The Rio 2016 Olympics have just ended.
I've blogged about positive publicity. To prove my point, just view the uproar about that US swimmer's false report about having a gun pointed by Brazillian police at his head. He escaped arrest by leaving on a plane while his team-mates were pulled off another later flight, and the whole story spilled out.
Watching the closing ceremonies live, we can surely genuinely appreciate the host's efforts and give them our true praise for work well done in the face of incredible odds, and unimagineable difficulties.
There was a write-up to-day that aptly made a fair assessment of each country's performance based on its population titled "Population-adjusted 2016 Olympic medals." Although USA came on top with the most medals, and Great Britain second, with populous China third, this report perhaps put things in proper perspective.
I'd tweeted earlier that I'm both happy and sad, that while my country got a few medals ( 4 silver & 1 bronze, said to be its best performance ever ), the number is meagre. Looking from the point of view of this population-adjusted performance, I was surprised Malaysia isn't at the bottom of the pile. India, with a population second only to China, is !
In fact at the top is Grenada, with 93.61 medals per 10 million population. Grenada has only 100,000 people ! USA only occupies number 43. Malaysia is ahead of 27 other countries.
I remember a write-up during the 1964 Tokyo Olympics about the supposedly physical advantages of the Negro athlete, specifically the "spur" on their heel bone that gave black athletes that extra "flick" when they run or jump. I remember the 100 meters was won by USA's Bob Hayes at 10 seconds flat, and he went on to become a successful American football player. To think about it, after more than half-a-century, the 100-meter sprint has improved a mere 7 %! This with bigger athletes and better equipment and running surfaces !
One feature that has emerged through the years has been the dominance of the black athlete, male and female. I went through the Olympics on the You Tube, from London 1948, and can see the rare few black male athletes and the even rarer female ones. The more recent games, up to Rio 2016, show how much the picture has changed. Where the black athletes were mostly dominating the sprints, now you see them dominating all events, including field events and the water sports. In the endurance races one hardly sees a non-black face in the victorious position anymore. And, remarkably, it doesn't end there. Even European countries like Sweden and Finland and Italy and, of course, Britain, display black athletes winning for them. Even Japan, non-European of course, won their remarkable silver medal in the premier 4 x 100 meter relay with the help of one "Cambridge", obviously of mixed black parentage.
There has been the thesis that family influence play an important part in the success of the athlete. Certainly in badminton in Malaysia, the Chong brothers, the Sidek brothers, and the Tan brothers could prove this point. Golf also is full of parental influence on world-class performance.
Then there's the so-called college system of America. Study apparently is integrated with sports, or the sports itself is well established as a subject of study. It's important to recognize this because that integration as far as I know doesn't exist in Malaysia. Students are only supposed to study and pass examinations. Sports is for those who don't want to, or can't study.
In fact I remember back in my university days 50 years ago there was a saying among us students that the 'varsity was the grave yard for sportsmen. I remember a promising National 400-meter runner from V.I., Lee something, I can't remember his full name now, whose athletic career simply stopped when he became an undergraduate at the U.M. We had an inter-varsity game with Singapore University, you know when Lee Kuan Yew was declaring his "rugged society" and we bystanders at those games shouted "bugged society !", and other than that our teams didn't do particularly well.
The other thing that has been mentioned when looking at the dismal performance of India is that of culture. India isn't without its sports of choice. Just look at cricket. And field hockey. In fact Malaysia's earlier fame in field hockey in this part of the world was because its Indian citizens made the sports popular in the country. How the change of rules and astro-turf have changed field hockey !
That was also the case with badminton in Malaysia. There has always been a culture of badminton. In fact in the old days local neighbourhoods formed "badminton parties" when they wanted to start the game in the locality and to attract players to participate in the game. Setting up the courts was easy, and the equipment cheap, and you don't have to change the shuttle-cocks until all the feathers were gone ! To-day everybody, I mean everybody in Malaysia follows badminton. Luckily I was far-sighted enough to buy my own tv set in my own corner of the house, in addition to the large screen in the sitting room watched by the family. I don't know how many games are listed in the Olympics, but my family only watched badminton, badminton and badminton !
Then we have sponsorship, both governmental and corporate. As it is, in Malaysia there is insufficient supply, or getting it is not easy. And in the US, at least, this is the key to the discovery, and development, of talent in all sports, and most importantly, from an early age.
Back to the black athlete, the US and Carribean Negroes may have benefitted from natural culling of the weak because of the terrible long journeys from Africa. The strong genes survived, and through migration to other parts of the western world , this is carried along. Then you say, what about the Kenyans and the Nigerians and the Ethopians who regularly excel in the Olympics ? I suggest this is also through natural selection because of the geography, climate and food, producing hardy and athletic stock.
The suggestion is much can be learned from environment and culture and physical development. My simplistic thesis is not even pretending to be scientific. It's just a view point by a sports enthusiast that may provoke thinking - about how we can do better at future Olympics. Tokyo 2020 may be too near, but it's a nice target.
And stop politicising sports. If you are a Chief Minister, and a budding cyclist wants a trainig bicycle that's too expensive for him, buy him one instead of ignoring his request and saying I didn't know. When that cyclist is successful and mentions the lack of assisstance, the blame olympics start.
............................................................................................
