Did you read the earlier post where I said

Have you been involved with precision riding?

All I did was ask a question, and even said I'd take the word of the person who said it is indeed a sport.

I am enjoying the new round of commercials (though admittedly I've DVR'd right past many). I caught some beautiful animation and realized it "Rhapsody in Blue"... one of my favorite tunes, and... the old United theme which I haven't heard in what seems like forever. As a marketer, I'm glad to see them repositioning themselves to where they were in an economic heyday.

Back on topic... loving the Olympics. We've been absolutely glued to our sets. Watching it during the day - setting the sleep timer and falling asleep to it at night.

Thank you, Olympics.

We posted at almost the same time, so I think you didn't see my answer. [edit I see you did :) ] But since I see you've ridden a horse at a gallop I'll try to elaborate: while on that horse you were probably using your leg muscles to stay on right? Gripping the animal? In dressage you can't do that as every move of your body is a cue to the animal. The rider essentially balances on the animal, and uses their muscles to control his movements -- like lead changes (which forefoot is placed down first). It's very difficult and counter-intuitive when one is on a massive cantering animal. I've ridden a great deal and can't do dressage. I think Boss Radio's wife can though...

Interesting. OK.

I still don't think I could get into watching it, but I have a better understanding of it now.

Well, a lot depends on how you define athleticism. And whether athleticism and sport are synonymous or just frequently go hand in hand.

And yes, it is all very muddy. I don't really consider gymnastics a sport but it is certainly athletic. The target shooting competitions essentially involve the ability to not move at all, the opposite of athleticism and are still widely accepted as sport.

As far as athleticism goes I'd put dressage much closer to gymastics in athleticism than shooting.

:) I was just about to add pretty much the same point Alex.

Agreed. I hadn't even considered shooting, which indeed isn't very athletic. At least that can be quantified by closest to the middle of the target methodology.

I admit a bias against Olympic events that are scored by judges.

I have that same bias as well (against subjectively judged events) and among the horse events dressage is my least favorite while the others are scored by mostly objective measures of time and penalties.

I was watching boxing for about 15 minutes last night and was amazed at just how subjective the judging has become. The commentators were quite openly disgusted with it.

The range of games played at the Olympics is part of the multiculturalism of it. It recognizes that it is all subjective, and to get billions of people to care, they have to cover a wide range. I tend to feel inclusive in this regard because the whole concept is to include everyone. Chopping out either the "less athletic" or "split second" events would exclude those that like them, and eventually would undermine the rest of the games.

True. I don't really have a problem with those being in the Olympics, they are just of very little interest to me. In fact, I would be much more interested if they did include more regional events than they currently do. Even if I still didn't watch them.

Though I wouldn't mind seeing a return to a principal of amateurism. I would be fine with rules saying that if you make your living being paid to perform your sport then you're not in the Olympics.