India-KXIP fan Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 Messi is genetically superior to other strikers. No matter how hard they train they won't score as much as him. We had Messi's. We have the superior genetics. But who knows how many Hockey Messi's have never picked up a hockey. In the past all potential Hockey Messi's played. It was common to play Hockey like it is common to play Cricket now. No one at all plays Hockey now. Genetics is in everything. We spent zilch but won 8 golds.
Crookbond Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 Did anyone consider that modern hockey is no longer same as the time when we won golds ? Edit - I am out before we have a Punjab Chit Chat here! :vroam:
jairamesh Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 This article is hit and miss. Fundamentally regardless of the nonsense people are spouting about genetics, diet or TV viewer-ship, it's economic investment and culture that play massive roles at how good a society is at competitive sports. A nation with a GDP per capita around $1400 and at best ordinary government sports bodies will always struggle to produce anything "world beating". Places like US and Australia invest heavily from grass-root levels (schools) to Universities and have programs (e.g. professional leagues) in place for the elite ones to make a living out of it. The best way is to provide kids in school the opportunity to experience, to enjoy, take part with the right facilities. I wonder how many Olympic size swimming pools the Indian government runs?? Build a culture of sports (physically) where kids are encouraged to take part in, and success will automatically follow. Some sports don't even need intensive capital to build facilities, like boxing, handball, volleyball (not the India volleyball :hysterical:), kabbedi, judo, gymnastics etc. I wonder how many parents on this forum encourage their kids to take up some form of physical activity? support them? pay the extra expenses?
Lurker Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 ^ Kya deny kar rahein hain abhi tak samajh mein nahi aaya ? We suck at sports on world scale...kaun deny kar raha hai yeh ? Denial manifests itself in many ways, being ignorant and choosing to do so is one of them. Without being condenscending towards you, let me ask you of one of the sports you mentioned earlier. Decathlon. What do you know of Decathlon aside from the fact that it has 10 events. Do you know what these 10 events are? Would you know what is typically considered a good score in Decathlon? Would you know on an average how far off is a Decathlete from the scores on a usual score? And if the answer to all these questios are a NO (which I am guessing is the case), what qualification do you have to say it is a spectator's sport or not? You are simply not educated enough (on the game) to make a judgement one way or the other. Maybe instead of being dismissive of Decathlon you can spend a few hours reading up on Jim Thorpe? Or Bruce Jenner? Or Daley Thomson perhaps? Or maybe move over to the women's side and see why Jessica Ennis, the hepthalete, was considered the face of British charge at this Olympics? Maybe try to read up on why Jackie Joyner Kersee is considered one of the all-time American athletes. Maybe you should dismiss your own ignorance and not an entire sport? Just saying. I am not going to start watching archery/boxing in the hopes ke bhai agli baar 2 medal aur mil jayenge. Yeh to obvious hai. If am not watching it, obviously kam interest hoga in Mary Kom than Rohit Sharma. You are proud of being ignorant. Anybody who picks a non-achiever cricketer getting drugged up ahead of someone who brings a medal for the country at the highest level of the game is simply happy to stay ignorant. Not picking on you, I consider you as one of the sane ones, but Nirmal Shekhar's article was specifically for the likes of you. xx
India-KXIP fan Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 Did anyone consider that modern hockey is no longer same as the time when we won golds ? Edit - I am out before we have a Punjab Chit Chat here! :vroam: We have won a gold on Astroturf! So that rules that out.
Clarke Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 BTW the article isn't in keeping with the relative performance of our contingent at London. The simple fact of the matter is, we doubled our medal count from last time. Isn't that a good thing to start with ? Was there anyone in the country who thought we'd be cracking the top 20 all of a sudden ?
jairamesh Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 What ever China's brutal method,but they certainly are disapproving this nonsense genetic debate. (yes maybe some sports, in the minority) In 1988 Seoul, China won only 5 Gold medals, 20 years later in Beijing they won a whopping 51 Gold medals. I am pretty sure genetics didn't play any part in it, unless they are experiencing some form of accelerated evolution.
India-KXIP fan Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 BTW the article isn't in keeping with the relative performance of our contingent at London. The simple fact of the matter is' date=' we doubled our medal count from last time. Isn't that a good thing ? Was there anyone in the country who thought we'd be cracking the top 20 all of a sudden ?[/quote'] No golds. Many failed to deliver till the end so a bit disappointing...
Lurker Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 What are the major events that you know of 1) Atheletics - dominated by blacks 2) Swimming - dominated by caucasians 3) Gymnastics - once again few elect countries do well here We are not good in any team sports (including hockey). We have only a handful of sports left to have a crack at. Depends on how deep you want to go into the subject here. Athletics - Hardly dominated by Blacks. Blacks only dominate short sprints (100, 200, 400, 4*100). Anything upwards of 800 m is a fair game for everyone. Middle Distance running (1500 - 5000m) has been historically a European trademark, specially Brits. Longer distance has been more of Kenyan/Ethiopian/Morrocan etc. Jumps (high, long, triple) have been all over the place. Same with throw (discuss, javelin, hammer, shot put etc). Then you have Marathon and walks that is again open to most countries. Point being I can think of atleast 20 countries who tend to have some sort of impact on one single event - track and field, and India is not one of them. Let us quit making excuses as if we simply ran out of sports.
Lurker Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 BTW the article isn't in keeping with the relative performance of our contingent at London. The simple fact of the matter is' date=' we doubled our medal count from last time. [b']Isn't that a good thing to start with ? Was there anyone in the country who thought we'd be cracking the top 20 all of a sudden ? It is a great development. At the same time it should also kickstart a vigorous debate. When we can win 6 medals why not 16? Or 26? Heck even 60. Clearly in certain events we can hold our own and match world's best. Why not take the debate a step further and ask why this non-chalance towards those who bring the glory to the nation ahead of those whose sole claim to fame is following orders of Preity Zinta and Vijay Mallaya???
India-KXIP fan Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 What ever China's brutal method,but they certainly are disapproving this nonsense genetic debate. (yes maybe some sports, in the minority) In 1988 Seoul, China won only 5 Gold medals, 20 years later in Beijing they won a whopping 51 Gold medals. I am pretty sure genetics didn't play any part in it, unless they are experiencing some form of accelerated evolution. Don't know man. Maybe they had genetics but the ridiculous amount of money spent converted those almost getting medals to medals? Just think genetics is in everything, you can train hard, take hgh, roids whatever as much as you want but you won't be Mr. Olympia. You need a certain body type/genetics. Only 1 white person has run below 10 in 100m. Always Ethiopians and Kenyans winning long races (this time a Brit Ethiopian). Some races are taller than others, some are smarter. Genetics is in everything.
jairamesh Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 Don't know man. Maybe they had genetics but the ridiculous amount of money spent converted those almost getting medals to medals? Just think genetics is in everything, you can train hard, take hgh, roids whatever as much as you want but you won't be Mr. Olympia. You need a certain body type/genetics. Only 1 white person has run below 10 in 100m. Always Ethiopians and Kenyans winning long races (this time a Brit Ethiopian). Some races are taller than others, some are samrter. Genetics is in everything. He is Somalian.
India-KXIP fan Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 What ever China's brutal method,but they certainly are disapproving this nonsense genetic debate. (yes maybe some sports, in the minority) In 1988 Seoul, China won only 5 Gold medals, 20 years later in Beijing they won a whopping 51 Gold medals. I am pretty sure genetics didn't play any part in it, unless they are experiencing some form of accelerated evolution. Also did you realise about 20 years ago East Germany alone beat USA and got 40 golds? Communit countries always do well, it's cause of doping. Now Germany is united, how many medals did they get? Think about it.
Clarke Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 No golds. Many failed to deliver till the end so a bit disappointing... Yea, i'd love to have more too. But lets say if we can keep up the trend and win 10-12 next time and 15+ in 2020, that should be good by any sensible head. There's also the approach of our north eastern neighbor which has brutal determination top to bottom that we cannot expect from the somewhat dysfunctional system we currently have.
Crookbond Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 India-KXIP fan, Genetics is not the ONLY thing man - hardwork aur woh sab kya dabbe mein gaya? You are sounding like Srikkanth now - so I will quote a Srikkanth for you. Boss, shut up! You keep quiet. Aap aise googly bol-bol ke baat karega toh mai bhi gussa ho jaega. Aap mere ko ungli daloge toh mere se kya expect karte ho :--D
jairamesh Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 Don't know man. Maybe they had genetics but the ridiculous amount of money spent converted those almost getting medals to medals? Just think genetics is in everything, you can train hard, take hgh, roids whatever as much as you want but you won't be Mr. Olympia. You need a certain body type/genetics. Only 1 white person has run below 10 in 100m. Always Ethiopians and Kenyans winning long races (this time a Brit Ethiopian). Some races are taller than others, some are samrter. Genetics is in everything. The Japanese 4X100m relay team made it to the finals, whilst not a single African country was represented.
Clarke Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 It is a great development. At the same time it should also kickstart a vigorous debate. When we can win 6 medals why not 16? Or 26? Heck even 60. Clearly in certain events we can hold our own and match world's best. Why not take the debate a step further and ask why this non-chalance towards those who bring the glory to the nation ahead of those whose sole claim to fame is following orders of Preity Zinta and Vijay Mallaya??? That's the plan, one set of games at a time. Of course, we'll continue to differ on the approach to the objective.
India-KXIP fan Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 India-KXIP fan, Genetics is not the ONLY thing man - hardwork aur woh sab kya dabbe mein gaya? You are sounding like Srikkanth now - so I will quote a Srikkanth for you. Boss, shut up! You keep quiet. Aap aise googly bol-bol ke baat karega toh mai bhi gussa ho jaega. Aap mere ko ungli daloge toh mere se kya expect karte ho :--D Superior genetics+ Hardwork+ Cool under pressue = Gold :two_thumbs_up: I just didn't like how people doubted our Hockey genetics. No one playing is reason
adi B Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 What are you talking about 90% of Olympic sports are not spectator friendly? Atleast paraphrase such statements with a - FOR ME - as in - 90% of Olympics sports are not spectator friendly FOR ME. And you really should research on what "90%" of the modern world thinks of cricket by the way. Brazil has many other sports that are extremely popular. Volleyball for example. England has a strong following in Formula 1 (more than cricket), snooker/billiards are followed pretty regularly. Cycling and many other olympic games has a good strong following too. China is fast becoming the largest market for every game from NBA to Football (both soccer and NFL), even baseball. To say TT and badminton is all they watch is ridiculous. Only in India do we watch ONLY cricket. Heck we were watching cricket even when we were world champions in hockey. completely agree..youth have showed some interest in other sports nowdays..still mostly uknown to multi sprts.maybe epl is the only other sport on rise in india.. sport knowledge and culture is very poor in india..mentality of indian youth and middle aged people needs to be changed
Crookbond Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 It is a great development. At the same time it should also kickstart a vigorous debate. When we can win 6 medals why not 16? Or 26? Heck even 60. Clearly in certain events we can hold our own and match world's best. Why not take the debate a step further and ask why this non-chalance towards those who bring the glory to the nation ahead of those whose sole claim to fame is following orders of Preity Zinta and Vijay Mallaya??? Isn't that already happening? I think it is. Check my Thank You thread earlier.
Recommended Posts