-
Federer and Nadal: Professionals at the Olympics
Also see
Lionel Messi and Ronaldinho in football, the multi-millionaire NBA stars of the Team USA and the equally rich tennis glitterati stars such Roger Federer and Ana Ivanovic are all sporting stars, but should they be fighting for gold at the Olympics?
We want to hear your views on whether professionals should be allowed to take part in the Olympics
Top golfers are some of the richest sportsmen on the planet but they too could be swinging for Olympic glory if officials have their way, but surely that does not sit with the ancient ethos of the Games?
Golfers themselves such as Phil Mickelson believe Olympic inclusion will help golf, and IOC officials have apparently said they would support its inclusion but only if the top stars play - but surely Colin Montgomerie has the right idea when he backed golf in the Olympics but only if the leading amateurs from each country took part.
Professional sportsmen and women can surely not take the Olympics as seriously as a major or Grand Slam event - so why not just let the amateurs take part and leave the top stars in football, tennis, basketball and the rest concentrate on their professional game?
Comments (103)
Jamie Pinkney says...
I think thats in sports like football players like Lionel Messi and Ronaldinho should not be allowed to play as they have represented their country at the world cup and in larger competitions. Sports such as Football should be limited to ametures or players that have notrepresented their country at a major championship. However i think that Tennis should have both a competition for the professionals and ametures. This would give the ametures a chance to show how well they can perform when they are not put up against the worlds best players. This then means that it will be a much harder competition for the better players like Roger Federer and Ana Ivanovic. This would make things more interesting as the matches would be tougher.....Then the top 2 ametures could progress into the prffesional tournament the for the next olympics if that is what they wish to do.
Posted 17:11 13th August 2008
John Bullen says...
The question is not one of professional or amateur, but whether winning an Olympic gold medal represents the pinnical of achievement in any given sport. Ask any tennis player which would you prefer to win an Olympic gold medal or one of the tennis majors and they'd chose the major, so would the golfers chose their majors over Olympic gold (I know I would) - such sports should NOT be part of the Olympic Games and we should recognise that that's OK, it's just that the Olympics should be about the highest achievement in any sport and if it isn't then they should be removed
Posted 15:34 13th August 2008
Jon Jardine says...
The Olympics is about reaching a pinnacle of sporting achievement. Does it matter if it is you daily job? Sports like football, Tennis and golf (if it happens) are there to enhance the profile of the games and generate more interest.
Posted 14:38 13th August 2008
Mohammed Isah says...
The olympics was suppose to be for amature athlets not for profetionals hungry for medals..
Posted 14:02 13th August 2008
Jan Davis says...
I have always believed that the ethos of the Olympic Games was for amatuers only. Now with the Olympic heirarchy wanting to change this, then they should consider changing the constitution to incorporate this and allow all professionals and not just the selected few. On the other hand it should be remembered that it is called the Olympic Games and not the Olypimpic Sports and there's a whole world of difference between the two. Games are a pastime, where money is not involved, whereas Sport is money orientated. Games are for people who can accept defeat, Sports - and one only has to look at the antics of footballers to know they find it difficult to accept defeat. I think it's a case for the Olympic Management brigade to make a choice as to whether it's for Sports or Games.
Posted 13:08 13th August 2008
Martyn Gunter says...
I don't understand how professional tennis players etc can compete but in boxing for example you have to be an amateur.... Why can't Hatton or Kahn compete? It makes no sense and needs to open to all. Most of the atheletes are paid good money for appearances, sponsorships and endorsements which is really the same as being professional...I wonder what they job they put down on the tax returns...Bar Tender?
Posted 12:12 13th August 2008
Ry Boy says...
The Olympics is supposed to be the pinnacle of sporting greatness when the best in their field compete on one stage. As soon as you stop professionals from competing, you totally devalue the competition and it becomes an event for people not good enough to be considered the best at their sport.
Posted 10:15 13th August 2008
Kevin Lyth says...
Well if the Pro's from other sports are in the Olympics where are the boxing pro's ???
Posted 09:33 13th August 2008
John Murphy says...
rubbish what bout Phelps you cant say hes amateur the amont of worldrecords hes won and theres others what about the to swimmers from aus. There all pros in there own sports these days. if you ban pros surely you couldnt let the likes of phelps enter.
Posted 08:38 13th August 2008
John Rabid (ex pat) says...
Define professional. In the U.S. colleges have programmes aimed at sport excellence, China has schools where children start as young as 5 to train every day to achieve excellence in the various sports so, Britain has the lottery to fund so there are NO true amatuers left
Posted 08:24 13th August 2008
Buck Calen says...
The Olympics are about being the best and if it's not about being the best, why the medals and the ceremonies? These are the best players the countries have to offer, then why not? Who should compete? people who haven't a clue about what's going on in the sport? If the amateurs were better, they would be professional, no? Then China and their programs should not be allowed to compete because they train them from such a young age. Who ever wrote this question was hoping it was a clever question, but it's rather pointless and dull. Good luck next chap. All professionals start off as amateurs, but they show they are above the rest and then are treated to the better care of the business, eg. equipment, trainers, doctors, etc.
Posted 03:26 13th August 2008
Cliff Sambridge says...
The Olympics should be the top of your chosen sport. For many professional sports like football, tennis and golf (which might be an Olympic event in the near future) winning a medal isn't regarded as a major achievement. It means nothing when compared with the major honors they can achieve in their professional sports. All boxers are ammature in the Olympics, so should be footballers and tennis players if they want to compete. They could turn professional later if they want. The exception to this rule is athletics where many are professional because they need to have an income to support themselves financially. For athletes, the golden rule still applies to them, "Is the Olympics the top of their sport?" What you have to ask yourselves is this, "can they achieve a higher honor in their sport than an Olympic medal?" If they can, then they should not be completing for an Olympic medal. It devalues the achievement of winning and competing in Olympic sports.
Posted 02:41 13th August 2008
Darren Kirk says...
professionalism has infiltrated most sports so asking for a cull on all professional sportsmen in the olympics is simply preposterous!! almost all track & field athletes are pro's, certainly all the tennis & football. how would banning all of these athletes be fair?? personally i feel it should be the best of the best regardless of whether the athlete in question happens to be a professional sportsmen or not.
Posted 02:29 13th August 2008
Slim Jim says...
If professionals were not allowed into the olympics what wou;d be the point. If pro's were not allowed into the olypics where whould all the athletes be? Because if they were not pro how did they qualify for the best event the world has ever celebrated. Also if Pro's were not allowed in the olympics where would Phelps the swimmer be now because by making so many WR's wouldn't that make him a pro?
Posted 23:28 12th August 2008
Tom Mac says...
What a damn silly question... there are hardly any amatures at these games at all. With sponsorship and endorsment.... who the hell does it for love in this day and age ! The prime example id the athletics team. The top earners get nearly as much as footballers for a days work ! Who is kidding who by claiming these people are amatures.
Posted 23:05 12th August 2008
Graham Coxall says...
I favor making the Olympics all amateur. If professionals are to be allowed then they should be allowed in ALL events, including boxing. Maybe I am being altruistic, but if you are good at some sport, you should have a decision to make. Either you participate with a view to representing your country at the Olympics and taking a chance on your '15 minutes of fame' (and all that comes with it) or making a living as a pro. Take football as an example, there is already a tournament that, as a professional, you can represent your country - The World Cup! Winning that will get you a VERY lucrative EPL contract! Leave the Olympics to the TRUE amateurs, and implement new tests to prove that status.
Posted 22:43 12th August 2008
Paul Brady says...
The professionals just canīt get enough. They have no right to be there. Do they make it more entertaining? Not one bit!! Wasnīt Daley Thompson & Jurgen Hingsten entertaining enough? Steve Ovett & Seb Coe? Carl Lewis? Team Jamaica (Winter Olympics) Eddie the Eagle? Let the real athlete take part not the money hungry attention seeking canīt get eough "professional"......
Posted 21:09 12th August 2008
J Childs says...
If the Olympics were just about being the best (like so many of the comments above) then lets just make it US athletes against the Chinese , I'm sure there are many quicker, stronger faster athletes from the these countries not at the games than some of the athletes from smaller nations but that's missing the point of Olympic competition These athletes train all there lives to make it to the Olympics and represent their country, it's the pinnacle of their careers. Football, Tennis, Golf , Basketball, Baseball etc shouldn't be olympic sports because they have hugely developed professional / global leagues and/or global competitions already that are deemed the pinnacle of their sports. Why do any of these sports need more airtime anyway... they already dominate press coverage - can't we focus on other sports for just a few weeks every 4 years
Posted 18:53 12th August 2008
Jason Clark says...
There are some sports that ooze money, tennis, golf, football etc sports where it is easy to earn an extremely good living just being in the top couple of hundred players in the world, other sports dont have that amount of money going into them so unless your say in the top ten ish your going to find it extremely hard going earning a living from it believe me i've tried. So on the one hand we have competitors who have to work to make a living because there particular sport doesnt provide the neccesary monies to get them through life even though there extremely good at what they do, i.e amatuers and then we have others who happen to be good at very popular sports that have money pouring from the seems, and i suppose these you would call professionals, and i'd also like to bet that these so called amatuers practice just as hard as any professional, its the money they earn from there chosen sport is what most people think that makes someone an amatuer or professional, a professional is someone who can do there chosen sport fulltime and not have another form of income, an amatuer is someone who also has to work, mostly to fund there chosen sport. In my view its not whether someone who wants to compete in the olympics is amatuer or professional its about how much money they earn from the sports that they do, if no sport had much money in it they wouild all be amatuers !
Posted 17:45 12th August 2008
Lee Dawson says...
I think that Professionals should be allowed to play at the olympics. allthough they are pros and play most of the year anyway it is bassically the same as representing your country in the world cup for example but nobody minds then. so yes i think they should be allowed to take part.
Posted 16:49 12th August 2008