Why no homely Olympic athletes?

I’ve been watching some of the Olympics, and I’m struck by the fact that most of the athletes are good-looking; on a scale of 0-10, I’d give them around a 7 to 10, maybe a few 6s. The worst-looking person I’ve seen would be considered “average” in any other context.

So what happens to a below-average-looking person who happens to excel in a particular sport? Is he/she disqualified, base solely on appearance? Is there some kind of Olympic rule concerning this?

You clearly missed the women’s shot put event.

As a general rule, though, an athletic physique is attractive and also necessary to be a good athlete. Sorta by definition there…

Well if you find young (say under 30), slim, athletic people attractive then it’s no wonder that you’d think the Olympics is full of hotties (I sure do). It also looks like a lot of the athletes get a nice haircut, some disciplines allow for makeup (like the gymnasts), etc.

That being said there are certain body types that some people won’t find attractive - shotputters, weightlifters, that 420 pound judo contestant and so on. They’re big and powerful and incredible athletes but they’re not slim, firm and toned.

We must be watching a different olympics. While there are a few cuties, and most competitors bodies are absolutely superb physically, the majority of athletes are decidedly (IMO) quite average looking face wise. Also, in some sports many of the women are so muscular, defined and “hard” looking they’re really not all that “attractive”, unless a very lean, muscular female physique is your thing.

In general though being fit does give your face + body package a big leg up vs the alternative of being flabby.

Do you honestly think there is a factual answer to this question?

You might have better luck in MPSIMS or IMHO.

To answer the ‘factual question’ here: no, there’s no rule based on looks, in the Olympics or in sport generally, concerning eligibility to compete. If you fulfill the qualifying criteria, you can take part.

Some athletes look good, some don’t, and in any case it’s largely in the eye of the beholder. Here in the UK we’re very proud of a runner called Sally Gunnell who took a gold in Sydney (or was it the previous Games?), but who has been the butt of more than a few jokes by insensitive comedians to the effect that she isn’t exactly the most attractive woman in the world.

The Chinese weightlifter makes Sally look like Meryl Streep.

Going from memory, it might even have been Barcelona.

You dare to mock me puny imperialist weasel. I could crush you like an egg!

It may just be because the cameras caught her at a bad time, but the American woman who took silver (or was it bronze?) in the Women’s Marathon was rather homely.

Awesome, Astro!

All in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I’ve found that none of the women athletes are my cup of tea and I thought some were downright ugly. But as they say there’s a lid for every pot and I’m sure someone thought they were the vision of loveliness.

Funny what a good diet and a lot of exercise will do for ya.

That was the odd thing about all the people crushing on the female gymnasts–in the long shots, they’re beautiful, beautiful people. When they pull in for the closeup and all you can see is The Neck and their faces, most of them are actually fairly normal. Carly Patterson, for example. Or the Hamm brothers.

:eek: MY EYES!!! :eek:

Actually, there is a reasonable, oft postulated, theory as to why attractive people are more likely to be fit from an evolutionary perspective. Humans tend to find symmetry of the face and body to be attractive. Why? Because symmetrical faces and bodies are more likely healthier, fit, and capable of producing viable offspring. I remember one evolutionary theorist who made a casual subjective observation that professional baseball players tended to be more handsome on average because baseball required a wide range of skills that would be important to evolving humans.

Would you believe the one time I got around to tuning in to Olympic coverage over the weekend was…yes…the women’s powerlifting competition. sigh It took us about a minute before we could figure out the gender of the competitors…

It’s said that “the camera loves beauty,” but it’s really the camera operator and the director who decide which athletes to show you. You rarely see the homely athletes, because somebody decided you wouldn’t want to see them.

How true, how true. Forgive the slight hijack here, but this is why I get annoyed at unfit people who blame their lack of popularity with the opposite sex on their clothes, car, haircut or other relatively minor trapping. The best investment a person can make in their social life is a gym membership, running shoes or a bicycle.

Evidently there was nobody else to look at in the men’s discus Sunday. I mean, one or two alright-to-good looking guys, but the rest… not because of the particular physique produced by the event, either. They were some seriously homely men. I mean dayum.

Ok, I admit that beauty’s in the eye of the beholder, but in the eye of this beholder I don’t recall a less-than-very-goodlooking male gymnast. I find it hard to believe that there’s no weeding-out process based on looks. Is there no average-looking (or worse) male gymnast *in the entire world *who is good enough to compete at the Olympics?

It could be that NBC does not want to show the ugly people.