A question about olympic cycling

capt_slog

My son tells me that there has been a change in the way olympic (track?) cycling is set up, such that Team GB can only enter one rider per event. He's been cross about this for months, but when I try to search for details I get a bit stuck.

Partly I don't know how to phrase the search, and if a get 'meaningful' answers I'm afraid they don't mean much to me as I don't understand how the events are organised.

No doubt you know about this, can you explain it to a novice please?

Are any other sports subject to the same criteria, or will we still see several USA athletes racing each other on the field and standing together on the podium?

The Little Onion

Each of the Olympic sports is administered by their own governing body, but under the auspices of the international olympic committee. Thus it is the UCI, and their regulations, which determine what happens in track cycling, and so the international athletics governing body will have a different set of regulations.

Not sure about why the UCI instigated the one rider per country rule, as it doesn't exist for the world championships etc.

CambsNewbie

Surely the Olympic ethos is the best sportsmen and women meeting every 4 yrs for competion.. And it's not that by giving GB only one place in the sprint, it's going to give someone from Sudan a chance for example.

At the same time, there was a fascinating article on the BBC website yesterday about why the Koreans are so good at archery. Apparently the are 147 archers in Korea who obviously can't all come to the games who are at the same level or better than than the two guys representing GB!!!

dw300

CambsNewbie wrote:

Surely the Olympic ethos is the best sportsmen and women meeting every 4 yrs for competion.. And it's not that by giving GB only one place in the sprint, it's going to give someone from Sudan a chance for example.

At the same time, there was a fascinating article on the BBC website yesterday about why the Koreans are so good at archery. Apparently the are 147 archers in Korea who obviously can't all come to the games who are at the same level or better than than the two guys representing GB!!!

Yeh, there's a lot about the Olympics that grates with me when they bang on about being the pinnacle of sport .. eg. Football, only allow 3 senior players .. meaning at best most countries will have 4 or 5 of their best players if they have 1 or 2 under 23 superstars. Tennis, 3 set matches etc etc ..

And how do sports such as Sync Swimming and Artistic Gymnastics tie in with the Faster, higher, stronger motto? Having said that, if you look way back in Olympic history there were medals for things like Poetry and Literature!

And the swimming .. how is it fair that a swimmer can be seen as one of the greatest Olympians ever on medal tally when they can win more medals in one Olympics than some athletes could in a lifetime.

team47b

No idea, ask the BBC

CiB

Capt Slog wrote:

My son tells me that there has been a change in the way olympic (track?) cycling is set up, such that Team GB can only enter one rider per event. He's been cross about this for months, but when I try to search for details I get a bit stuck.

Beats me how the guy on the moped never wins. Talk about starting with an advantage.

capt_slog

CiB wrote:

Beats me how the guy on the moped never wins. Talk about starting with an advantage.

I've noticed that he peels off before the finish so I've concluded that It's because he's an idiot and never puts enough fuel in to last the race.

DavidBelcher

The Little Onion wrote:

Each of the Olympic sports is administered by their own governing body, but under the auspices of the international olympic committee. Thus it is the UCI, and their regulations, which determine what happens in track cycling, and so the international athletics governing body will have a different set of regulations.

Not sure about why the UCI instigated the one rider per country rule, as it doesn't exist for the world championships etc.

The cynic in me suspects it was UCI goalpost-moving on an epic scale to curb the fact that Team GB were winning left, right & centre. But then Pat McQuaid's always come across as something of a "Tesco Value" Sepp Blatter....

David

Yellow Peril

The one rider per event seems pointless. They've just built a huge velodrome and I think it would make more sense to use it as much as possible. They can't claim a timetable issue, they could have started a week earlier, football did. Also by having more competitors/heats/sessions more people could get to see some games action. Not rocket science is it?

Gizmodo

Following changes to track cycling's Olympic programme in time for 2012, there are five events for each gender in London: the sprint, team sprint, keirin, omnium and team pursuit.
A total of 188 cyclists will take part [in the qualifying events], and each nation can send up to a maximum of 16 - up to one athlete per individual event, and one team for each gender's team pursuit and team sprint (a reduction on previous Games).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/8856339.stm

thefd

dw300 wrote:

Yeh, there's a lot about the Olympics that grates with me when they bang on about being the pinnacle of sport .. eg. Football, only allow 3 senior players .. meaning at best most countries will have 4 or 5 of their best players if they have 1 or 2 under 23 superstars. Tennis, 3 set matches etc etc ..

I don't think tennis or football should even be at the Olympics. Most athletes are professional these days (except boxers - which seems wierd) so not because of that - more because they already have big tournaments where they shine on the world stage. I believe golf comes in at the next Olympics - that is wrong also, in my opinion!