Olympics Spoilers and chat.

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Badger_Boom

Veteran
Location
York
I have rowed and fenced in the past but I think I'm over the hill these days. On the other hand, I'm a decent (proper) rifle shot at 100m already so maybe if I practice. A lot.
 
 

PaulSB

Squire
I thought this became fairly common knowledge in 2012 when we had the Olympic mascots Wenlock and Mandeville (representing the 'birth' places of both the modern Olympics and the Paralympics).
Nope, passed me by completely. I googled Wenlock as I assumed this referred to Much Wenlock..
 
View attachment 740893 I found this on the net. I'm not sure if it's real, but if it is there's some world class self delusion going on.

Edit it's real: https://yougov.co.uk/sport/articles...hink-they-could-qualify-for-the-2028-olympics

I fenced in national champs (individual and was team captain of Salle Paul B), and in FIE A-grades, and trained alongside pukka Olympians like Fiona McIntosh and Linda Martin. I was good, but not THAT good.

Now, I'm too short, too old and have far too many wobbly bits.

However, if sports such as Individual Cat Pilling and Tag Team Yellow Stickering ever made it into the Olympics, I'd be right up there, I think. :laugh:
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
I think if I were to dial back time to my youthful peak, and train like a demon full time for four years in my optimal sport (probably road cycling although maybe rowing, not that I've ever tried it) I might just about elevate my level to that of a rather crap club rider/rower.

Anything requiring brute strength like shot put or agility and coordination like gymnastics or fencing or both like boxing I doubt I'd be able to master the basics however long I had.
 
Last edited:

lazybloke

Ginger biscuits and cheddar
Location
Leafy Surrey
View attachment 740893 I found this on the net. I'm not sure if it's real, but if it is there's some world class self delusion going on.

Edit it's real: https://yougov.co.uk/sport/articles...hink-they-could-qualify-for-the-2028-olympics

I've not followed the link, but the graphic tells me exactly how ******g stupid a large % of my fellow brits are.
 
OP
OP
Beebo

Beebo

Firm and Fruity
Location
Hexleybeef
I've not followed the link, but the graphic tells me exactly how ******g stupid a large % of my fellow brits are.

But it’s actually a very small percentage. Mostly below 5%.
I’m unsure how they got 27% when the bar chart below doesn’t support that.
The only ones above 10% are archery and shooting. Which are skill based. Archery seems totally out of my reach, but I guess the Turkish dad has shown that anyone can do a bit of shooting. 😁
 
SO: it turns out that qualification is quite complicated. I think if you pick an unpopular sport, you can scrape in with quite mediocre ability (see "Eric the Eel", "Eddie the Eagle", etc). But pick something accesible+competitive - like 100m sprinting - and you are in for a big fight:

https://olympics.com/en/news/how-to-qualify-paris-2024-athletics-qualification-system-explained

The auto-qualify standard for men's 100m is 10.00seconds.
There is a quota system too. I haven't fully understood it, but that article says a TOTAL of 905 track/field athletes will compete at 2024.
So roughly, you need to be one of the best 905 runners/jumpers/chuckers in the world.

I need to start training ...
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
But it’s actually a very small percentage. Mostly below 5%.
I’m unsure how they got 27% when the bar chart below doesn’t support that.

The 27% is for at least one sport

Imagine there are 25 sports (which is roughly right) and 100 people are surveyed. 25 people think they could qualify in a sport and they all nominate different sports, so each sport gets one person.

In that case the "at least one" bar at the top would show 25% and each individual sport bar would show 1%

The fact that the individual sport bars are higher than 1% this suggests that many of the 27% are nominating more than one sport
 
Last edited:
The 27% is for at least one sport

Imagine there are 25 sports and 100 people are surveyed. 25 people think they could qualify in a sport and they all nominate different sports, so each sport gets one person.

In that case the "at least one" bar at the top would show 25% and each individual sport bar would show 1%

I love the idea that some people thought their ability across 2-4 sports would boost their chances :biggrin:
 
Top Bottom