> > > This is worse than the inclusion of equestrian events.
> >
> > Hrm? Watch out, or I'll sick Leen on you. Equestrian events are absolutely fitting. Few people realize it, but horseback riding is a physically taxing activity and requires precise physical coordination and timing. It's as appropriate as any traditional Olympic sport.
>
> That comment surprised me as much as if someone had said "it's worse than the inclusion of swimming." I can only assume Tranio has neither ridden a horse nor watched Olympic-level equestrian competition before. If you think the horse does everything itself and the rider just sits there, then anybody off the street could buy an appropriately-trained horse and win a gold medal at the Olympics. That's no more true than saying I could win an Olympic road race tomorrow if I only had the same kind of bike they use.
>
> Brunnen-"I wish"G

Of late, I have watched the Olympics for an hour or more nearly every night. After watching the nearly impossible feats performed by many of the world's best gymnasts and being totally amazed, I was even more intrigued when the judges are so incredibly strict. A girl could perform the most amazing dismount with her body twisting multiple times in the air and then land squarely on her feet, but if she's off balance enough to force her to move her foot an inch, she would lose points and probably be out of medal contention. In order to win a medal, their performance must be absolutely perfect.
Now, here's where this applies to equestrian: I saw only a portion of the competition which included the gold medal winner's run. He knocked over a rail, and then lost his way around the course momentarily. When he crossed the finish line he shrugged to the cameras and crowd as if to say, "Oh,... I guess I won the gold even with my screwing up." I just felt that this guy somehow won despite his bumblings, instead of winning because his performance was absolutely perfect and/or the best in the world like in the other sports. A swimmer isn't going to win the 1600M because he/she "only had to stop and rest once".
I completely understand that preparing for that competition takes years of training with the horse, and that "anyone" could *not* simply ride a winning horse into a gold medal. However, the winner, as in every other sport, should be the absolute best of that sport in the world and their performance should be at least borderline perfection, if not perfection itself. (Note: I am not wanting to illicit a semantic discussion on the term 'perfection'.) The equestrian competition that I saw seemed to be just a little bit too forgiving in that area, and I was not terribly impressed with the medal winners' performance as I have been with every other sport.

Tra "Aaaaaaaaaaa horse is a horse, of course of course..." nio