Olympic golf......

...would you have bought tickets if it had been included next year, or at least tried to get tickets.
Also what tickets has anyone managed to get so far? Just heard we have tickets for the evening athletics meet that includes the mens 200 final and the mens triple jump so I'll get to see Mr Bolt and hopefully have a chance to see a Brit with a chance of winning a gold (thats Idowu, not Christian Malcolm in the mens 200....). So for all they cost a fortune and I know the whole thing has been a bit of a farce but we are very happy to be going.
And I would have applied to see the golf mainly because Ive never been to a pro event.

Diggers wrote:
And I would have applied to see the golf mainly because Ive never been to a pro event.

Personally, I believe this is the issue. I think Olympic golf should have been for amateurs NOT professionals.

Firstly, I see scheduling issues for the top pros. Secondly, they will all expect to be paid for competing.
There are enough top quality amateurs to make for a very exciting competition and I think it would mean a lot more to them than to the pros who would view it as just another tournament.

Not an Olympic sport (like a lot of others IMO)but if it was i would agree with it being amateur.Wonder what tickets for the ladies Beach Volleyball will fetch.
Been a heck of a boost for the economy inside the M25 from what I have seen

I dont have the slightest interest in amateur golf so personally Im happy for it to be for pros. There are very few sports at the Olympoics that insist on an amateur status (in fact are there any?) so I dont see why golf should be any different myself.

Sorry...boxing is an obvious one I guess.

I agree with what D4S says about scheduling issues but not the part about them wanting appearance money. I can see the idea of being the first Olympic golf champion appealing to quite a few of their egos - particularly someone like Tiger with an eye on the history of the game

The same thing happened in Tennis remember and most of the top players seems to warm to the idea of being an Olympic tennis champion

Digs Its not there and I just dont see it ever happening TBH.
To broaden what should not be in I would suggestFooty,Golf,Hockey,Tennis.
sailing is a bit iffy(although I love sailing).Too me Olympic sport is in a stadium,velodrome,or swimming pool.What next Olympic F1,Motocross?

Hockey is one of the great Olympic sports DM, Id say the pinnacle trophy. Same for the equestrian and sailing and rowing, I think the mix of sports is fantastic personally.
Golf is on the list for sports in 2016 so I think you will see it happening.

How is the representation of each country going to work? Four from each country or something like that? Surely it has to be something similar as if it's based on ranking alone the nationalities will be a bit skewed in favour of Brits and Septic's

I think I would take winning the Open(British that is)over an Olympic gold medal -not that either is likely without some serious practice.
In equestrian they should give the horse the medal.

Im not saying it would be equal to am ajor but if you listen to the tennis players, as Davie says, the Olympics is now huge for them. Probably the biggest thing after a slam.

I dont think it's as big as any of The Masters 1000 events or the ATP Tour Finals at the 02. I'd say there was a mixed opinion about the olympics from the players.

Murray, clearly couldn't have cared less about the last one as he went out to a guy who he could have beaten with one arm behind his back had he considered it a tournament worth winning.

Super, completely wrong re Murray. Murray was desperate to play at the last Olympics and stay in the viillage to get the experience of a games. Unfortunately he had lost a lot of weight before the games and was well below normal fitness levels and lost a match. As you yourself said yesterday such things happen.
Maybe right about the Tour Finals as a biggie but I wouldnt agree re The Masters events personally though guess it depends how many they already have. Ive only ever read positives re the Olympics from players personally from the likes of Federer and Nadal and Murray. A quick link from Federer below with a report on the doubles final he won and what it meant to him.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/tennis/7565395.stm

Dont you find you look at most sports now and feel suspscious of the successful competitors re drug use?
Hopefully golf is well clear of that

Certainly some sports but they are the same sports that have been tainted for decades, cycling and athletics. Doping dates back to the 50's in cycling, its nothing new.
I dont think its an issue in tennis or football or as you say golf but who really knows. Im sure there are af ew people willing to try anything to gain an advantage.

Fair enough Diggers, maybe it's just because I see Tennis and Golf in the Olympics as a bit silly and superfluous.
However , you're unlikely to see negative things written about an event like the Olympics when someone is competing in it. First of all because if they've entered it, they probably want to play and secondly, sports stars tend to be a bit dreary in interviews and generally say the sort of things reporters like to hear and expect to hear given the leading nature of their questioning.

e.g. " So Roger, how are you enjoying the Olympic experience?"

"Well, it's a second rate tournament, fairly tinpot, and considerably behind Masters events, Tour Finals and Grand Slams"

Unlikely to happen.

Golf in the Olympics is absolutely fantastic for the game and I would even go as far to say that it will change the future of golf. The Chinese government, yes the one with a $3 trillion current account, will only acknowledge and put money into a sport that is competed for in the Olympics. This means that there is already investment being made in Chinese golfers and golf courses and with their growing middle class having a penchant for anything luxurious and Western it would not surprise to see a Chinese major winner over the next decade or two. Their individualistic nature, in part due to their one child policy, will also make them very well suited to the game.

As for other Olympic sports, there are a load of sports that could be discounted like shooting, archery, bmx, kayaking, etc etc. As I have not even the tiniest bit of interest in the Olympics, I see it as a sporting exhibition for those sports that no-one really wants to participate in and no-one really cares about. If there was an egg and spoon race and throw the welly then I might change my opinion...

Does anyone know much about Golf in Brazil, I know there are a couple of second rate tournaments there but is it in a position to host golf in the way we expect to see it?

I've got visions of a muni and Mac watching on his TV , strangling a cat and shaking his head because it's only a 2 on the Doak scale.

And as for whether the golfers should be amateur or pro in the Olympics, I agree that it would be better for golf to have this as the pinnacle of an amateur career Realistically for the Olympics, nobody is going to turn up to watch amateur golfers compete, just like the football, and this would hit them financially.

How about each country enters a two man team, one pro/one amateur to give a good balance? Make it more in a Ryder Cup format with fourballs and foresomes and then it might be a bit different to keep the pro's interest, easier for the amateur and more exciting for the non-golfing spectators.

super_realist wrote:Does anyone know much about Golf in Brazil, I know there are a couple of second rate tournaments there but is it in a position to host golf in the way we expect to see it?

I've got visions of a muni and Mac watching on his TV , strangling a cat and shaking his head because it's only a 2 on the Doak scale.

Faldo's already on it - building a big golf resort type place to keep his account healthy for the next divorce...

Sharrison people spend their whole lifes training to compete in these sports and you write them off just like that ?
Lets face it what is golf to a lot of people, just a stupid game of hitting a ball with a stick in a field played by posh bigotted old codgers.
Im always amazed how little respect people have for other sports and how they think they think anyone could do them until they actually have a try or see them in the flesh and realise how incredibly difficult they actually are.

Good call Diggers, If you break down every sport they all seem rather stupid and pointless, however some of those so called sports like Archery, Snowboarding, Canoe Slalom or Shooting require a great deal more skill than it does to play the likes of football or Rugby for instance.

Diggers wrote:Sharrison people spend their whole lifes training to compete in these sports and you write them off just like that ?
Lets face it what is golf to a lot of people, just a stupid game of hitting a ball with a stick in a field played by posh bigotted old codgers.
Im always amazed how little respect people have for other sports and how they think they think anyone could do them until they actually have a try or see them in the flesh and realise how incredibly difficuylt they actually are.

Surely the same could be said of any sport? Throwing a stick into the field as far as you can, jumping as high as you can, running/swimming as fast as you can etc etc - these are all rather primitive?!? I'm not saying that these minor sports have no value but they are exactly that - minor sports played by the few. My point was that the Olympics is the only place to exhibit these niches sports and as I have little interest in them, I have little interest in the Olympics. I think that the Olympics as an exhibition for sports that people do not participate in but want to watch once every four years is fantastic because otherwise these sports would not exist. However, for my viewing pleasure they do absolutely nothing.

And please lets not get onto comparing random sports again - darts and snooker require a huge amount of skill but comparing them with rugby and tennis is just plain ridiculous.

I love the olympics, but only tickets we got was for Football at Wembley, which on the plus side is about 6 stops on the tube, but on the downside meant we could not apply for anything else on this second chance. Oh well, the south americans take the football as seriously as the anything, and if the olympics is good enough for Messi or Nadal in tennis, its surely good enough for any golfer.

And golf is all about tradition, The MAsters, St Andrews, so start olympic golf and build the tradition so that in 50/100 years it is at the same level.

Also an olympic gold will be harder to win then any major!

"I think Olympic golf should have been for amateurs NOT professionals. "

D4S ... the Olympics still would be amateur had it not been for the scumbag shamateurism tactics of some countries. At least by making it professional, it levels up the playing field a bit.

beninho wrote:I love the olympics, but only tickets we got was for Football at Wembley, which on the plus side is about 6 stops on the tube, but on the downside meant we could not apply for anything else on this second chance. Oh well, the south americans take the football as seriously as the anything, and if the olympics is good enough for Messi or Nadal in tennis, its surely good enough for any golfer.

And golf is all about tradition, The MAsters, St Andrews, so start olympic golf and build the tradition so that in 50/100 years it is at the same level.

Also an olympic gold will be harder to win then any major!

Why would it be harder? Surely it's only harder because it is played for less frequently, the actual event is likely to be easier.
If selection for the event is based on something similar to other sports in the Olympics, ie a limited number of the top exponents from each country who meet a qualifying regimen are allowed to compete then that will mean that you will have some very good players, i.e 4 top players from America, 4 from GB and perhaps 4 each from countries like Taiwan, Brazil, Chile, Sri Lanka etc, not exactly countries with a large amount of world class players.

I suppose it depends on your definition of a minority sport Sharrison, how many kids in the world do tricks on a BMX bike ? Sailing is pretty much the national sport in France, their sailors are feted like heroes. How many people in the world shoot guns at a range regularly, a lot I'd say.
Everywhere needs a place to showcase talent, the Commonwealth Games also serve this purpose. If all we ever saw on TV were the mainstream sports that would be very sad indeed IMO.
I dont see how anything can be called an exhibition if the competitors pour their life into what may be a once in a lifetime shot at them winning a medal.
Personally when I read about and see some of the stories about competitors, like the guy who is a doctor but also an Olympic medalist, these to me are real sportying heroes. I might not love their sports but they deserve their place in the sun as far as Im concerned and im sure many thousands of people will enjoy watching them.

It would be harder as you say because it will be less frequent, a golfer would have 16 majors to compete in a 4 year period and a chance of 2 gold medals. The overall quality is likely to be of a lower standard that is true.

Again though its going to be about tradition, people talk about player x winning x amount of opens the quality of the field 50/75 years ago is not talked. Similar in football Real Madrid have won a lot of european cups, a chunk of these when the cup was new and not all countries competed, this is not used against them.

Good topic Diggers.

In answer to the original question, yes I would have bought (tried to buy) tickets for Olympic golf. It's a shame that the inaugural olympic golf event will be hosted by Brazil, a country with limited golf heritage and no renowned courses. London would have been the ideal venue to kick off golf, with famous courses like Wentworth, Sunningdale and Walton Heath on the doorstep.

Having said that, I would have no interest in watching amateurs, in the same way that nobody would watch tennis or football if it was amateurs only. Olympic golf will not succeed without the stars like Tiger, Rory etc and I think eventually it will become an important tournament for them, sitting just behind the majors and ahead of the so-called "5th major" players championships and WGC events. The fact it is only every 4 years will add to this and as mentioned earlier there will be a lot of golfers who will want to go down in history... a gold medal is a very special thing.

And in answer to the 2nd question, I didn't get any tickets despite applying for £3000 worth. Had a look at the remaining tickets up for sale today but they are either obscure sports and/or very poor value for money... eg I'm not a table tennis fan but I might have been interested in broadening my horizon and taking in a session. However for £75 it's not worth it.

Ray, I doubt Woods would qualify for the Olympics at present. I'm sure there will be a limited amount of players per country and Woods is currently USA number 7 and on a downward spiral.

Will it be popular?, I'm not so sure as there are so many sports to cover during such an event that i can't see broadcasters giving the amount of coverage that a golf tournament requires to cover it properly.

super_realist wrote:Ray, I doubt Woods would qualify for the Olympics at present. I'm sure there will be a limited amount of players per country and Woods is currently USA number 7 and on a downward spiral.

Will it be popular?, I'm not so sure as there are so many sports to cover during such an event that i can't see broadcasters giving the amount of coverage that a golf tournament requires to cover it properly.

On a scale of one to ten, how much do you really love Tiger Woods? Are you Elin's dad?

I can't bear him Harrison, however I mentioned him because Ray suggested the Olympics needed the likes of him if golf was to be successful, but he's unlikely to make any team as they are picked on current performance.

Yet still cannot respect that he is the biggest draw for crowds and viewers in the game which is exactly what the Olympics would want...

He's the biggest draw for Woods fans, not necessarily for golf fans. Just because you like golf, it doesn't follow that you must want to see Woods at every event. I think there's a pretty even split of those who want him at events and a growing percentage who think his presence and over the top coverage spoil their viewing of a tournament

The Olympics may well want him in, but at the moment he is nowhere near meeting the qualifying criteria that other sports apply for their athletes and probably couldn't get selected for America. (and i use the term "athlete" very loosely when talking about golf.)

A few years ago, everyone wanted Woods to be there simply because he was far and away the best player, and was a kind of phenomenon.

He has lost his aura, for numerous reasons, and this view has changed, considerabely.

As for golf in the Olympics, no thanks!

super_realist wrote:He's the biggest draw for Woods fans, not necessarily for golf fans. Just because you like golf, it doesn't follow that you must want to see Woods at every event. I think there's a pretty even split of those who want him at events and a growing percentage who think his presence and over the top coverage spoil their viewing of a tournament)

Come on Super, if Tiger plays at the Open he will have the biggest following on the course, along with rory. More golf fans will follow him around the links ahead of Donald, Westwood and Kaymer, even though they sit at the top of the rankings. And I would consider people attending the open in person as golf fans above glory hunting tiger fans.

Yet another topic hijacked by super's anti-tiger crusade!!!

I guess it would be interesting to see what the players themselves thought but really we cant guage how they feel until closer to the event.
I think a lot of kids grow up wanting to compete in an Olympic games, for those who stay in the Olympic village it must be fantastic to mix with other sportspeople from all kinds of events.
Even though clearly winning a major would be a much bigger deal I think most of the top players will want to compete if they can and to be honest maybe it wont be the normal people who watch golf on TV who are the viewers, maybe a whole new set of people will tune in and enjoy our sport.

All this talk of Tiger - it's maybe worth reminding that the first golf olympic event is 5 years away. He could well be forgotten by then

There probably would be lots of lickspittles surrounding him if he isn't too crippled to play The Open, there always are around big names, just as there are lots of sad people who turn out for film premiers. They are likely to be considerably fewer than when he was in form.
Personally i'd rather watch a Donald or McIlroy because of their technical flair, Poulter for being brash and forthright and knowing how to enjoy the game or Mickelson because of his short game, than watch a surly bottom lip dragging, miserable, grumpy, humourless robot miss the cut.

Super, I think that you may have blinkered yourself with golf fans. It is the less regular spectators and viewers of golf that Tiger draws in. My wife has absolutely no interest in Donald or McIlroy's technical flair or Mickelson's short game but she will always ask how Tiger's doing when I'm watching golf. Golf fans will be there whatever because they are interested in golf but non golf fans will always want to see Tiger.

From what i gather the atmosphere in the olympic village is fantastic, especially if you are single. Towards the end of the games, many athletes have finished their events and decide to have some fun!

I'm well aware that golf fans will watch with or without him, which is why I believe it isn't remotely important if he isn't in the Olympics, as on current form he'd bring nothing to the tournament except for extra viewers in the shape of the casual/glory hunting or generally otherwise disinterested viewer (and it is these people who are partly responsible for my dislike of the man)

Do athletes have to stay in the Olympic village? I'd be surprised if tour pro's would want to stay in bunk beds when they are accustomed to travelling around the world in private jets.

I honestly cannot believe anyone would rather watch Poulter than Woods!!

Seriously, if you would rather watch a wannabee wide boy, (who dresses like a complete t***) slap it round for 18 holes, than the greatest player of all time, then you have issues,a nd it is more than likely you who has been hoodwinked by the Red Tops into worshipping their hero 'Poults'

Golf needs non golf fans to show an interest in the sport. Golf in the olympics could generate an interest in the sport from people that usually would not pay any notice to it. If golf is to grow as a sport and continue it needs these people.

Tiger Woods also brings non golf fans to the game. These people are interested because he is Tiger Woods previously due to his golf hype, though he could also be attracting people to the sport who are impressed a pro golfer has been banging a porn star. Luke Donalds technical flair will not bring people to the game.

super_realist wrote:I'm well aware that golf fans will watch with or without him, which is why I believe it isn't remotely important if he isn't in the Olympics, as on current form he'd bring nothing to the tournament except for extra viewers in the shape of the casual/glory hunting or generally otherwise disinterested viewer (and it is these people who are partly responsible for my dislike of the man)

Fair enough if it is the type of fan that makes you dislike Woods. I actually quite like that my friends and family who have absolutely no interest in golf whatsoever are interested in having conversations about Tiger Woods.

JDandfries wrote:I honestly cannot believe anyone would rather watch Poulter than Woods!!

Seriously, if you would rather watch a wannabee wide boy, (who dresses like a complete t***) slap it round for 18 holes, than the greatest player of all time, then you have issues,a nd it is more than likely you who has been hoodwinked by the Red Tops into worshipping their hero 'Poults'

Are people really fanatical about Poulter?!? I thought that it was just 13 year old kids that were attracted by his clothes a few years back - he certainly has very little else to offer. Typical Arsenal fan for me...

ok super, what's wrong with going to a film premiere? I've been to a few. They normally have some entertainment and free drinks in the foyer and there is often a brief speech or Q&A with the director and leading actors.

I've been to a few golf tournaments live, and the stand out ocasion for me remains watching Tiger romp around St Andrews on the final day in 2000. As such, when I head dow to RSG next month he will be one of the people I am looking forward to seing most.

It's the type of fan who knows nothing about golf, trying to pretend that they do because once in a while they'll tune in to see Woods mope his way around the course, yet those same people will complain about Monty or any other player being a bit grumpy.

I also want to know what's wrong with being an Arsenal fan!