2016 Olympic Golf Tournament (Men's and Women's) Discussion Thread

[Golfingdad]

13 minutes ago, iacas said:

It's not a contest between countries.

It's a contest between athletes. They just happen to be representing countries.

Yup.

@Rainmaker probably approves of the gymnastics rules that prevented a third US gymnast from qualifying for the individual finals despite the fact that she qualified substantially higher than every other competitor except the two Americans that qualified.

[Buckeyebowman]

On 8/5/2016 at 10:42 PM, gregsandiego said:

OK, but wait! How can you be a member of TST and NOT have the golf channel? 

 

And by the way do you know when the golf event starts?

I'll tell you how. I used to be able to buy it "a la carte" for so much per month on Dish Network. Then, they changed their ways and demanded that I buy their top of the line "package" in order to get it. I told them to f**k off! There's no way I'm going to knuckle under to that kind of crap!

[gregsandiego]

8 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

I'll tell you how. I used to be able to buy it "a la carte" for so much per month on Dish Network. Then, they changed their ways and demanded that I buy their top of the line "package" in order to get it. I told them to f**k off! There's no way I'm going to knuckle under to that kind of crap!

Well there is always the local sports bar!

[Buckeyebowman]

17 hours ago, boogielicious said:

I did gymnastics when I was young. The owner of our gym was a 1960 Bronze medalist on the balance beam. She did back walkovers as the difficult technical move.

For the most part, Olympic athletes have gotten faster and better in their sport, or for golf longer, but gymnastics has gone and done things that I did not think was humanly possible.

There's a local radio screamer who talks a lot of sports, but also everything else. His favorite sports are pro baseball, pro football, and pro basketball. He's now much for college sports. But, he does allow that the best, pure athletes on the planet are gymnasts! As he puts it, "They do things you can't believe!"

1 hour ago, iacas said:

It's not a contest between countries.

It's a contest between athletes. They just happen to be representing countries.

I guess that's why we hear "USA! USA! USA!", or "BRASIL!, BRASIL!, BRASIL!" Despite the "one-worlders" protests, the Olympic Games remain one of the best representations of nationalism left on the planet!

[Rainmaker]

5 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

Yup.

@Rainmaker probably approves of the gymnastics rules that prevented a third US gymnast from qualifying for the individual finals despite the fact that she qualified substantially higher than every other competitor except the two Americans that qualified.

I don't know specifically about that rule but it sounds like I would agree with it.  I can imagine how it sucks to be the 3rd best gymnast in the US and be better than athletes from other countries that are in the games. 

On the other hand . .the way I have always understood the Olympics is that it's the best athletes from each country and then we see which country ends up with the most medals at the end.  If the Olympics is about which country has the most medals at the end, then I agree with the rule. 

If the Olympics is a global individual competition, then I guess I would disagree with the rule - but then I'd say it's kind of confusing when athlete's or the media, etc, talk about "competing for their country".  I mean, what if the qualifier were based only on individual ability and the top 100 (or however many) gymnasts in the world were all from the US so no other countries could compete?  Obviously the US is taking home the Gold, Silver and Bronze. 

My opinion on this is pretty worthless, though . .I don't know much about the Olympics or follow most of these sports outside of the Olympics.  But I always thought *the point* of the Olympics (other than just to enjoy the sporting event) was to see which country ended up with the most medals. 

 

[newtogolf]

4 hours ago, Rainmaker said:

I don't know specifically about that rule but it sounds like I would agree with it.  I can imagine how it sucks to be the 3rd best gymnast in the US and be better than athletes from other countries that are in the games. 

On the other hand . .the way I have always understood the Olympics is that it's the best athletes from each country and then we see which country ends up with the most medals at the end.  If the Olympics is about which country has the most medals at the end, then I agree with the rule. 

If the Olympics is a global individual competition, then I guess I would disagree with the rule - but then I'd say it's kind of confusing when athlete's or the media, etc, talk about "competing for their country".  I mean, what if the qualifier were based only on individual ability and the top 100 (or however many) gymnasts in the world were all from the US so no other countries could compete?  Obviously the US is taking home the Gold, Silver and Bronze. 

My opinion on this is pretty worthless, though . .I don't know much about the Olympics or follow most of these sports outside of the Olympics.  But I always thought *the point* of the Olympics (other than just to enjoy the sporting event) was to see which country ended up with the most medals. 

 

It should be about who the best athletes in the world are first then what country they are from second.  If our 3rd best gymnast is better than the rest of the worlds then our top 3 girls should be competing for the medals.  Countries shouldn't get participation medals just for showing up.  

[Golfingdad]

5 hours ago, Rainmaker said:

I don't know specifically about that rule but it sounds like I would agree with it.  I can imagine how it sucks to be the 3rd best gymnast in the US and be better than athletes from other countries that are in the games. 

On the other hand . .the way I have always understood the Olympics is that it's the best athletes from each country and then we see which country ends up with the most medals at the end.  If the Olympics is about which country has the most medals at the end, then I agree with the rule. 

If the Olympics is a global individual competition, then I guess I would disagree with the rule - but then I'd say it's kind of confusing when athlete's or the media, etc, talk about "competing for their country".  I mean, what if the qualifier were based only on individual ability and the top 100 (or however many) gymnasts in the world were all from the US so no other countries could compete?  Obviously the US is taking home the Gold, Silver and Bronze. 

My opinion on this is pretty worthless, though . .I don't know much about the Olympics or follow most of these sports outside of the Olympics.  But I always thought *the point* of the Olympics (other than just to enjoy the sporting event) was to see which country ended up with the most medals. 

 

I wouldn't call that opinion worthless ... Seeing as how the people running the Olympics seem to agree with you.

And I don't disagree.  If you take it to the extreme then it would just be us vs Russia in most competitions.  It's better to include all of the countries at the expense of some athletes in the big ones being left out.

But allowing 2 extra golfers from a country that has enough to qualify still fits fine within the Olympic spirit IMO. :)

[natureboy]

6 hours ago, Rainmaker said:

I don't know specifically about that rule but it sounds like I would agree with it.  I can imagine how it sucks to be the 3rd best gymnast in the US and be better than athletes from other countries that are in the games. 

On the other hand . .the way I have always understood the Olympics is that it's the best athletes from each country and then we see which country ends up with the most medals at the end.  If the Olympics is about which country has the most medals at the end, then I agree with the rule. 

If the Olympics is a global individual competition, then I guess I would disagree with the rule - but then I'd say it's kind of confusing when athlete's or the media, etc, talk about "competing for their country".  I mean, what if the qualifier were based only on individual ability and the top 100 (or however many) gymnasts in the world were all from the US so no other countries could compete?  Obviously the US is taking home the Gold, Silver and Bronze. 

My opinion on this is pretty worthless, though . .I don't know much about the Olympics or follow most of these sports outside of the Olympics.  But I always thought *the point* of the Olympics (other than just to enjoy the sporting event) was to see which country ended up with the most medals. 

This cuts both ways for lots of countries. The US and other teams get more of a chance to compete in disciplines like table tennis where a country like China has enough depth to probably fill a big percentage of all the available competitive slots.

It's also how they ensure that smaller countries get at least some slots for their better athletes, and the larger population countries don't completely dominate. I personally like the stories when one of these unlikely competitors peaks at the right time / rises to the moment and breaks through for a medal. That's in the spirit of what the games are about - a 'gathering' of athletes from around the world. In World Championship competitions do more / all athletes from a given country get a chance to advance based solely on performance?

I disagree that the 'point' of the Olympics is about the country medal tally. Certainly the broadcasters often play that up. I suppose they are providing information viewers are asking for and you can't get away from some national pride elements in the medal tally. However, obsessive focusing on that as a source of 'national prestige' is what leads to the FSB breaking into the testing lab at night to switch out the samples of their massive number of doping athletes. Or the old East German system where athletes were doped by the state system without even their knowledge / consent. Personally, I think approaches like this only make the perpetrators look 'weak' and 'afraid' of legitimate competition.

I would have been more proud of Lance Armstrong as a one-time winner or perpetual 3rd place finisher of the Tour De France knowing he had ridden clean in a sport that has a horrible reputation.

Edited August 10, 2016 by natureboy

[nevets88]

Justin Rose gives us a glimpse of his Rio digs. Check out the Trackman on the chair. Someone commented it's pretty... "basic". Well, what did you expect?

 

A brief bio of all the players

[Golfingdad]

2 hours ago, natureboy said:

This cuts both ways for lots of countries. The US and other teams get more of a chance to compete in disciplines like table tennis where a country like China has enough depth to probably fill a big percentage of all the available competitive slots.

Even then, I'm pretty sure that a whole bunch of the competitors in table tennis are Chinese players that moved to other countries to be the best pinger-pongers in that particular country.

[Golfingdad]

http://www.golfdigest.com/gallery/the-designs-of-16-countrys-olympic-golf-bags?mbid=social_facebook#1

Many of these are really sharp looking!  (Argentina might be my fave)

[nevets88]

36 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

http://www.golfdigest.com/gallery/the-designs-of-16-countrys-olympic-golf-bags?mbid=social_facebook#1

Many of these are really sharp looking!  (Argentina might be my fave)

This hat is a little too much but I'm a low key personality, it is sold out, so what do I know? 

It is weird seeing players wearing clothing and using bags that aren't plastered with corporate logos though.

[Aguirre]

4 hours ago, nevets88 said:

This hat is a little too much but I'm a low key personality, it is sold out, so what do I know? 

It is weird seeing players wearing clothing and using bags that aren't plastered with corporate logos though.

We see it at the team cups.

I still think an opportunity was missed here for a team competition. No reason why both an individual and team competition couldn't have happened.

 

[Golfingdad]

Maybe I've been under a rock, but I was unaware that the winner of this event gets an invine to all four majors next year.

No big whoop for your Bubbas or Kuchars or Justin Roses, but if any of these no names has a good week, that is some perk!

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Maybe I've been under a rock, but I was unaware that the winner of this event gets an invine to all four majors next year.

At least you knew it wasn't a team event… unlike Matt Kuchar.

[ChrisP]

Wish they'd show this on CNBC or MSNBC where people like me have been going to browse the different sports going on. It would just get more exposure and non-golf fans would watch. Not sure non-golf fans even know golf is in the Olympics and they're definitely not going to tune in to TGC.

Edited August 11, 2016 by ChrisP

[Aguirre]

13 minutes ago, ChrisP said:

Wish they'd show this on CNBC or MSNBC where people like me have been going to browse the different sports going on. It would just get more exposure and non-golf fans would watch. Not sure non-golf fans even know golf is in the Olympics and they're definitely not going to tune in to TGC.

Yeah but so what?

[natureboy]

40 minutes ago, ChrisP said:

Wish they'd show this on CNBC or MSNBC where people like me have been going to browse the different sports going on. It would just get more exposure and non-golf fans would watch. Not sure non-golf fans even know golf is in the Olympics and they're definitely not going to tune in to TGC.

 

27 minutes ago, Aguirre said:

Yeah but so what?

 

If it's about 'exposure' for golf and 'growing the game' then a less visible broadcast doesn't really help that goal.