You realize that virtually all throwing events have form requirements as well, right? Javelin, discus, shotput, etc. I guess we should get rid of those too. Seriously, what exactly is this antipathy towards having judges to determine whether the rules are broken? Hell there used to be judges for the freaking 100m dash to call false starts. I suppose THAT shouldn’t have been an event till someone invented the new weight-sensing starting blocks. :rolleyes: yourself.
Christ, take a moment or two to learn something about what you are talking about before you open your mouth.
Fencing, even at the amateur level, is electronically scored. The foils are connected to a scoring box, and each fencer wears a metal mesh suit, which is also attached to the scoring box (there are a few more bells and whistles, but that’s the gist of it). A valid touch is scored when the circuit between the foil and the opponents suit is completed. If the rules for a particular event provide, for example, that only touches on the torso are valid, the fencer wears a mesh vest that only covers the torso. Touches on the arms or legs will not complete the circuit, so no score is recorded. Other events have differing rules for coverage, etc.
The refs make sure the rules are followed, but the scoring is as objective as all hell.
Argue against fencing as an Olympic sport all you want, but do so based on knowlege, not Olympic-level ignorance.
Yeah, what he said.
I think Acid Lamp thinks we should return to Trial By Combat, since he thinks judges are such a bad idea.
Then fencing was a poor example. I apologize to all the fencing fanatics out there. The point is irrelevant though since I was responding to concept of objective vs subjective scoring. Fencing figured out a way to be objective? Good for them, my point is still valid, and I’ve YET to hear one decent argument against it other than “I like that event”.
To be clear. Any event that is not scored objectively, or utilizes human decision in any capacity other than simple cheating enforcement has no business in the Olympic games. For the sake of simplicity, I’m NOT talking about making a call when equipment fails or some such hyperbolic example. Especially if the athletes are only given one chance to compete, rather than an aggregate of scores. I don’t believe for one second that the judges are incapable of error, or are not subject to personal biases. How can you truly break a record when the record has no substantive existence outside of a panel of humans?
Wouldn’t bother me at all.
You do know that wrestling, pankration (hand to hand combat), and boxing were all among the events at the ancient Olympics, right?
Both can be scored completely objectively, or lacking that by aggregate score.
And how do you propose aggregate score be compiled without humans making decisions based at least partially on subjective observation?
There are two rules of holes you should probably be aware of:
[ol][li]When you are in a hole, quit digging.[/li]There’s no such thing as half a hole.[/ol]
Ya see, this is exactly why I have very little hope for humanity, and I believe this board to contain some of the worst examples of that humanity. You and many other people on this board get some psychotic, sociopathic, thrill or sense of satisfaction out of acts of violence, revenge, and general terroristic verbal bullying like this. The lot of you are disturbed and sick.
Violence doesn’t feel good… and if it does, then you are a sick individual.
I acknowledged that aggregate scores would come from subjective decisions. While I personally feel that all such sports have no place in the Olympic games, an aggregate system would cut down on flubs, flukes and bad calls at what is obviously an extremely emotional time for the athletes. An aggregate score would allow for a “bad call” to only factor in, rather than totally decide a single performance. It would also allow for an athlete to show consistency in their level of performance.
For example:
Gymnast A scores a total of: 8.0, 8.5, and 10 subjective scores compiled by the judges panel. (Yes I KNOW there is a different system in place now, this is for the sake of an example) for an average of 8.7
Gymnast B scores a total of: 9.0, 9.2, and 9.5 for an average of 9.2
by allowing three performances of the routine, it’s clear that gymnast B is the superiour gymnast, despite A’s single perfect routine. If we just went with one subjective decision, gymnast A might have won or lost on nothing more than a flub, or a bad call, or whatever else affects the judges at that moment. Despite the subjective nature of the scoring, multiple performances at least give each athlete a chance to properly show their skills. A bad call can happen once, but it’s far less likely to happen three times in a row.
Darn, thought you said kickboxing.
“psychotic, sociopathic, thrill or sense of satisfaction out of acts of violence, revenge”
I can go along with this. 
I have no problem admitting that we are a violent species. In fact I think that if we learned to channel our tendencies properly instead of just pretending it’s all BAD we’d probably be better off as a whole.
However, “General terroristic verbal bullying”? I don’t get it. Who exactly am I terrorizing or bullying?
How exactly can wrestling or boxing be scored objectively? Have the victories be only by knockout? Introduce a broken bone as the determination for victory? And which events are acceptable under aggregate score?
Can you give a list of the sports that are scored objectively? As far as I can tell, you want track and field to be the only olympic sports. And that’s only because all the judges have to do is determine who crossed the line first or whether a foot was over the line during the throw/jump.
I just don’t see your angle here. Maybe after you list the acceptable sports I’ll have a better idea of what you’re talking about.
I bet you’ll think twice before you kick any more referees, mister.
There is nothing inherently bad in violence. Used in a controlled manner, it can be very effective. Violence and anger can be a very motivating force.
As to the OP, very bad manners, and a lack of control. He should be banned.
I am pretty sure a cursory view of history proves you wrong on that one.
Hell, a cursory look at human nature proves that! One of the hallmarks of civilization is eschewing violence whenever possible. But that doesn’t change the fact that it feels good, and is hardwired into the human psyche. Anybody who thinks differently obviously slept through Psych 101. It is only through the dedicated efforts of violent men (and women) that devilsknew can feel so protected and secure as to mock and belittle those who embrace and control our violent selves for the betterment of society.
blah, going to bed.
Ban the guy for life. There’s no excuse whatsoever for attacking a ref like that. Truly shocking, in the non-ironic sense of the word.