From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles
Subject: Re: Atlanta '96 : Pro cyclists in ?
Date: 13 Aug 1992 00:16:37 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Aug13.024905.22538@hpcvusn.cv.hp.com> harry@cv.hp.com (Harry Phinney) writes:
>swayzed@brandonu.ca writes:
>: The amateur athelete
>: is a heroic individual. He or she is the person who has to struggle to make
>: ends meet; who depends on meager government handouts, who trains after school
>: or after work.

>That's a nice dream, but you might want to wake up for this discussion.

Another way of putting it:
The amateur is a Member of the Idle Rich Class.  At least some of them
have been, and that was the original Olympic ideal.  Such refined people
felt they shouldn't have to compete with people would stoop to debasing
themselves in the pursuit of filthy lucre.

>: Furthermore, they are tainted
>: by their professionalism. Take the dream team and their silly squabbling over
>: product endorsements and which uniform to wear, or the fact that they didn't
>: even stay in the atheletes village.

>Almost as tainted as the US Olympic Committee squabbling with the "dream
>team" because the "dream team" was jeopardizing the financial arrangements
>the USOC had with the manufacturer of the warmup suites.  I agree that
>this situation was lousy, but the USOC was no more clean or pure than the
>athletes.

Almost reminds me of the situation of DP contractors, who can be paid
a salary by DP contracting firms (AKA headhunters) but with some
exceptions can't operate on their own.  It's OK if athletes are supported 
by the USOC or by their national sport federation or by the army, which 
organizations (except possibly the army) negotiate their own endorsement 
contracts, but the athletes become "professionals" and ineligible if they 
operate on their own.

>: Why would I want to see pro's
>: in the Olympics when I can see pro's almost everywhere else?

>Why not?  The line between amateur and professional has become so blurry
>that to the best of my knowledge, the only determining factor now in US
>cycling is which license you buy.  If you want to compete as an amateur,
>buy a USCF license.  If you want to race as a pro, buy a USPro license.
>For the most part the riders compete in the same events, for the same
>prizes, and in many cases ride on the same teams.

Furthermore, in general I would *prefer* to see the professionals.  They
play the game better.

Pure amateur competition for the joy of the sport is entirely possible.
You don't have to give medals and show it on worldwide television, though.
In fact, as soon as you do the line of demarkation between amateur and
professional becomes blurred.  Somebody will find a way to buy a piece
of the attention.  Call some friends and race them to the next town.
Or go to your nearest velodrome.

One of my favorite trivia questions used to be, "What was the first 
professional basketball team Wilt Chamberlain played for?"  I was looking
for the Harlem Globetrotters.  Somebody once answered, "Kansas".  What 
could I say?

When people pay a lot of attention to a competition, it tends to become
so close to professional that it takes a professional hairsplitter to
tell the difference.  I think the presence of honest professionals in
the Olympics is long overdue.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles