being a mate of the PM.MaxPB said:The other thing that occurred to me is that now we're actually good at the Olympics it might be time to raise the bar for honours from four golds for a knighthood to five golds. If we're still as good in Tokyo then raise it again to six. It was fine to set the bar at four golds when were weren't very good but we are now in a different place with performance, giving out the highest honour needs a higher bar.
0 -
It is being widely reported that 4 of the 8 finalists in the 800 m were intersex, not just 1 athlete at the whole gamesdavid_herdson said:
For 99.99%+ (and for once, we can use that accurately), it's not an issue. We're talking one athlete out of more than 10000 in Rio, never mind all those other athletes who didn't qualify. I fully accept that it needs to be done humanely and sensitively but at the same time, the decision reached needs to be fair to all involved and that will inevitably involve debate.Jonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
In fact, that it's so rare is unfortunate because the general case becomes hard to separate from the specific, given that there is at present only one specific worth considering.0 -
Picking up indirectly on this point, I do like the Decathlon and Heptathlon for that reason - much less cope for genetic exceptionalism, more scope for the all-rounder. Superficially, the pentathlon ought to be even better in this regard, with its more esoteric range of disciplines - but the show jumping aspect is to a large extent a lottery and I have my doubts about the fencing - though I'm no expert and I'm sure others understand better than I the subtleties involved.david_herdson said:
No, it'd be entirely boring. Billions tune in to the Olympics to watch the exceptional; not some bloke doing a glorified gym workout.Jonathan said:
The debate should not be focussed on an individual. I can't think of other circumstances would it be okay to talk openly about someone's gonads. Politics doesn't count.david_herdson said:
For 99.99%+ (and for once, we can use that accurately), it's not an issue. We're talking one athlete out of more than 10000 in Rio, never mind all those other athletes who didn't qualify. I fully accept that it needs to be done humanely and sensitively but at the same time, the decision reached needs to be fair to all involved and that will inevitably involve debate.Jonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
In fact, that it's so rare is unfortunate because the general case becomes hard to separate from the specific, given that there is at present only one specific worth considering.
The Olympics has a specific problem to solve, because it rewards genetic specialisation. This is likely to become more common in future.
Speaking of specialisation, it would be great to see an Olympic event for the genetic all-rounder, Mr & Mrs Average. Someone who is amazingly right down the middle, neither slow nor fast etc. :-)
It's the same reason why Quentin Wilson never got why Top Gear became more successful once they stopped reviewing Vauxhall Cavaliers.
Edit - I think you might have been joking. I'm not sure whether the fact that I didn't notice reflects worse on me or you.
And while I'm throwing my uninformed opinions around, I would happily lose any sports from the Olympics (and indeed from the general category 'sport') anything which includes judges, points for artistic interpretation, a backing track, or an expectation that competitors slather themselves in make-up to perform (if they are performing rather than competing it is not a sport). Rhythmic gymnastics is jolly clever, but is not a sport.0 -
At one time they used to do very well at mens hockey.Pulpstar said:China isn't too bad at sports, especially when compared to it's population rival India. I think only getting two bronze medals in the gymnastics will sting the most for them !
0 -
I have played Association Croquet (handicap was once 2 1/2) - it is no more a brutal sport than snooker. It is one of the most skilful ball games there is with players trying to hit a ball up to 40 yards away from their own and then having to place balls accurately within a few inches from many yards away. The croquet shot (one ball touches the other and BOTH must move when the player's ball is hit), is one of finesse - holding the mallet differently can send the balls at different ratios from 6:1 (stop shot) to 1:1.5 (pass roll) when sent in the same direction and accurate placement is required when the balls go off in different directions (called a split shot).Jonathan said:
You clearly have never played Croquet, a bitter, brutal sport.PlatoSaid said:
What a narrow minded view. We should have the Caring Games - where those who emote the most get to feel really good about themselves. There are no winners or losers as that'd demean their self-worth.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
0 -
The other three injected themselves ?Ishmael_X said:
It is being widely reported that 4 of the 8 finalists in the 800 m were intersex, not just 1 athlete at the whole gamesdavid_herdson said:
For 99.99%+ (and for once, we can use that accurately), it's not an issue. We're talking one athlete out of more than 10000 in Rio, never mind all those other athletes who didn't qualify. I fully accept that it needs to be done humanely and sensitively but at the same time, the decision reached needs to be fair to all involved and that will inevitably involve debate.Jonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
In fact, that it's so rare is unfortunate because the general case becomes hard to separate from the specific, given that there is at present only one specific worth considering.0 -
Fantastic post. I haven't a clue what the last paragraph actually means, but it is certainly well up there in the highest traditions of PB. Thank you, Mr. Jonnie.weejonnie said:
Not sure about wine tasting or tiddlywinks but generally croquet is split between men and women at the highest levels (men having generally better perceptual ability). Certainly the winners of the President's cup and Chairman's Salver for the last 'n' years have been male - and special women's competitions were held.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
That being said, one of the most famous historical croquet players was Dorothy Steel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Steel. (Although many here will remember John Prescott's recent contribution at Dorneywood))
Technical advances in croquet in recent years have been amazing - a few years ago a triple peel (putting your partner ball through the last three hoops while making your own winning break) was notable. These days, Quadruple peels are hardly mentioned, Sextuple peels are commonplace and there have even been cases of Octuple peels (putting the ball through the last 8 hoops as you make 12. Bear in mind you can only hit (roquet) and take croquet from (contact shot) each ball ONCE between making each hoop.0 -
It would be easier to abolish the stupid system. Is Phelps getting a gong ? 22 !, I repeat, 22 !MaxPB said:The other thing that occurred to me is that now we're actually good at the Olympics it might be time to raise the bar for honours from four golds for a knighthood to five golds. If we're still as good in Tokyo then raise it again to six. It was fine to set the bar at four golds when were weren't very good but we are now in a different place with performance, giving out the highest honour needs a higher bar.
0 -
I once went on a “team bonding weekend” where we were encouraged to play croquet........Jonathan said:
You clearly have never played Croquet, a bitter, brutal sport.PlatoSaid said:
What a narrow minded view. We should have the Caring Games - where those who emote the most get to feel really good about themselves. There are no winners or losers as that'd demean their self-worth.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
0 -
Oh dear, yet another Owen GoalPlatoSaid said:Mark Wallace
Owen's running a campaign based on the premise that he isn't proud of Britain now. Captain Competence strikes again. https://t.co/LR6Ke4kzlj
Owen Smith: A Labour Party that isn't proud of Britain.0 -
Before Astro-turf came in. India and Pakistan were stupid to accept it. The dribbling skills went with it. Now it is hit and run. From 1936 to 1968, they won them all.OldKingCole said:
At one time they used to do very well at mens hockey.Pulpstar said:China isn't too bad at sports, especially when compared to it's population rival India. I think only getting two bronze medals in the gymnastics will sting the most for them !
0 -
Always a joy to illustrate the SNP's cozying up to the wrong side as long as they aren't BritainTheuniondivvie said:
Q. Salmond opposed intervention in the Bosnian war? Any link to that?CarlottaVance said:
Salmond had clearly learned nothing from Srebrenica.....how's that hole you're digging going?Theuniondivvie said:
Ah, you've conflated Serbia's Kosovan war with the entirely separate Bosnian war & Srebrenica massacre four years earlier.CarlottaVance said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/307225.stmTheuniondivvie said:
Salmond opposed intervention in the Bosnian war? Any link to that?CarlottaVance said:
A somewhat uncharitable view of Nicola's visit to the Balkans (which I though 'brave', since Salmond opposed intervention at the time....)malcolmg said:
Nonentity regional party teamleader seeks publicityTheScreamingEagles said:BTW - I see Ruth Davidson is channelling what Mike wrote on August 4th
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, has become the most senior party figure to float the idea of an early election as she cited concerns about rebellious backbenchers.
She said the “usual suspects” on the backbenches could “cause problems” for Mrs May and added there was a clear “temptation” to call an election sooner than 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/21/ruth-davidson-says-early-general-election-is-tempting-and-warns/
Good work.
A. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/307225.stm
Always a joy to witness your elastic relationship with dates and geography, and provide a bit of necessary schooling.
Belgrade has thanked Scottish National Party leader Alex Salmond for "condemning Tony Blair's aggression".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/309981.stm
I wonder how the successor to 'the toast of Belgrade' felt about that....0 -
This looks revolting. What is it?
Jena Abrams
This is kind of meat the Venezuelan government give inside it's CLAP* bags to the people
Socialism is yum https://t.co/r7ezRveU3x
It reminds me of Alien0 -
Astonishing betting figure*
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/767700068237447168
*Astonished that it is high as £740 -
Momentum
#LabourLeadership vote has begun - time to make some waves! Let us know when you've #JustVotedJez https://t.co/sBKrUWtYA90 -
Agreed. One of my favourite, and one of the most mis-understood of lawn games.weejonnie said:
I have played Association Croquet (handicap was once 2 1/2) - it is no more a brutal sport than snooker. It is one of the most skilful ball games there is with players trying to hit a ball up to 40 yards away from their own and then having to place balls accurately within a few inches from many yards away. The croquet shot (one ball touches the other and BOTH must move when the player's ball is hit), is one of finesse - holding the mallet differently can send the balls at different ratios from 6:1 (stop shot) to 1:1.5 (pass roll) when sent in the same direction and accurate placement is required when the balls go off in different directions (called a split shot).Jonathan said:
You clearly have never played Croquet, a bitter, brutal sport.PlatoSaid said:
What a narrow minded view. We should have the Caring Games - where those who emote the most get to feel really good about themselves. There are no winners or losers as that'd demean their self-worth.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
Some wags used to remark that I spent more time playing Croquet than studying; I never tried to work it out, but was certaintly never happier than when in BNC new quad playing with mallets and balls.....0 -
Yes, well there zillions of swimming events to win. Not so much on the cycling track or rowing boat.surbiton said:
It would be easier to abolish the stupid system. Is Phelps getting a gong ? 22 !, I repeat, 22 !MaxPB said:The other thing that occurred to me is that now we're actually good at the Olympics it might be time to raise the bar for honours from four golds for a knighthood to five golds. If we're still as good in Tokyo then raise it again to six. It was fine to set the bar at four golds when were weren't very good but we are now in a different place with performance, giving out the highest honour needs a higher bar.
0 -
Excellent idea. Anyone who's not 100% ruthless can be noted as unfit for promotion.OldKingCole said:
I once went on a “team bonding weekend” where we were encouraged to play croquet........Jonathan said:
You clearly have never played Croquet, a bitter, brutal sport.PlatoSaid said:
What a narrow minded view. We should have the Caring Games - where those who emote the most get to feel really good about themselves. There are no winners or losers as that'd demean their self-worth.Richard_Nabavi said:Clearly the answer is to restrict the Olympic Games to sports where gender doesn't matter. Croquet, Tiddlywinks and Wine Tasting come to mind.
0 -
What about bell-ringing as an Olympic sport? (Technically, I believe, campanology is the study of bell-ringing rather than the exercise itself). I know I've just doubted the validity of sports that require judges, but judging in these contests is for accuracy and timing rather than style - something a computer could easily do. It is an exercise that requires more than a little physicality, skill, practice, dedication etc...
It would be a tedious spectator event, admittedly - although it would provide a pleasant musical backdrop for a couple of days. But GB&BNI would be in with a good shout of a medal (along with Ireland, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand), natch).0 -
Possibly, but the injections dont seem to have leveled the playing field much do they? If they did it's a spooky coincidence that 3 of them make the final despite no inherent advantagesurbiton said:
The other three injected themselves ?Ishmael_X said:
It is being widely reported that 4 of the 8 finalists in the 800 m were intersex, not just 1 athlete at the whole gamesdavid_herdson said:
For 99.99%+ (and for once, we can use that accurately), it's not an issue. We're talking one athlete out of more than 10000 in Rio, never mind all those other athletes who didn't qualify. I fully accept that it needs to be done humanely and sensitively but at the same time, the decision reached needs to be fair to all involved and that will inevitably involve debate.Jonathan said:It's great that the human race doesn't fit into neat classifications.
The Olympics needs to wake up to that and deal with it humanely in a way that is not invasive to the privacy of individual.
I am not sure any of us would enjoy the location of our gonads or the contents of our DNA discussed on the Internet.
It's a bit sick.
In fact, that it's so rare is unfortunate because the general case becomes hard to separate from the specific, given that there is at present only one specific worth considering.0 -
Being counted as London revenue no doubtCarlottaVance said:malcolmg said:
Business as usual , we just pay for them to have fun at our expense.CarlottaVance said:The grievance mongers alight on Great British Bake off:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14694454.BBC_criticised_as_new_Great_British_Bake_Off_series_contains_no_Scots/
Lets see -
Scotland has one twelfth of the UK's population.
There are twelve contestants
Last year two came from Scotland.
So, all things being equal, roughly how many should Scotland have this year.....?
Talking of which....GERS are out this week - the usual suspects rubbishing them already.....where is that Whisky export duty?
http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/14696204.David_Torrance__Why_the_SNP_needs_a_mature_response_to_economic_figures/0
