Olympic Golf In Trouble?

A few stories are hinting at a possible protest vote and overall uncertainty about golf's "universality" by IOC members. Lawrence Donegan thinks some of the recent defenses from Jacques Rogge for golf's finalist slow may not bode well, whiel Owen Gibson believes the concerns may cost golf it's shot in the 2016 games.

Some IOC members retain concerns about whether the Olympics would be the pinnacle of achievement for golfers ahead of the four majors, while others argue that it does not score well on the criterion of "universality" given the expense and difficulty of developing golf courses in Africa and parts of Asia.

I don't know where they'd get any ideas like that before they've even gotten the estimate from Jack Nicklaus and Annika Sorenstam to build the official Olympic course, The Bear and The Swede. And with 60 player fields contesting glorified WGC events that has excited positively no one, how much less universal can you get than that?

And, let's hear from Peter Dawson, who heads up an all-male golf club that'll admit a woman by 2016. Maybe.

Dawson admitted some IOC members had raised concerns about whether the Olympics would represent the pinnacle of the sport but said they had not been widespread. "We have been able to allay that fear by emphasising the broad support among the world's top players. There is only one Olympic tournament for every 16 majors," he said.

And it's still just a boring old 72-hole stroke play event with a goofy world ranking-based format for entry. Zzzzzzzzz.

And then there's this protest vote bit, which is so IOC:

Some IOC members have privately voiced disgruntlement that they will not be offered a choice of sports from which to pick and have speculated that golf might suffer as a result of a protest vote.

But Craig Reedie, the British IOC member who was part of the programme commission that evaluated the seven sports, said: "The executive board clearly feels it is giving the members the guidance that was requested of them."

Comments

[thusgone]

golf in the olympics is a stupid idea. but the universality criticisms make no sense to me. how universal are such olympic stalwarts as fencing, equestrian events and rhythmic gymnastics?

[Wayne]

After rhythmic gymnastics entered the games clubs started popping up all over my city. Even my apartment building has an RG club and we get together three times a week. Tonight is ribbon routine night. And don't get me started on all the neighbourhood kids I see wanting to be Olympic fencers. The sidewalks can be dangerous with all those hopefuls thrusting and parrying.

[Joey]

Golf in the Olympics means nothing if it is just another 72 hole stroke play event. 64 entrants, 36 hole match play in the only suitable format for an individual; two person best ball 36 hole matches for team event.

[GHIN]

The Olympics are a joke. They won't "grow the game" which is the official mantra of golf's big boys and the golf media. And no one in their right mind should think anyone will give a rat's turd after about golf in the Olympics after the first five minutes.

I, for one, will be extremely happy if golf doesn't get in. It would save unquestionable misery for the sport I love like no other. And besides these concerns for the ringmasters just might be valid. After all, it's their show and the show is what they care about.

I am really looking forward to watching the golf team from Botswana march into the Olympic stadium wearing their polo outfits or would it be Lacoste?

[Wisconsin Reader]

What is so terribly wrong if the Olympics have golf AND it is a 72 hole stroke play event? . . . It does seem that literally every golf organizing body in the world finds that format quite suitable to produce their "Champion Golfer of the Year."

[court]

A protest vote - whtaever it takes. Professional golf does not belong in the Olympics.

[court]

Wayne, let me know when you take your stand up on the road - I'll buy a ticket ! Great stuff.

[Sooner Dave]

As a golfer and a softball dad/coach, I'd rather see softball (but not baseball) returned to the Games than have golf added. There are many more opportunities for female golfers than there are for softball players. So the 'grow the game' mantra makes more sense for softball.

[Smolmania]

Sooner, you're probably right, but when decisions get made by a bunch of old European white males, you had no shot. I still don't see golf in the Olympics as having any impact on "growing" the game, but a lot of people involved clearly disagree (Tom Doak, e.g.). Quite frankly the use of professionals and national teams could be eliminated for my tastes if they had any thought of following the Baron's ideals, but that's not going to happen. . .

[Ky Laffoon's Ghost]

I think the IOC should reinstate rope climbing as an Olympic event.

[JPB]

Who watches the Olympics?

[thusgone]

@wayne: nicely done.

[Wayner]

Golf belongs in the Olympics because it will help to provide additional funding to the sport in many countries where sports don't get government funding unless they are in the Olympics. Even here in golf-mad Canada it should help golf get additional funding. In places like China it could make a huge difference.

Golf is a very popular sport and I believe that the Olympics should contain popular sports and get rid of stuff that no one does, like fencing. Who cares if the Olympic competition is not the "ultimate championship" for golf. It isn't for tennis, soccer, ice hockey, basketball, rugby, etc. and they are all in the Olympics.

The whole professional vs. amateur issue is a load of crap. The distinction between professionals and amateurs 115 years ago when it was originally made for the Olympics (and golf was at about the same time) was mainly a class issue. Upper class sportsmen were amateurs as they would not sully their hands by taking cash for athletic competitions. Professionals were working class people since they needed money. The Olympics were set up to be an amateur competion in 1896 to only allow the upper classes. Golf was the same way - look up how golf professionals were treated in the UK and US prior to about 1920 - they were generally not allowed in the clubhouse and were thought off as lower-class staff, not unlike one's gardener. Read "Tommy's Honour" to see how there were viewed at the first Open Chapionships at Prestwick.

Today in golf most major amateur competition are not won by true amateurs - they are won by "pros in waiting" who are in university and haven't yet turned pro. The Mid-Am competition is for true amateurs who have real jobs - kind of like Bobby Jones 80 years ago.

[court]

Wow - Wayne - I would LOVE to know where those thoughts came from.

Why do you say that the Olympics is there to provide funds for sports in countries where that sport doesn't get funding ?

Where did you learn your history of the Olympics ?

"pros in waiting" ? - I had no idea that there was a special catagory for hackers vs really good amateurs who want to try to play for money.

[wayner]

Court - read up on Baron de Coubertin who was behind the revival of the Olympics in 1896 and how he modeled it after the sporting tradition at private English schools such as Rugby (the school not the sport). English private schools were full of gentleman who played sports for the love of the game. Rugby (the sport) remains very popular in English private schools and was a fully amateur game until 1995 - the working classes played a different version of the game called rugby league.

Pros in waiting include Tiger Woods from the age of about 12 until he turned pro. True amateurs are guys like Bobby Jones or Buddy Marucci