Racewalking is not a sport!

Literally it gives the olympics as much credibilty as the Black Entertainment Awards.

If it were up to me the finish line would be a burning pit of fire. They would all fall in. Then we would laugh.

About 80% of them dont walk anyways. The winner yesterday was clearly running for the majority of the race. It either needs to be scrapped or get a major rules overhaul soon.

i honestly laughed when i realized this was an event...some of the "sports" in the Olympics are a joke.

The Malcom in the middle episode on this was hilarious!

These people are moving faster than 99% of the people on this board can run and they are doing it for 20+ km. It's difficult. There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one.

---

Posted by Rush

These people are moving faster than 99% of the people on this board can run and they are doing it for 20+ km. It's difficult. There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one.

---

just because something is difficult doesn't make it a sport, or worthy of being in the olympics.

Honestly I didnt even know this was a sport/event.....

---

Posted by mikevolz

just because something is difficult doesn't make it a sport, or worthy of being in the olympics.

---

What defines a sport? In your mind of course.

Hey I think I found something I could go to the Olympics for

---

Posted by Rush

These people are moving faster than 99% of the people on this board can run and they are doing it for 20+ km. It's difficult. There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one.

---

Well said, I'd love to see people in this forum try it.

---

Posted by Ben_Hutch

Well said, I'd love to see people in this forum try it.

---

I wouldn't want to do it. It looks like it's hard on the hips.

I think I could do it, that's how I normally walk on a daily basis. And just why isn't Poker an Olympic sport yet?

---

Posted by DCRage

I think I could do it, that's how I normally walk on a daily basis. And just why isn't Poker an Olympic sport yet?

---

I think you'd give up after 2km.

2 km is probably a shorter distance than the total distance I walk during my work shift (a little over a mile). I probably work 1.5-2 miles a day doing my job, although 1-2 days a week it's more like 3-4 miles.

---

Posted by DCRage

2 km is probably a shorter distance than the total distance I walk during my work shift (a little over a mile). I probably work 1.5-2 miles a day doing my job, although 1-2 days a week it's more like 3-4 miles.

---

The Olympic record for the men's 20km racewalk is 77min. That is a pace of under 4min. per km (just over 6min per mile). Like I said, most people cannot run at that pace. I've been running long distances for years and cannot run a half marathon faster than 90min., which is only a slightly faster pace to what these people are walking.

again i'm not going to discredit the difficulty of speedwalking. It just looks gay as hell.

That being said, i think breast stroke, back stroke, butterfly etc should all be removed from the olympics as well. Swimming is swimming. You don't see the crab walk, or duck walk, or backwards runs. You see sprints, or distance runs. So to get rid of speed walking we need to get rid of those other things as well. (and don't bring up hurdles that's not the same)

---

Posted by Rush

---

Posted by mikevolz

just because something is difficult doesn't make it a sport, or worthy of being in the olympics.

---

What defines a sport? In your mind of course.

---

Ok, as a 'sport' it fails in my mind in that it handicaps its participants. How many other sports in the world are you handicapped in? not allowed to run as fast (i know its walking as fast as you can, but if that is the basis for your argument... come on seriously?) not allowed to hit as hard as you can, throw as fast as you can, try as hard as you can.

but, what i was really criticizing was that you're whole reason for it being A. a sport, and B. in the olympics was because it is hard. that was the assumption your post made. And being the entitled asshole i am, im going to need more convincing than that.

---

Posted by mikevolz

Ok, as a 'sport' it fails in my mind in that it handicaps its participants. How many other sports in the world are you handicapped in? not allowed to run as fast (i know its walking as fast as you can, but if that is the basis for your argument... come on seriously?) not allowed to hit as hard as you can, throw as fast as you can, try as hard as you can.

but, what i was really criticizing was that you're whole reason for it being A. a sport, and B. in the olympics was because it is hard. that was the assumption your post made. And being the entitled asshole i am, im going to need more convincing than that.

---

Doesn't every sport have handicaps? Aren't they called rules?

And actually you made the assumption from my post. I just said it was hard basically so people shouldn't knock it.

In the end, IMO there is no clear definition of a sport, which might be why they are called the "Olympic Games" and not "Olympic Sports"


As to the comment above yours regarding the different run distances and swimming strokes, each one presents it's own set of challenges and strategies for winning, so in that respect running/swimming is not all the same.

SPORT == Competitive physical activity: An individual or group competitive activity involving physical exertion or skill, governed by rules, and sometimes engaged in professionally.

While I agree racewalking is hardly a typical sport it falls under the category, it's like saying soccer is a contact sport, ridiculous really.

I say its a sport. I couldnt do it. Its a physical activity, there are winners and losers, your practically running (just not as fast). so yeah I think that justifies it as a sport.

---

And actually you made the assumption from my post. I just said it was hard basically so people shouldn't knock it.

---

ok, here's your original post

---

Posted by Rush

These people are moving faster than 99% of the people on this board can run and they are doing it for 20+ km. It's difficult. There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one.

---

the conclusion you make from this is that, speed walking is more deserving of being in the olympics than other sports with the "There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one." line.

The evidence you provide is that its because it is difficult. by describing what happens.

the assumption, that your post makes, through your own argument mind you, is that because something is difficult, it is worthy of being in the olympic games.

so through this logic, we can also justify anything being in the olympics because it is hard, in particular, hard physically. So why isn't walking on your hands in the olympics? its hard, physically challenging, takes much more, strength, endurance, coordination, balance, than speed walking?

---

Doesn't every sport have handicaps? Aren't they called rules?

---

yes, but onto my point, what sports handicap you from going 100%? do we have races where the bikers can only go at 5th gear? can you imagine a horse trotting race? your horse can only trot?

---

In the end, IMO there is no clear definition of a sport, which might be why they are called the "Olympic Games" and not "Olympic Sports"

---

yes, but the 'activities' that are done during the 'olympic games' are called olympic "SPORTS."

the whole festival is called the games, the events themselves are called sports.

---

Posted by mikevolz

---

Posted by Rush

These people are moving faster than 99% of the people on this board can run and they are doing it for 20+ km. It's difficult. There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one.

---

the conclusion you make from this is that, speed walking is more deserving of being in the olympics than other sports with the "There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one." line.

The evidence you provide is that its because it is difficult. by describing what happens.

the assumption, that your post makes, through your own argument mind you, is that because something is difficult, it is worthy of being in the olympic games.

so through this logic, we can also justify anything being in the olympics because it is hard, in particular, hard physically. So why isn't walking on your hands in the olympics? its hard, physically challenging, takes much more, strength, endurance, coordination, balance, than speed walking?

---

Well, I really don't want to get into a literal/semantics argument again, but I do want to make the point that your interpretation of my quote assumes that the events that I would remove before racewalking are what you would define as "sports". None of that information is available from either of your previous posts, so it's an assumption based on your part.

As for your analogy of walking on your hands, yes, you are correct, just because it is difficult doesn't warrant it a spot in the Olympic games. However, a) I never said that that was the only reason I would keep it in the games. I merely stated that there were other events that I would get rid of first. and b) there are other reasons why events are in the Olympics that have to do with historical reasons.

For example, all the dressage and equestrian events mostly rely on the skill of the rider, but the fitness of the horse. However, historically, one could argue that horse riding was a very important skill to have hundreds of years ago when the Olympics were first established and that one's skill riding a horse deserves recognition. Another example is the historical significance of the actual marathon distance. Javelin throw is obviously tied to spear throwing.

The historical significance of the racewalk is below

---

Harkening back to the stylized gait of footmen who walked alongside their masters' coaches on journeys in days of yore, English sports enthusiasts made walking a competitive sport in the late 1800s.

---

As for not going 100%, you can walk as fast as you want in the racewalk. That's the whole point of the event. The only restriction is that you cannot run. To me that is no different than not allowing someone to wear flippers in the swimming events or restricting them to a particular swimming stroke or not allowing the swimmers to run on the edge of the pool or allow the cyclists to take short cuts on the triathalon course, not allowing someone to cork their bat in baseball, why there are off sides in football, hockey, etc. I could go on.

As for sports vs games. Point taken, however you still never answered my original question of what you define as a sport. I think the answer is relevant considering you are the one that is speaking as if the term is clearly defined (when IMO it is not as clear as some would like it to be)

As I have said, I chose not to make the distinction (I refer to Olympic events as "events", but I'm not the one complaining that such and such event doesn't deserve to be in the Olympics because "it is not a sport".

I would also be happy to provide a list of events I would take out of the summer games before I would remove racewalking and my reasoning for each.... none of which have to do with the definition of a "sport"

---

Posted by Rush

---

Posted by mikevolz

---

Posted by Rush

These people are moving faster than 99% of the people on this board can run and they are doing it for 20+ km. It's difficult. There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one.

---

the conclusion you make from this is that, speed walking is more deserving of being in the olympics than other sports with the "There are a number of other things I would take out of the Olympics before this one." line.

The evidence you provide is that its because it is difficult. by describing what happens.

the assumption, that your post makes, through your own argument mind you, is that because something is difficult, it is worthy of being in the olympic games.

so through this logic, we can also justify anything being in the olympics because it is hard, in particular, hard physically. So why isn't walking on your hands in the olympics? its hard, physically challenging, takes much more, strength, endurance, coordination, balance, than speed walking?

---

Well, I really don't want to get into a literal/semantics argument again, but I do want to make the point that your interpretation of my quote assumes that the events that I would remove before racewalking are what you would define as "sports". None of that information is available from either of your previous posts, so it's an assumption based on your part.

As for your analogy of walking on your hands, yes, you are correct, just because it is difficult doesn't warrant it a spot in the Olympic games. However, a) I never said that that was the only reason I would keep it in the games. I merely stated that there were other events that I would get rid of first. and b) there are other reasons why events are in the Olympics that have to do with historical reasons.

For example, all the dressage and equestrian events mostly rely on the skill of the rider, but the fitness of the horse. However, historically, one could argue that horse riding was a very important skill to have hundreds of years ago when the Olympics were first established and that one's skill riding a horse deserves recognition. Another example is the historical significance of the actual marathon distance. Javelin throw is obviously tied to spear throwing.

The historical significance of the racewalk is below

---

Harkening back to the stylized gait of footmen who walked alongside their masters' coaches on journeys in days of yore, English sports enthusiasts made walking a competitive sport in the late 1800s.

---

As for not going 100%, you can walk as fast as you want in the racewalk. That's the whole point of the event. The only restriction is that you cannot run. To me that is no different than not allowing someone to wear flippers in the swimming events or restricting them to a particular swimming stroke or not allowing the swimmers to run on the edge of the pool or allow the cyclists to take short cuts on the triathalon course, not allowing someone to cork their bat in baseball, why there are off sides in football, hockey, etc. I could go on.

As for sports vs games. Point taken, however you still never answered my original question of what you define as a sport. I think the answer is relevant considering you are the one that is speaking as if the term is clearly defined (when IMO it is not as clear as some would like it to be)

As I have said, I chose not to make the distinction (I refer to Olympic events as "events", but I'm not the one complaining that such and such event doesn't deserve to be in the Olympics because "it is not a sport".

I would also be happy to provide a list of events I would take out of the summer games before I would remove racewalking and my reasoning for each.... none of which have to do with the definition of a "sport"

---

ok, sport. as a definition. in my own terms. I believe the letter of the law of sport (what 'technically' defines a sport) is some sort of competition in which there are an even set of rules. I personally believe in the spirit of sport, that there is should rely on some sort of athleticism. Golf is considered a sport by some, but not by others. I think it is a sport because at the high levels it takes a high level of athleticism to play, but you don't have to be in shape to play it. (think baseball pitchers level of athleticism). but at the end of the day, it is a sport that mostly relies on skill (just using golf as an example of how i think).

the 'sports' of today are basically a give and take of athleticism vs skill. I.E. olympic racing (such as running, and swimming) are an almost pure version of athleticism, as when compared to sports that apply running where lots of skill in areas are required (running a hook route, double jukes, dribbling...)

so this brings me to where im singling out the racing sports, vs other sports.

olympics has swimming (different strokes), rowing, running, and whatever. In all of these races you go as hard as physically possible. In swimming you have the different strokes, you go as hard as you can. now the comparison from breast stroke to free style as walking to running is here, ill explain my problem with it.

With different strokes your doing it in a different form that is so different rarely are those lines blurred. butterfly and breast stroke are so different that its easy to tell.

in racewalking, your right in the gray area, i know theres a form to racewalking, and it looks amazingly hard to perfect, but the racers are borderline jogging, in some cases getting disqualified for changing form to run.

i think that when the rules of competition are set up like that and require such intense monitoring it detracts from the underlying aspect of competitive sports, or events. in addition to the fact that they are preventing themselves from going fast.

if you want me to write more, i will, sorry for the disjointedness, but my attention span did not permit me to read your post and write this in one sitting, if i missed anything let me know.

good talk

thank you ,i told my wife that was a joke for the olympics and they want to take away womens softball and keep that crap

With the way Olympic boxing is scored, I'd rather watch racewalking.

---

Posted by mikevolz

if you want me to write more, i will, sorry for the disjointedness, but my attention span did not permit me to read your post and write this in one sitting, if i missed anything let me know.

good talk

---

No, that was enough. I still don't agree, but that's cool.

One point I want to make about the swimming though. The strokes (as you say) are distinct, but there are rules that limit you to what type of kicks you are allowed to use. For example the most powerful kick is the dolphin kick. However, you are limited to different degrees, how many times you can use the dolphin kick in the various swimming strokes (Fly - unlimited, free/back - as many times as you can after a turn, but you must be under water, breast - one kick on each turn). I bring this up because, in my mind, these rules also require monitoring and prevent the swimmers from going as fast as they could, which IMO is analogous to your problem with racewalking.

I will agree that judged events are a problem in any competition because they bring subjectivity into the mix.

I also have a question. In terms of your definition, then what do you consider skill and how do you make the distinction between sport and non-sport (in terms of your definition) with things like table tennis, driving/riding, shooting, skateboarding, fishing, etc. From what I gather, many of those would indeed fit your definition of a sport, but many would argue that they are in the grey region at best.

The fact is I'm just sick of having to stay up til 4 in the morning to watch Wrestling. **** racewalking, **** all of the athletes that do it, and **** the olympics for allowing it.

---

Posted by F--K_Luck_AuH2O

**** racewalking, **** all of the athletes that do it, and **** the olympics for allowing it.

---

Yeah!!! and Fuck_Luck_AuH2O


LOL