What is the origin of the olympic biathlon? Did someone really think it would be a great idea to have athletes ski, then shoot a gun? Also, does it take skill to be good at the luge?
The biathlon a direct descendant of the old WW II military ski patrols, and was first introduced into the Olympics in 1960, Squaw Valley CA.
The luge is apparently pretty difficult. You have to steer with subtle movements of the body and feet at speeds of over 60 MPH.
Not to mention that people have been hunting by exerting themselves (running or skiing) and shooting arrows at game for thousands of years.
The biathlon is actually one of the very few Olympic events that has direct military application. Infanteers all over the world (or at least in the Northern hemisphere) are trained to cross-country ski and shoot. I’ve even gone out for cross-country ski training once or twice myself, and I’m in communications, not infantry. Certainly the Scandinavian countries value the skill, since their military defenses are based on zipping quickly and quietly around the mountains, shooting at Nazi/Soviet/whatever invaders.
Other pseudo-military Olympic events typically involve obsolete weapons (like javelins or fencing swords) or horseback riding. Biathalon is one of the few skills (aside from basic activities like running or hand-to-hand fighting) that has actual real-life value for non-Olympians, i.e. soldiers who need to ski long distances quickly and still shoot accurately.
Luge is pretty difficult owing to the speed and the fact that you really can’t see much of the course ahead of you.
However, if you want to volunteer to lie down on a sled and be shot through an icy tube with limited visibility and control of where you are going, you are more than happy to give it a try.
Modern Pentathlon would count as one of those pseudo-military events. In case you don’t know, the five parts of the sport are pistol shooting, epée fencing, swimming, equestrian show jumping and cross country running, and are supposed to symbolise a soldier escaping from an enemy and coping with the loss of his horse, running out of ammo etc. It doesn’t seem a very realistic description of modern military behaviour, but it was included in the Olympics for the first time at Stockholm 1912, so maybe it seemed more realistic back then.
Proposals have been made to drop it from the events list for Beijing 2008.
Well, duh, that’s why I specifically mentioned fencing swords and horseback riding as obsolete military skills. The biathlon, by contrast, represents a current military skill.
No need to be like that about it Bryan. I didn’t mean to imply that you wouldn’t have known that personally - maybe I should have put “one” or “people”. Any problem with me contributing to the thread?
-
-
- I might try it on an innertube… -and maybe not from the very top at first…
~
- I might try it on an innertube… -and maybe not from the very top at first…
-
- as I remember, in one of the last few Olympics a US competitor won a medal in one of the shooting competitions but the US television network with the broadcast rights completely refused to televise any of the shooting sports.
~
I hadn’t heard this, but it’s more likely the biathlon would be downplayed not because of the shooting, but because it’s a relatively uninteresting sport visually. Were it up the American networks, their Winter Olympic coverage would consist only of hockey, figure skating, snowboarding and the skiing where the guy flips around a lot. The decision to give scant coverage to shooting events is more a matter of ratings than some moral issue.
Plus, according to these guys, no American has medalled in biathlon since it was started in 1960. Yet another reason for an American network to minimize coverage.
Another problem with showing shooting events from the Olympics is that they are not particularly easy to televise.
You don’t see much archery either.
The events take a long time for one thing and it’s not that easy to see who’s ahead or to make expert commentary.
“Wow, that was a good shot. And that one was too! Oops. that missed. He lost.”
The networks will show biathlon highlights because they are fairly easy to edit and have some nice visuals. Also, there is more time to kill in the winter than the summer. Th
Re: the difficulty of Luge
I know it’s not EXACTLY luge, but I read an article (on MSNBC.com, I think) about a total amateur who took a day of skeleton lessons, and then was allowed on the run. He came in about 10 seconds above world record time, and his general feeling on the skill level required was “Anybody can do it decently, but it would be VERY difficult to get those last 10 seconds off of the time.” Luge may be a bit different, but I don’t think it would be THAT much harder to survive, just to do it well.
In luge, they time it to the 1/1000th of a second, so the difference between a great slider and a not so great slider is pretty small.
Ooh yeah. Guys in one-piece Spandex suits? I’m there 
Seriously, if you understand the rules and if you have some interest in the outcome, biathlon is (IMO) probably the most exciting of the traditional skiing disciplines. Things can change completely in a few seconds. And since the most dramatic part takes place at the shooting range, it’s not hard to televise. The problem is those two “ifs”. American audiences aren’t familiar with the rules and don’t have anyone to cheer for, therefore US television networks find it easier to televise another event and just edit the biathlon down to a two-minute “highlights” feature between events.
Fella bilong missus flodnak has complained that the biathletes have it too easy. After all, they have skis and poles made out of the latest hi-tech materials, and carry nothing but ultralight rifles. The Norwegian military, on the other hand, still puts its faith in solid wood, AG3s, and a well-stocked backpack… 
I definately saw Biathlon on NBC’s coverage of the Salt Lake games, including the shooting. They even had a nifty graphic system rigged to show which targets had been hit and in what order.