I had an arguemnt with a die-hard Olympic observer. She wore the scarf and the mittens, watched the opening, and has been an avid follower almost every night.
But she said our Canadian Olympians were losers.
Squeeze me?!
To be specific, we were talking about figure skater Patrick Chan, whose disappointing performance pulled him out of being a gold medal hopeful. I argued with her on the difficulty of camel spins, quadruple jumps, his inexperience and extreme pressure.
She came back with an interesting point. This was the first year Canada invested heavily in their athletes, providing top notch physiotherapists, sport psychologists and experienced trainers. They practiced 24/7 in their training for the Olympics. Ideally, all Canadian athletes should be on the podium.
But the favorites have disappointed all. Instead the underdogs are coming out on top!
So who is to blame? Is it the quick onslaught of extensive, concentrated training and support or just mounting pressure to be a Canadian performing on native soil?
Are our athletes a reflection of the fragile-looking Olympic symbol, the inukshuk?
And what if all these investments were was was necessary to perform at the level we're currently performing ? What if the level of the other countries had rose as well and it was just tougher to get there, even with (and thanks) to the investments ? Performance wise, I believe most athletes have outdone themselves, the question is how would they have done without all these investments ?
ReplyDeleteAn Olympic champion is able to overcome the stress, pressure, etc and get the job done. Too many of our athletes haven't been able to do this.
ReplyDelete