http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/sports/RTGAM/20021129/wiocdl2/Sports/sportsBN/breakingnews-sports

Exerpt:

Representatives of baseball, softball and modern pentathlon will each have a brief 10-minute opportunity this afternoon to argue why their sport should continue to benefit from the lucrative exposure the Olympics provide.

...


If the session decides to keep the three sports, Rogge's ruling executive board will have until next June's IOC assembly in Prague to find other ways to trim excess events. It has been suggested that events in badminton, rowing, canoeing, yachting and synchronized swimming are among the disciplines in danger.

I know there's been talk about moving it to the Winter Olympics, but i had no idea they were thinking of cutting it altogether.

Here's another (newer) article:
http://www.gamesbids.com/cgi-bin/news/viewnews.cgi?category=1&id=1038686976


Exerpt:
[The first 3 sports were allowed to stay until another review in 2005]

Now the IOC’s ruling executive board will have to focus its attention on cutting disciplines from other sports in the next few months to find other ways of scaling down the Games.

A report discussed at the IOC meeting suggested radical steps such as scratching disciplines like race walking and equestrian eventing.

Badminton, rowing, canoeing, and yachting are also in danger.

um they are gonna cut badminton starting in 2008 in Beijing? yeah that's a good decision. cut the event which the hosting country and region of the world that clearly favors that sport. don't understand these things at all sometime. the world is runned by people with no mind.

Originally posted by jwu
um they are gonna cut badminton starting in 2008 in Beijing? yeah that's a good decision. cut the event which the hosting country and region of the world that clearly favors that sport. don't understand these things at all sometime. the world is runned by people with no mind.

I believe it will be after 2008. Still, cut a sport that played by over 30% of the world population is such a "fantastic" idea to reflect the "Olympic spirit"?????

Wow... If that's the logic, why don't they cut basketball? Volleyball? Soccer? (Actually, almost all other "remaining events"). Since most of them, won't have much more population support than badminton (or table tennis) anyway... Never have to say, a lot of them won't have even close to have a support population as badminton.

Ohhh... forgot this... Badminton and table tennis were dominated by asian nations, and few European ones...

Hmmm... Ok... U got my point...

Originally posted by LazyBuddy
I believe it will be after 2008. Still, cut a sport that played by over 30% of the world population is such a "fantastic" idea to reflect the "Olympic spirit"?????

Wow... If that's the logic, why don't they cut basketball? Volleyball? Soccer? (Actually, almost all other "remaining events"). Since most of them, won't have much more population support than badminton (or table tennis) anyway... Never have to say, a lot of them won't have even close to have a support population as badminton.

Ohhh... forgot this... Badminton and table tennis were dominated by asian nations, and few European ones...

Hmmm... Ok... U got my point...

Heh yeah, point taken and agreed ;)

Originally posted by LazyBuddy
I believe it will be after 2008. Still, cut a sport that played by over 30% of the world population is such a "fantastic" idea to reflect the "Olympic spirit"?????

Wow... If that's the logic, why don't they cut basketball? Volleyball? Soccer? (Actually, almost all other "remaining events"). Since most of them, won't have much more population support than badminton (or table tennis) anyway... Never have to say, a lot of them won't have even close to have a support population as badminton.

Ohhh... forgot this... Badminton and table tennis were dominated by asian nations, and few European ones...

Hmmm... Ok... U got my point...

Well, on the the plus side, they are only thinking about cutting it, and it won't be cut until at least after 2008. Fortunately, "race walking" will probably go before badminton does. It sounds like baseball will probably be cut by 2008 though, so having Americans do well is no guarantee either.

Originally posted by bigredlemon
It sounds like baseball will probably be cut by 2008 though, so having Americans do well is no guarantee either.

Got ur point.

However, Americans are not that dominated in baseball. They will face big charllenge from Cuba, other middle south American nations, and even Japan.

The thing not for sure is: whether they can win baseball medal (especially without pros join the team). The thing for sure is: they can't get a shot in badminton in recent years... Maybe should I say, not even in a match like quater final lvl???

Just something interesting that I found. When I went to the olympic site below:

http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/index_uk.asp

and check out the events recognized, the representing picture is badminton. hmm...

just look at this one photo of Lee Dong Soo, no one in the world will say that badminton isn't an extremely athletic sport:

I like the perspective of that shot. dang, that's a lot of ups. :D

what a pic

i need to learn how to jump like that lol

It's too bad but true that sports will not be cut because of their merits as sports...but because of marketing, money, and so on. The Olympics are a big big business, and they're always looking for more more more. Sports like badminton that are seen as poor revenue generators may be cut for that reason alone.

On the other hand, badminton's Asian appeal may save it, because I believe the Olympic organizers see a lot of (economic) potential for the games in that area - it's a huge market that they have only begun to reach into. Just look at the Soccer World Cup - the reason they chose Korea / Japan as hosts was mostly about marketing the game in that area - grow grow grow, money money money...same reason why China will host the Olympics next.

Aaaaaaah...the spirit of the games...?

Originally posted by ^shaz^
i need to learn how to jump like that lol
go do highjump :p

Originally posted by Shoulderpain
It's too bad but true that sports will not be cut because of their merits as sports...but because of marketing, money, and so on. The Olympics are a big big business, and they're always looking for more more more. Sports like badminton that are seen as poor revenue generators may be cut for that reason alone.

On the other hand, badminton's Asian appeal may save it, because I believe the Olympic organizers see a lot of (economic) potential for the games in that area - it's a huge market that they have only begun to reach into. Just look at the Soccer World Cup - the reason they chose Korea / Japan as hosts was mostly about marketing the game in that area - grow grow grow, money money money...same reason why China will host the Olympics next.

Aaaaaaah...the spirit of the games...? Sad but true. Money is probably what prompted them to add baseball in the first place. Since 2008 will be hosted by China, a big badminton country, I'm hoping that will mean lots of badminton coverage in countries that wouldn't normally air badminton. When I hear olympic China, i think of ping pong and badminton. I think most people would rather watch badminton than ping pong. I guess that will be badminton's big chance to prove itself.

Lately, a number of sports magazines has recognized how underrated badminton is the US. Hopefully, this pattern builds up until badminton is viewed much like soccer was viewed last year.

Originally posted by kwun
just look at this one photo of Lee Dong Soo, no one in the world will say that badminton isn't an extremely athletic sport:

Hey kwun! that is a fake picture you posted... that isn't what really happened. I happen to have the REAL photo so i'll post it for you ;):D

The real original pic ;)

Or was it this one....

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

HAHA. we are laughing our heads off here. :)

its a bird!! its a plane!!... wait a sec.... a jump smash ?! :eek:

haha very nice BRL

Is he trying to "intercept" an airplane or something???

HAHAHAHAHAHA
dat's all i gotta say
AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA :D

YAY! It's SOOper-man.
Suddenly a 20 page paper doesn't seem so hard to write anymore...:D

Sydney 2002??? :rolleyes:

Originally posted by kwun

HAHA. we are laughing our heads off here. :)

Thanks :) I knew photoshop was good for something!

Originally posted by Qidong
Sydney 2002??? :rolleyes:

Yea... its the secret olympics held earlier this year:rolleyes:

Secret Olympics for the Ultra-Talented 2002?

hahaha.. dude.. i can't stop laughing about this.... good job on that photo editing !

All this talk about badminton being cut from the Olympics is very sad. It would be a great shame that it could not continue after 2008.

One thing I have never understood in this is how the Olympic Football could possibly continue. 2 out of the 3 biggest sporting events in the world are football (World Cup and European Championships) so who needs it in the Olympics?

Badminton has some huge events in its own right but the Olympics is a special and precious tournament and the badminton ruling bodies can learn a lot from being involved in an event that has many other sports in it.

Badminton has survived without the Olympics for so long before it was introduced and we can do the same should it be cut out.

it occurs to me that i no longer hold high esteem on the olympics as before. I see the olympic and IOC are now driven by political and marketing agenda instead of the pursuit of athletic excellence and bridging of culture and nations. Scandals, cheats, briberies, kickbacks, drugs, doping, boycott, favortism, etc are now seem to be the norm. Take badminton for example, it has a history of 100 years before being accepted as an olympic sport in 1992. Where as for snowboarding which is common to only a few countries was accepted as an olympic sport with about 15 years of history. I'm not saying it's ok if badminton was dropped from the olympic but saying it is result political manipulation rather than on techncial merit.

Originally posted by cooler
badminton for example, it has a history of 100 years before being accepted as an olympic sport in 1992. Where as for snowboarding which is common to only a few countries was accepted as an olympic sport with about 15 years of history. I'm not saying it's ok if badminton was dropped from the olympic but saying it is result political manipulation rather than on techncial merit.

The reality is, the the president of the IOC acts as though he's the president of a for-profit company. There's money in snowboarding. Not as much greens in badminton. Snowboarding does require great physical and mental talent. But so does paintball and cow-tipping. Maybe it's just cuz he's been there too long. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Perhaps new leadership would have revived the olympic spirit... but the old guy's reign continues...

- it was just mixed doubles they were contemplating on getting rid of but the IBF president had a meeting with the IOCpresident and I think they shelved the idea for the time being - or Am I wrong?

Originally posted by MoS
- it was just mixed doubles they were contemplating on getting rid of but the IBF president had a meeting with the IOCpresident and I think they shelved the idea for the time being - or Am I wrong? Im not sure... i just posted the articles I found. If you hear something new, link your source so we can have a look. Badminton news isn't exactly dominating the sports section in Canada.

My understanding is that they are thinking of cutting the mixed doubles event
when they were talking about "events in badminton, etc", not the entire
sport of badminton in the olympics. At least that's what I read in a paper
somewhere.

I really hope that badminton is not cut from the Olympics. My dream is to play/qualify for the Olympics in 2012.

Just a word in defense of the IOC...which is painful for me, because generally I can't stand all the management-types who have made sport into just another product to get as much profit as possible from.

I think that the idea of reducing the list of Olympic sports is a good one because:

a) The Olympics are becoming too damn expensive for any city to host because of all the building and preparations now required. There are too many sports, too many athletes, and too many stadiums to build for most cities. I live in Vancouver, and right now we are "trying" to get the 2010 Winter Olympics, even though a lot of people in the city are against it because it's so expensive. People are asking, "Why should we spend so much tax money to prepare for a 2 week event that already-rich athletes use to become richer?"

b) There are a lot of marginal or "joke" sports that have been allowed to slip into the program, as well as some sports that already have enough big-time events and shouldn't need the Olympic attention. Some marginal or "joke" sports might be: trampoline, pairs diving, short-track speedskating, or whatever. Some big-time sports might be soccer (has World Cup), Basketball (has NBA, other leagues), Tennis (has so many big tournaments, and the players themselves don't care about the Olympics), or whatever.

Therefore, I think the idea of "shrinkage" (hello, Seinfeld fans?) is a good one for the Olympics, generally. I just don't think that badminton should be cut. It's a fine sport that deserves a place in the sun at a world - level event, and the only event available right now is the Olympics. The problem is HOW the decisions will be made when the cutting starts. Basically, the decisions will probably be made almost entirely based on money...and that's wrong in my opinion.

Originally posted by Shoulderpain
The Olympics are becoming too damn expensive for any city to host

I can see how they might think about cutting badminton. Even if one factors in money, I think it'd make more sense to cut baseball instead, which they refused to do thus far, because:
- baseball stadiums are quite expensive, compared with badminton courts
- at the grass roots level, i thnk it's not popular in most countries. In the countries that it is big, it's already big enough to sustain and doesn't really need the olympics, whereas badminton has grass roots level support in most countries in one form or another.

I'm sure people can come up with much more reasons both for and against baseball or badminton though

I'm sure people can come up with much more reasons both for and against baseball or badminton though [/B]

It's difficult for me to comment about cutting baseball, because I agree with you, but then the same thinking would also apply to Ice Hockey which I love as a Canadian. I wouldn't want to be the person who has to decide which sports have to be cut! Every sport has merits, fans, popularity...they should just have a lottery or something.

Why don't they cut out sports like

Rhythmic Gymnastics
(Solo!!!:rolleyes: ) Sychronised Swimming
Diving

All these sports depend on the opinions of others to determine winners and losers.

And weren't they thinking of introducing Ballroom Dancing as an Olympic sport?

Interesting that they would consider eliminating mixed doubles, seeing as that is one of the few events where men and women compete together--but maybe that's why.

Only a few sports have ever been eliminated as Olympic events, and none recently.

I agree with you that sports that rely on judges should be cut. It probably sounds extreme, but sports like that (figure skating, diving, synchronized swimming) always have a smell of corruption to them, and are unsatisfying because of the judging element that always takes the focus off of the athlete's performance. After the past Winter Olympic scandals in figure skating, I swear I'll never watch the "sport" again.

One question I have related to this is: Why are some judged sports like figure skating full of corruption, while other judged sports like gymnastics or diving not?

Any answers out there?

Originally posted by Shoulderpain
I agree with you that sports that rely on judges should be cut. It probably sounds extreme, but sports like that (figure skating, diving, synchronized swimming) always have a smell of corruption to them, and are unsatisfying because of the judging element that always takes the focus off of the athlete's performance. After the past Winter Olympic scandals in figure skating, I swear I'll never watch the "sport" again.



I can see ur point, however, can't fully agree.

If u say, all sports that rely on judges should be cut, then, well, a lot of others will be cut, too. Say, swimming (judge can determine if any interference, and early "start" invovled or not), tracking field (ex: timing on rely racing, illegal starting postion, etc), basketball (do I have to metion the whistles?), baseball (striking zone), volleyball (touch the net, illegal serve), Gymnastics (well...), wrestling/fencing/boxing (illegal contact, hits, points)

Just way too many... If the standard is set to be this, then, any sports will have some "corruption" possibilities...

Originally posted by LazyBuddy
I can see ur point, however, can't fully agree.

If u say, all sports that rely on judges should be cut, then, well, a lot of others will be cut, too. Say, swimming (judge can determine if any interference, and early "start" invovled or not), tracking field (ex: timing on rely racing, illegal starting postion, etc), basketball (do I have to metion the whistles?), baseball (striking zone), volleyball (touch the net, illegal serve), Gymnastics (well...), wrestling/fencing/boxing (illegal contact, hits, points)

The judging in the sports you mentioned and the judging in say figure skating is quite different. In the sports you mentioned, there are clear instance where a violation occur and judges "judge" that. In figure skating, the opinion of landing a triple sow-cow or whatever it is called is exactly that, an opinion of the judges and how well you do depends solely on the judge's score. Anway, hope my point is clear, even though the sports LB mentioned are technically speaking judged, I think the better term would be refereed or regulated rather than judged.

Originally posted by jwu
The judging in the sports you mentioned and the judging in say figure skating is quite different. In the sports you mentioned, there are clear instance where a violation occur and judges "judge" that. In figure skating, the opinion of landing a triple sow-cow or whatever it is called is exactly that, an opinion of the judges and how well you do depends solely on the judge's score. Anway, hope my point is clear, even though the sports LB mentioned are technically speaking judged, I think the better term would be refereed or regulated rather than judged.

I agree. However, no matter how much %%% we talking about all these sports, the judge/referee all play big roles in game results. Yeah, we know judge can totally mess up outcomes like figure skating and gymnastics. However, do we still remember game 6 of this year's NBA final??? Do we still remember the famous "various strike zone" in baseball? Do we still remember the "time flowing back" incident in Korean basketball? Do we know how many "dis-qualificaiton" in track&field, which should not be called? Or, should be, but did not called?

Well, u know my point. Judge/referee can effect a game, not necessary at the beginning, or throughout the entire eventt, but also could be the last second. Therefore, my point is, using possible "judge/referee corruption" as an excuse to kick a game out of oly. game is unacceptable to me.

However, no matter how much %%% we talking about all these sports, the judge/referee all play big roles in game results.

It is an incredible oversimplification to somehow equate the "judging" of referees, who exist in virtually all sports, and the "judging" of judges in sports like figure skating. I mean, come on! In a sport like figure skating, the judges decide who wins, and that's that. The result is totally based on the points they grant, or fail to grant. That is not a just a little different from the "judging" that takes place in sports like soccer, or ice hockey, or whatever, it is totally different. In sports where referees monitor the play, they are there to ensure fair play and keep players from breaking the rules. In a sense, they do play a part in the result of the sport, but it is nothing like a truly judged sport, where the judges decide the outcome.

I hope this doesn't sound like I'm being critical of your comments, but I think you are taking logic to it's most ridiculous and extreme conclusions.

Originally posted by Shoulderpain

I hope this doesn't sound like I'm being critical of your comments, but I think you are taking logic to it's most ridiculous and extreme conclusions.


I see ur point. And I agree with your point.

However, whatever I metioned in previous post is taking the view from a player but not a committee. To us, sure, figuare skating and gymnastics are almost purely depend on what judge like or dislike. A champion can be placed at last, due to weired "art" issues.

However, for the athletes, no matter s/he be ruled to be lose at the beginning (say, invisible art issues) or at the last pennalty kick/shot (soccer, basketball, hockey, etc) for regulation rules, it's still hurt for players, since the result is the same.

I am not trying to create an agrument to say, whether judge/referee in all sports are equally to be important or not. I just try to say, since the "rules" and the "rulers" in each game do play certain necessary roles, just use this as an excuse to cut a sport from oly. game is ridiculous, since if this rule applies, then, well, maybe we will take everything out.

I am not trying to create an agrument to say, whether judge/referee in all sports are equally to be important or not. I just try to say, since the "rules" and the "rulers" in each game do play certain necessary roles, just use this as an excuse to cut a sport from oly. game is ridiculous, since if this rule applies, then, well, maybe we will take everything out.
__________________________________________________ _____
I guess what we are proving in this discussion is that it is very difficult to find any objective criteria that can be used to cut sports. Really, all that I have proven with my points about judged sports is that I personally dislike them, because performance and success in those sports are entirely mediated by judges who are not always fair, competent, or objective, and are sometimes obviously corrupt.

Your point about referees affecting the outcomes of games is well taken. In the women's ice hockey final in the past Winter Olympics, for example, team USA played team Canada. For some reason, the main referee was American, and she was very biased in her calls - 11 penalties to the Canadians vs. only 2 (I think) for the Americans. In spite of this, team Canada won, but the outcome was definitely almost reversed because of biased refereeing. Similarly in the past World Cup of Soccer, where team Korea advanced partly due to inspired play, and partly because of referee bias or incompitence - or corruption at higher levels of FIFA.

I think, however, that at least in sports where referees only oversee a game, the athletes at least have the final ability to somehow overcome and win despite bias or incompetence (as in the team Canada example). In purely judged sports, on the other hand, if you are judged to have lost, it doesn't matter what you do in the game itself, and judge's decisions are almost never reversed, no matter how obviously biased or inept they are.

Just imagine if judges were added to badminton. I got 15 points, but lost because the other player had better technique. Basically, I prefer sports where there is a final score which is the result, as much as possible, of the actions of the athletes in the game itself...with as little outside interference or interpretation as possible.

There are some who would even argue that sports which rely entirely on judging for their outcome are not really even sports at all. I don't know how I feel about that.

Originally posted by Shoulderpain


Just imagine if judges were added to badminton. I got 15 points, but lost because the other player had better technique.



Lol... I really like ur example.

Yeah, now, finally I think I can take ur point of view. Yeah, totally agree on this statement.

Judges to badminton?! No thank you. Imagine all the people good at other sports but coming to play and winning cuz of their strokes, style, and stuff. NO WAY!. lol.

hahaha, I forgot to printoff this thread and show it to Lee and Yoo today

I'm obviously biased but I honestly think if anything should be cut it should be baseball :D. Badminton is just too cool to be cut. I'd lose so much respect for the Olympics if badminton were cut :(.

I think that if any games should be cut it should be, soccer, baseball, softball and basketball. As these sports all have lots of leagues, like the Premiership, MLB and the NBA. I'm sure people see enough of these sports without it being in the olympics.

I believe it will be after 2008. Still, cut a sport that played by over 30% of the world population is such a "fantastic" idea to reflect the "Olympic spirit"?????

Wow... If that's the logic, why don't they cut basketball? Volleyball? Soccer? (Actually, almost all other "remaining events"). Since most of them, won't have much more population support than badminton (or table tennis) anyway... Never have to say, a lot of them won't have even close to have a support population as badminton.

Ohhh... forgot this... Badminton and table tennis were dominated by asian nations, and few European ones...

Hmmm... Ok... U got my point...

well they should cut chess, and golf, these 2 suck
plus its nothing to see westerners try to hide their defeat, they look down on asians anyway, now it seems like by cutting badminton they will avoid a losing battle, since most european nations simply cant make it to the top in badminton

there are way too many events in track and field which of course dominated by US. Some of these should be cut.
100,200,400,800,etc
sprint, relay, hurdles, etc

Sports which should be cut are those where the top athletes do not give a damn about the Olympics. Tennis is the first thing that comes to mind. Athletics (although dominated by Americans) should be in because the athletes are passionate about Olympic glory just like our shuttlers.

I think badmintons biggest problem with drawing crowds is no one comes until quarterfinal matches at the earliest. The stands are seriously empty until quarters, the finals of tournaments usually attract bigger crowds though.
bigger crowds = bigger ticket revenue

Sports which should be cut are those where the top athletes do not give a damn about the Olympics. Tennis is the first thing that comes to mind. Athletics (although dominated by Americans) should be in because the athletes are passionate about Olympic glory just like our shuttlers.

Right on the money,

Tennis shouldn't even be in the Olympics, niether should Men's Baseball .....

I think badmintons biggest problem with drawing crowds is no one comes until quarterfinal matches at the earliest. The stands are seriously empty until quarters, the finals of tournaments usually attract bigger crowds though.
bigger crowds = bigger ticket revenue

The problem for lack of attendance in earlier round is because the lackness of competitiveness. Due to the "limited entries" rules, the powerhouses have to bench WC champs and many promising rising stars. At the same time, some rank 50's players get a spot, simply because of they are the best from the other nations.

I know Olympics has the duty to spread the sport's popularity. However, here's the debate I can never solve myself. Whether we should "give everyone a chance", or should we see "the best against the best"? :rolleyes:

:eek: OG Commity, please don't cut badminton :p it's our lives :D :p :(
Tennis should be cut, not badminton :eek:

Badminton should stay...and it is our lives!!! Just as baderz said..:cool:

I guess it is not a good time to lobby to include cricket in olympics... :p

The problem for lack of attendance in earlier round is because the lackness of competitiveness. Due to the "limited entries" rules, the powerhouses have to bench WC champs and many promising rising stars. At the same time, some rank 50's players get a spot, simply because of they are the best from the other nations.

I know Olympics has the duty to spread the sport's popularity. However, here's the debate I can never solve myself. Whether we should "give everyone a chance", or should we see "the best against the best"? :rolleyes:

You want to stay in Olympics, make sure there are enough countries participating in your events. One of the Olympic requirements is participation. I think for most events in the Olympics, there is a limitation of 3 or 4 entries. More than that is pointless, because there is only gold, silver and bronze to win.

You just wait, sooner or later some of the "extreme" sports will be included. While many will argue against it, I'll say this: I like the way these extreme sports athletes cheer for one another and are unabashed in sharing their congratulations. Isn't that one of the ways of the Olympic spirit?

har??
hopefully dun cancel badminton lar..
iw'll be borring without badminton in olympic

Equistarian is still in the Olympics, right?... Shouldn't that be eliminated? It cannot be called a 'worldwide sport'! Oh, and eliminate fencing too! I think the African nations can back us up on this.

By the way, BWF should really really focus on badminton development in Africa, South America, and Oceania. We [Asians and Europeans] need their vote when it is time to decide which sport to include / eliminate... Those 3 areas have plenty of nations who can help us out [come voting time]...

So BWF need serious serious work to get the enthusiasm of those nations...

Errm haven't you all noticed how old this thread is?? I believe the vote has already been held ...

You want to stay in Olympics, make sure there are enough countries participating in your events. One of the Olympic requirements is participation. I think for most events in the Olympics, there is a limitation of 3 or 4 entries. More than that is pointless, because there is only gold, silver and bronze to win.

I only agree 50%. ;)

In ideal world of "balance of power", everyone should NOT care about the nationality, and focus on sports itself. Cheer for the best of the best, regardless which team s/he respresnets. For the ones are not good enough yet, well, stay at home, and train harder.

I know our world is far from being ideal. Therefore, we need to sacrifice someone for the others. Therefore, in badminton, we give up the powerhouses, and try to let the minorities to "at least participate". In the end, what we sacrifice is the sport itself. So, ppl are forced to watch "2nd grade" games (at least, earlier rounds), rather than the real battles.

I don't know such approach will help the sport or not. I think attendance speaking, it did not help. How many ppl want to watch their #1 being trashed in 1st round? Therefore, they simply choose "not coming". :cool:

More than that is pointless, because there is only gold, silver and bronze to win.

I believe the true Olympics spirit is to "participate", not blindly saying "give me a medal". If you are not good enough, do you think you deserve a medal? If someone is way better than you, do you think he deserve to be kicked out of the door, because he represent team xxx or yyy???? :eek:

There are way too much politics involved in today's sport. I know that we need to accept the fact of being "less ideal". However, using a less acceptable "reason" to cover the face, to me, is purely hmmmm... shameful. :o

what tennis should not be cut!! dont worry, stop blaming other sports! their is nothing wrong with badminton or any olympic sport! the stupid commity is probably fat rich guys that only care about the money, and right now, badminton is making a bit less money, soooo we should plan to organise a trip to the 2008 olympics! yah field trip!!!!

Ladies Beach Volleyball should NOT be cut. :cool:

I believe the true Olympics spirit is to "participate", not blindly saying "give me a medal". If you are not good enough, do you think you deserve a medal? If someone is way better than you, do you think he deserve to be kicked out of the door, because he represent team xxx or yyy???? :eek:

There are way too much politics involved in today's sport. I know that we need to accept the fact of being "less ideal". However, using a less acceptable "reason" to cover the face, to me, is purely hmmmm... shameful. :o

For me, the spirit of participation of the Olympics is to foster friendly competition among nations. That is key. If you believe that, then there is justification for entry limitation, not just for badminton but for all Olympic events. In any event, this is out of BWF's control.

Contast to something like Badminton World Championships. The spirit of this tournament should be competition among the best players, so I advocate elimination of the entry rule.

what tennis should not be cut!! dont worry, stop blaming other sports! their is nothing wrong with badminton or any olympic sport! the stupid commity is probably fat rich guys that only care about the money, and right now, badminton is making a bit less money, soooo we should plan to organise a trip to the 2008 olympics! yah field trip!!!!

We don't want to blame other sports unnecessarily... but there is a limit on how many 'world sports' that will be held in one Olympic... I believe the limit is 32. And the Olympic commitee have a meeting every once in a while to include some new sport and thus exclude some of the existing sport... in the end, 32 types will be played.

I heard, for the London Olympics 2012, badminton is safe! Baseball is out... :) [That's fair enough for me] [Even the Americans don't give a damn about Olympic baseball]

Errm haven't you all noticed how old this thread is?? I believe the vote has already been held ...

Badminton is safe for the 2008 and 2012 Olympics. :) But 2016 is still not clear...:crying:

So far, we badminton fans are lucky that the Olympic hosts [Beijing and London] care and give a damn about Badminton. They themselves are 'Badminton countries'. :D

But what if an African or American country host the 2016 Olympic... Badminton is not a priority for them, only a burden, so they might very well not support Badminton's inclusion...

Thus, I say, BWF should promote Badminton intensively in Africa and the American continent... :)

Maybe cut after 2008, when?? It's very clear that badminton still exist in London Games 2012 according its website. Probably next 2016?!

I can't believe bdm isn't including in interesting-sport list. One logical reason is bdm isn't big-sport category in US and major Europe. As we know US is very powerful and influence at IOC to make one decision. Example Sydney 2000 controversy.

What is criteria of the sport to being join olympic sport? Worldwide popularity, describe Olympic motto citius-altius-fortius or what? So confusing!

But what if an African or American country host the 2016 Olympic... Badminton is not a priority for them, only a burden, so they might very well not support Badminton's inclusion...

Thus, I say, BWF should promote Badminton intensively in Africa and the American continent...
I can't believe bdm isn't including in interesting-sport list. One logical reason is bdm isn't big-sport category in US and major Europe. As we know US is very powerful and influence at IOC to make one decision. Example Sydney 2000 controversy.
..lots of exposure, which = advertisements which = money(and lots of them);) ..That's the big *influence*..
Btw, the U.S. did host the 1996 Olympics(in Atlanta, GA), and at that time it also supported badminton as one of the event..;):cool:
And as most people realize, there is, arguably, no other country in the world that promotes commercialism as big as in the U.S...I and a few others have brought this up and somewhat discussed the idea before in another thread(s), but there are also some BC posters who didn't think the idea will fly(brought up lack of a badminton "explosion" or continuous exposure as "failure" from post-2005 WC, as an example)..:p ;)

..lots of exposure, which = advertisements which = money(and lots of them);) ..That's the big *influence*..
Btw, the U.S. did host the 1996 Olympics(in Atlanta, GA), and at that time it also supported badminton as one of the event..;):cool:
And as most people realize, there is, arguably, no other country in the world that promotes commercialism as big as in the U.S...I and a few others have brought this up and somewhat discussed the idea before in another thread(s), but there are also some BC posters who didn't think the idea will fly(brought up lack of a badminton "explosion" or continuous exposure as "failure" from post-2005 WC, as an example)..:p ;)

Oh yes, the US supported the 1996 Olympics quite well. I remember. I was there too... :) But I don't know how long they can pay attention to Badminton. And from my observation, the other American continent countries, like Mexico, Argentina, etc. have not shown real interest in Badminton. These guys are whom I meant when I said BWF should get the American countries to pay attention.

Aaaah, regarding advertising and money... :D
Here's what I observe is happening, I hope BWF people shall read this:
1. Tennis racket and attire sales worldwide are declining. The major advertisers are Wilson, Nike, and Adidas-Reebok.
2. They need to look elsewhere for business development, preferrably areas where they can transfer their existing know-how pretty easily. [They are good at doing racket-design, sports attire design, and consumer-marketing]

BWF then should:
Help facilitate the process of capturing the imagination of the people [future consumers and future players] in Europe-Africa-Americas with human stories of the badminton stars. Their rise to glory, their struggle, their flamboyance, their challenges, their rivalry blabla... BWF should feed the media with these stuff...

Basketball needed the Lakers vs. Celtics and Michael Jordan stories...
Golf needed Tiger Woods, etc.
Tennis needed McEnroe vs. Borg, Navratilova vs. Evert, Agassi, Sharapova, even Kournikova, Paradorn Srichapan, and Sania Mirza...
Soccer... well, for the US market, they need something like David Beckham...
The media loovvvess to cover these things above... Why? Because the people like to follow these kinds of news and information too... :p [human stories inspire!] :cool:

When the media and people pays attention, the commercial value of the players go up. Then Wilson-Adidas-Reebok-Nike will milk their WORLDWIDE commercial value too... They will put in more money for sponsorship, put TV ads, etc... Major $$$! Because these sporting goods business guys expect to get more WORLDWIDE revenue later... :D

In the end, everybody wins eh? :D Well, maybe not tennis, but hey, they're adults, they can take care of themselves... I play both tennis and badminton. Love both, but it seems to me, in the past 30 years, tennis have progressed much much much further than badminton. :)

BWF then should:
Help facilitate the process of capturing the imagination of the people [future consumers and future players] in Europe-Africa-Americas with human stories of the badminton stars. Their rise to glory, their struggle, their flamboyance, their challenges, their rivalry blabla... BWF should feed the media with these stuff...

Basketball needed the Lakers vs. Celtics and Michael Jordan stories...
Golf needed Tiger Woods, etc.
Tennis needed McEnroe vs. Borg, Navratilova vs. Evert, Agassi, Sharapova, even Kournikova, Paradorn Srichapan, and Sania Mirza...
Soccer... well, for the US market, they need something like David Beckham...
The media loovvvess to cover these things above... Why? Because the people like to follow these kinds of news and information too... :p [human stories inspire!] :cool:

When the media and people pays attention, the commercial value of the players go up. Then Wilson-Adidas-Reebok-Nike will milk their WORLDWIDE commercial value too... They will put in more money for sponsorship, put TV ads, etc... Major $$$! Because these sporting goods business guys expect to get more WORLDWIDE revenue later... :D
...exactly what my point is/was all about..Where or what other country, other than the U.S., can generate such publicity and media frenzy and all those things you mentioned above?? Which in turn will generate all the commercialism/merketing spree...However, another factor to consider is, the U.S. population need local or home-grown athletes that they can somehow relate to?? Which of course, goes back to the "image" issue(if you know what i mean)..;):)
Side note: Btw, i recently heard this on the news that for the upcoming Super Bowl(American Football) match, advertisement(s) will cost abt $2-3mil for a 30 sec. commercial (http://au.news.yahoo.com/070124/11/126pr.html). I also heard, they've estimated abt min. 100 million viewers in the U.S. alone will tune in for the game. Tally those numbers up and you'll see why those companies who are digging in their pockets now are both risking & investing for a big return..:rolleyes: ;)

Soccer... well, for the US market, they need something like David Beckham...
American soccer is doomed. :(

American soccer is doomed. :(

Hahahahahahah. Quoted for truth!!

Table tennis is not exactly doing well in the US, as with many other sports, but it is not in danger of getting the Olympic axe. And table tennis is an even poorer sport than badminton.

I believe badminton is somewhere in the Olympic midtable. To strengthen its Olympic status, we cannot rely on US alone (baseball is in danger even with strong US lobby) but spread the popularity to many other nations. Traditionally, the European influence is also quite powerful, and I tend to believe that the Europeans will protect badminton.

I believe it will be after 2008. Still, cut a sport that played by over 30% of the world population is such a "fantastic" idea to reflect the "Olympic spirit"?????

Wow... If that's the logic, why don't they cut basketball? Volleyball? Soccer? (Actually, almost all other "remaining events"). Since most of them, won't have much more population support than badminton (or table tennis) anyway... Never have to say, a lot of them won't have even close to have a support population as badminton.

Ohhh... forgot this... Badminton and table tennis were dominated by asian nations, and few European ones...

Hmmm... Ok... U got my point...

100% Agreed. They can't cut a sport from Olympic just because the sport is not popular in their countries without considering the worldwide popularity.

Well, they can if they want to. You see the inclusion of sport into the Olympic is governed by the Olympic Charter, which set down rules on the criteria of admission in Chapter 5, Rule 47, article 1-7.

In article 1.1, it says as a sport, it must be "widely practiced by men in at least 75 countries and on 4 continents, and by women in at least 40 countries and on 3 continents."

For the host city, Chapter 5 Rule 48 article 1 says "the programme of the Games of the Olympiad must include at least 15 Olympic sports." Note this set the minimum but not the maximum, and todate there are 28 Olympic sports on the list including badminton, so in theory, 13 of them can be dropped. Mind you there are also many "Recongnised Sports" waiting to knock on the Olympic Sports door.

Just for easy reference, here are the current 28 Olympic Sports:

Aquatics (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=AQ)
Archery (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=AR)
Athletics (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=AT)
Badminton (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=BD)
Baseball (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=BB)
Basketball (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=BK)
Boxing (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=BX)
Canoe / kayak (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=CA)
Cycling (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=CY)
Equestrian (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=EQ)
http://www.olympic.org/common/images/common/spacer.gifhttp://www.olympic.org/common/images/common/spacer.gifFencing (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=FE)
Football (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=FB)
Gymnastics (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=GY)
Handball (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=HB)
Hockey (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=HO)
Judo (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=JU)
Modern Pentathlon (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=MP)
Rowing (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=RO)
Sailing (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=SA)
http://www.olympic.org/common/images/common/spacer.gifhttp://www.olympic.org/common/images/common/spacer.gifShooting (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=SH)
Softball (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=SO)
Table Tennis (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=TT)
Taekwondo (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=TK)
Tennis (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=TE)
Triathlon (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=TR)
Volleyball (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=VB)
Weightlifting (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=WL)
Wrestling (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=WR)
Some of the "older" sports are also kind of safe because in Chapter 5 Rule 47 article 4.4 also states that "Sports, disciplines or events included in the programme of the Olympic Games which no longer satisfy the criteria of this rule may nevertheless, in certain exceptional cases, be maintained therein by decision of the IOC for the sake of Olympic tradition."

In the modern day Olympics where cost of hosting are extremely high (we always heard of hosting city makign huge financial loss), there will be constant pressure to cut down the sports.

As the charter only state the minimum sports, badminton is not a guranteed safe sports, especially when the event is held say in the continent of Africa and South America if a decision is to be made to drop some sports.

Never take the Olympic status for badminton for granted just because it is popular in Asia!

I have started to think that maybe it's not all that bad if they drop Badminton from the Olympics...

The badminton associations around the world is relying to heavilly on olympics funding.. And they are not forced to look at more commercial aspect to fund and sposnor the game and players!!

Maybe taking it of the olympics will lead to some more focus and creative measurements to get corporate sponsors, bigger TV-coverage etc. etc..

But of course.. every 4th year its a highligt to watch the olympics badminton on TV.. that would be missed :-(

/Twobeer

Twobeer, what you said might be true for the traditonal strong houses like China, Indonesia, Malaysia. The tradition and pride alone will keep the sport alive in these countries.

But to the lesser countries, if the sport is excluded from Olympic, it can go either way. The best case would be as like what you say that the associations start to think more commercially, but there could also some that might go into oblivion.

The less associations that are active, the less chance that badminton will be reinstated, so it could be a vicious cycle.

I think whenever the Olympic is on, the world is watching. Even equestrian will get a mention in my local press during Olympic! Badminton needs to stay in there and that need a worldwide supports from everyone who loves this game.

Yes I know that badminton is in 2008 and safe in 2012 olympic, but 2016? 2020? I just donot know.

US fears to CHN. that's why they want to cut badminton from OG.
don't forget, only 3 golds separate US from China, from 28 golds in Atlanta 96 (US 44, CHN 16)

Table tennis is not exactly doing well in the US, as with many other sports, but it is not in danger of getting the Olympic axe. And table tennis is an even poorer sport than badminton.

I believe badminton is somewhere in the Olympic midtable. To strengthen its Olympic status, we cannot rely on US alone (baseball is in danger even with strong US lobby) but spread the popularity to many other nations. Traditionally, the European influence is also quite powerful, and I tend to believe that the Europeans will protect badminton.

I don't think it is fair to say that table tennis is a poorer sport than badminton. In most of our opinions it is. My dad was scottish junior champion for table tennis and we always have arguments about what is the better sport. I prefer badminton obviously but table tennis is good. Not looking for an argument or anything. Just stating my opinion :)

I read somewhere that badminton was one of the most watched sports in the 2004 olympics so what about basketball or something. I doubt it will happen , its an amazing sport :)

I don't think it is fair to say that table tennis is a poorer sport than badminton. In most of our opinions it is. My dad was scottish junior champion for table tennis and we always have arguments about what is the better sport. I prefer badminton obviously but table tennis is good. Not looking for an argument or anything. Just stating my opinion :)

I read somewhere that badminton was one of the most watched sports in the 2004 olympics so what about basketball or something. I doubt it will happen , its an amazing sport :)

I like to watch both table tennis and badminton. What I mean by poorer is that it is financially poorer. Less prize money etc.

what a pic

i need to learn how to jump like that lol

His other sport must be high jump.

Dont worry about future Olympics because some comedian here predicted Msia taking two golds in Beijing.

I like to watch both table tennis and badminton. What I mean by poorer is that it is financially poorer. Less prize money etc.

Oh right :o Sorry.

they should cut themselves

Is there any solid reason to cut off the badminton sports from Olympics?Just because it was dominated by few countries??Remember,it is no longer dominated by korea,indonesia,china,denmark no more..Other Countries,like thailand,vietnam,singapore,england,japan,philipine s,german,france,etc r coming up..n more n more ppl r starting to playing it,or take it more serious.So,no reason to cut off badminton from olympics!!

HOLY CRAP LOL. this guy flies.. haha i love this thread. lotz of nice people

Is there any solid reason to cut off the badminton sports from Olympics?Just because it was dominated by few countries??Remember,it is no longer dominated by korea,indonesia,china,denmark no more..Other Countries,like thailand,vietnam,singapore,england,japan,philipine s,german,france,etc r coming up..n more n more ppl r starting to playing it,or take it more serious.So,no reason to cut off badminton from olympics!!

that's right.
Eng XD pairs won WC 06
Boonsak won S'pore SS 07
JPN WD pairs won bronze medal in WC 07