< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 8 ·
|Aug-30-08|| ||chessmoron: I didn't want to but if you obliged...fine.
"expectations on Liu, a Chinese sprinter of unprecedented gifts"
|Aug-30-08|| ||chancho: Edwin Moses is a legend. 122 consecutive wins and did not lose a race for 9 years.|
|Aug-30-08|| ||badest: Moses was OK, assuming he was clean ... however, for 400m hurdles, John Akii-Bua was the man!|
|Aug-30-08|| ||Bobsterman3000: LOL. Hilarious. Yes, and I'm sure that I can find 5 links that describe Rustam Kasimdhzanov as a "great world champion."|
Ok, I guess that was proof enough for any unenlightened people that are ranting incessantly but only masquerading as informed sports fans. I still await more names from you. Certainly, the "dominant" sports power in the world would have more recognizable names than just 3, especially considering that China has roughly 1/5 of the world's population.
Here, I'll do it for you. As part of your studies why not read about Yi Jianlan, who just finished a strong rookie season in the NBA and will probably be China's 2nd NBA all-star. Also, there's Asian basketball legend Wang ZhiZhi, the first Chinese player to make the transition to NBA success and noted for his strong 3-point shooting.
|Aug-30-08|| ||chessmoron: You are comparing apples and oranges. Chess media and media media is two different things.|
This is the Los Angeles Times; this is not some opinionated crap you hear from chess sites and chess media.
Wang Zhizhi and Yi Jianlan are not popular than Liu Xiang, Li Ning, Guo Jingjing, Lang Ping.
|Aug-30-08|| ||Bobsterman3000: I didn't say "popular." What I asked is that you name some "dominant" athletes known outside of China to sports fans and you still haven't named any beyond Liu. You're the one that insisted on the use of the term "dominant" but instead you supplied a measly 3 names of people who may be the hottest item in their local Chinese province right now, but they won't go down in history as notable names outside of their home area.|
I can name you four hundred millionaire $$ local athletes in the US that are big names here. They're on a million billboards and area TV commercials and are big celebrities in the regional sense. That doesn't mean that they're known international performers.
|Aug-30-08|| ||ex0duz: All i see here is people living in the past. The US has won 2000+ past olympic medals you say? Another case of misrepresentation here. The U.S has participated in 25 olympics(mostly as the worlds sole military/economic superpower), while China has only been to 8(and is pretty much a third world country still). The U.S has also got the most overall medals this year, but no one except the Americans seem to care about this fact. Keep trying to justify the loss as China winning in 'fake' sports you don't care about(like badminton and table tennis).|
The fact is that China hasn't BEEN a dominant sports power in the world, but they WILL be as the current olympics have shown, and as their economic and social freedoms continue to improve. It has nothing to do with natural abilities(when it comes to these two countries), and more to do with politics/money.
|Aug-30-08|| ||cannibal: <Bobsterman3000: What I asked is that you name some "dominant" athletes known outside of China to sports fans and you still haven't named any beyond Liu.>|
I wonder how many of the American sports heroes are actually known to the average East Asian... You keep saying the whole world knows them, but of course you mean the US and probably most of Europe do. And the mass media sports here and there are not exactly the same I'd say. In Korea, archery is a mass media sport. Of course no one outside East Asia knows the guys, because we suck at it, so why would be bother.
|Aug-30-08|| ||dumbgai: Whoa whoa, how did this page turn into a discussion about track and field and Olympics? I expected to see some chess discussion here.|
|Aug-30-08|| ||chessmoron: <<ex0duz>: And is pretty much a third world country still> That is pretty harsh statement as well as an incorrect one. Skyscrapers and modern architecture as well as newly constructed highways and freeways is throughout each provinces. People can be entrepreneurs without any govt control and can create businesses by themselves.|
|Aug-30-08|| ||Bobsterman3000: <ex0duz> No one said anything about "fake" sports. However, I would argue that many Chinese medalists are "manufactured" in the sense that they are taken from home at an early age and developed through state-sponsored programs. |
China's results bear this out - the medals lean heavily in favor of disciplines that emphasize heavy regimented practice schedules, and a militaristic approach to developing technical skill (judo, gymnastics, diving), and don't have as much dependence on a component of raw athletic ability (sprinting, basketball, decathlon etc.)
I don't necessarily consider those sports "fake" but let's be honest about the path that Chinese Olympians take:
This article has comments by Chinese competitors on how they are compelled by the government to adhere to very rigid and controlled practice schedules, with minimal time for family matters or academics.
|Aug-30-08|| ||you vs yourself: <In Europe, track & field is much bigger than here in the US>|
Europe's population is so small though, compared to the rest of the world. 700 million out of 6 billion. Even there, it's debatable what percentage of them actually knows those names.
|Aug-30-08|| ||chessmoron: <<Bobsterman3000:> dependence on a component of raw athletic ability (sprinting, basketball, decathlon etc.)>|
Asians not just China will never succeed in these 3 categories but Liu Xiang did broke that barrier on the 110m H. It does not have to do with anything more than genes.
|Aug-30-08|| ||Bobsterman3000: <chessmoron> You may be surprised by how well China will do in the future in "impact" sports. Within a generation there may be 4 or 5 more Xiang Lius. China is a sleeping giant in regards to athletics, but not comparable to the US in overall output just yet :-)|
I'm predicting that we'll see China medal in basketball sooner or later - they've finished 8th twice - ahead of both Germany and Russia this year. Yao wasn't very healthy and the team lost to silver medalist Spain in overtime this year in a heartbreaker game that they should have won.
|Aug-31-08|| ||dumbgai: Well since the discussion here is about sports and China, I think China definitely has the POTENTIAL to become a top contending nation in basketball and athletics. I think the so-called genetic inferiority isn't as significant as a number of other factors such as training methods, coaching and funding. Also, with the current recruiting of children for sports programs in China many potentially great athletes are completely left out because they failed to impress scouts when they were around five years old (for example, a basketball player like Allen Iverson would have had no chance to succeed in China due to his small size as a child). Obviously these obstacles will take a long time to overcome (if at all), but I think it's certainly possible for China to continue improving in the "big sports". From watching the Chinese basketball team play, their deficiencies seem to be more about coordination and consistency than speed or strength. In athletics perhaps the sprint events will be the most difficult to improve, but Chinese women have already had great achievements in middle and long distance running and some of the field events, and I think the men will eventually improve in these disciplines as well.|
|Aug-31-08|| ||GeauxCool: <ex0dus> I agree. China has done extremely well, dominating world-wide sport after just 3 decades of training. They deserve credit for a job well done! Part of the bias against China appears to focus on whether agility is a demonstration of one's athleticism. But raw athletic ability is measured, among other things, in the attributes of STRENGTH, STAMINA, and AGILITY. China excels at sports that focus on agility. Examples include table tennis, diving, volleyball, and another is BADMINTON, an intense sport which is severely under-appreciated in USA. |
<PP> When you watch this, try keep your eye on the birdie:
- BTW, <dumbgai> is right. Chinese women athletes have come along way. For example, <Iron Hammer> is widely-regarded as the greatest women's team volleyball participant in the World. She didn't just win Gold for China, she later coached USA to Silver!
|Aug-31-08|| ||Bobsterman3000: <dumbgai> You are very right. The Chinese basketball team is actually two teams: team #1 being their world-class (frontline) forwards and centers, and team #2 being their comically overmatched guards. |
As soon as the guardplay gets up to par the Chinese team will start to press for a medal.
If teams like Puerto Rico, Slovenia and Greece can get good backcourt play there's no reason that China can't also.
|Aug-31-08|| ||PinkPanther: <chessmoron>
Just because new things are being built, doesn't really speak to the overall wealth of an average Chinese person. As I said somewhere else on this site before, the Chinese are still poorer than crap and will be for the foreseeable future. The only economic significance that country has is based on its population and not on its standard of living from person to person.
China has 4 times the population of the US and has about 1/4th of the GDP of the US. That means the average person in the US is 16 times more wealthy than his Chinese counterpart...have fun making up that gap, China. If China didn't have such cheap labor, they wouldn't even have a leg to stand on, because outside of food, cheap clothing and manufactured athletes, what do they offer the world in terms of services or products? Nothing.
And so you know, the second that the Chinese government backs off (which they probably won't do) and allows athletes to choose for themselves whether or not they want to be great, they will lose the biggest advantage they have: their "work ethic", that is to say being worked like slaves in the sport (or non-sport) that they are in.
|Aug-31-08|| ||chessmoron: <PinkPanther> Can we stop comparing China to developed countries like the US? You cannot compare a 58 years China to 300 years USA. Yes the standard is not there but China is HELLUVA developed than Africa.|
And also China has given your Bush Administration trillions of dollars to cover their war cost and yes in return send exports their stuff to get their money back.
Now that cheap labor is nearly gone in China...Wal-Mart and several made-in-China products will be more expensive--this is of course a backlash against Western corporation to treat Chinese as s*it.
Chinese get s*it money from those Western hawks and their corporation get all that big bucks. No sir-re. Chinese workers is not going to be duped again.
|Aug-31-08|| ||PinkPanther: <chessmoron>
You shouldn't have to compare China with countries in Africa to make it look well off. That right there shows the nature of the argument. I'm pretty damn skinny when you compare me to the fattest man in the world, but I'm no underwear model.
I never said anything about George Bush or his policies or the economic ramifications of his policies. He has been a horrible president; most people are willing to admit that. Cheap labor in China isn't going anywhere anytime soon. They are one of the few countries in the world that is poor, and is yet not poor enough to where they can't get some things done. China puts itself in the position of allowing this to be done to it, and in fact, when it comes to being "abused" for the sake of other countries they even encourage it by devaluing their currency to keep their exports so high. The only way China is getting so big and "powerful" is because of stuff like this. As I said before, they don't really produce much of anything. They grow food and produce products for companies from other countries. The moment that they decide they don't want to provide cheap labor and act as a "sweatshop" for the rest of the world anymore, their economy will entirely collapse because those are the only legs that it is standing on.
|Aug-31-08|| ||sapfy: <Bobsterman3000: As far as Carl Lewis goes, he had already won 4 golds and 6 world championships by the time his positive test came along.>|
So what? Unfortunately, not testing positive does not mean there is no doping.
That said, I have no opinion on whether Lewis ever intentionally used performance enhancing drugs.
<Apparently, the IOC accepted his explanation that the positive test came as a result of cold medications.>
The IOC? This case, along with dozens of others, were buried by the US Olympic Committee and was only years laters brought to light by a whistleblower.
|Aug-31-08|| ||sapfy: <PinkPanther: And so you know, the second that the Chinese government backs off (which they probably won't do) and allows athletes to choose for themselves whether or not they want to be great, they will lose the biggest advantage they have: their "work ethic", that is to say being worked like slaves in the sport (or non-sport) that they are in.>|
Spot on. The people who are cheering on China should be aware of what exactly it is they're cheering for.
|Aug-31-08|| ||badest: <dumbgai: ... In athletics perhaps the sprint events will be the most difficult to improve, but Chinese women have already had great achievements in middle and long distance running and some of the field events, and I think the men will eventually improve in these disciplines as well.> Of course genes and environment play a major role in how much you can develop as an athlete. For the sprints the Chinese will have a hard time competing with runners from the Carribean and for the longer events with runners from Kenya, Ethiopia or North Africa (mostly for 800 and 1500m). The Chinese women did some very good results in the longer events (esp. 5000 and 10000m), but weren't some of them caught with doping (which of course frequent among other athletes too ... the US athletes just have more money so the doping is more sophisticated - not everyone can afford "designer-drugs").|
|Aug-31-08|| ||Interbond: Please! Chessgames.com is about chess!!|
|Aug-31-08|| ||ex0duz: <Interbond: Please! Chessgames.com is about chess!!>|
Yeah.. because chess has never been intermingled with politics and between 2 superpowers(US vs Russia etc), and because we never talk politics on these forums.. -rolls eyes- :P~
<PinkPanther: You shouldn't have to compare China with countries in Africa to make it look well off. That right there shows the nature of the argument.>
The same way you have compared the U.S with China when you have also stated that China is a 'poor third world' country? It's pretty much the same thing.. talk about double standards. :p
<Just because new things are being built, doesn't really speak to the overall wealth of an average Chinese person. As I said somewhere else on this site before, the Chinese are still poorer than crap and will be for the foreseeable future. The only economic significance that country has is based on its population and not on its standard of living from person to person.>
As i've stated before, currently China cannot be compared with the U.S, or many other first world countries in many fields(gold medal count not being one of them). That is why i referred to it as still a 'third' world country, and why a few economically 'developed' cities like Shanghai, HK and Taiwan etc doesn't really make 'China' a developed country, and neither does having skyscrapers while the majority of the country lives in villages. It sort of parallels the U.S though, just that the U.S has had a big head start. Give it some time. I'm sure China will be able to keep up its current levels of infrastructural development, earthquakes and wars not withstanding.. 0_o
<China has 4 times the population of the US and has about 1/4th of the GDP of the US. That means the average person in the US is 16 times more wealthy than his Chinese counterpart...have fun making up that gap, China. If China didn't have such cheap labor, they wouldn't even have a leg to stand on, because outside of food, cheap clothing and manufactured athletes, what do they offer the world in terms of services or products? Nothing.>
Everyone has to start somewhere. They aren't a technologically developed country yet, and are still undergoing their industrial 'revolution', ie the reason why they are getting blasted by environmental activists. And FYI, China is having a ball 'making up that gap'. It will come sooner than you think, especially with the U.S wasting all it's money on unnecessary wars among many other things.. You say that China's economy will collapse, but the U.S is in the same bed as China, since they are one of the biggest recipients of Chinese goods. What's good for China also happens to be good for the U.S. Like you said, China has 4 times the population, so why wouldn't it make use of its cheap labor and focus on that for now? China is a big place, and also includes HK and Taiwan. Taiwan etc is well known for it's technological industry, and HK is also well known for it's trade and technology. Shanghai is also said to have 'overtaken' HK in terms of economy and being the centre for trade.. Honkies used to look down on Mainlanders(Shanghainese), but now the Shanghainese look down on Honkies(as the saying goes in China if i'm not mistaken).
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 8 ·