I could get behind that.
A 'net friend of mine used to be on his local curling team. His take on its inclusion in the Olympics? “If you can drink beer while doing it, it isn’t really a sport. Curling was invented as an excuse to get out of the house and drink beer. That leaves us with only one conclusion.”
It is however very interesting to watch when you’ve got the flu and are running a high fever. Gotta give it that.
If we need to pare down the Olympics, I’d start with any sport that depend on arbitrary judging. In particular I’d start with any sport with the word “synchronized” in the name.
Name an Olympic sport, besides swimming and diving, you can’t smoke while you’re doing it.
You could smoke while pole vaulting. You could smoke while playing soccer. You could smoke while shooting. You could smoke while running. You could smoke while speed skating. You could smoke while snowboarding.
Of course, you probably won’t be doing your best. Neither would curlers, which is why you don’t see the world’s best curlers smoking when they’re playing.
Olympic snowboarders have been known to smoke before the event. Guess they thought they were competing in the hashpipe, not the half pipe.
Both feet are always touching what? Each other? The ground? Wouldn’t that be more of a shuffle?
Only in a menage a trois.
In the “sport” of walking, at least one foot must always be touching the ground.
Right. Not two.
You could smoke while doing the backstroke. You’d have to do an open turn and it would get pretty wet, but you could still do it. Hell if you didn’t put your head underwater for the breaststroke you could smoke too. It might be interesting to see someone smoking right as they dove off the board too.
Curling badly is relatively easy (on par with bowling, I’d say). Curling well is very, very hard.
It’s not an event predicated on pure physical stamina or speed, but rather, a precise combination of accuracy, strategy and strength. There are a lot of other sports I’d kick out of the Olympics before curling.
As is bowling well.
Still rooting for Olympic Bowling in 2016! But considering even baseball is being dropped from the Olympics, I don’t hold out much hope.
I bet boxing would be hard. 
Does anyone stand a chance of placing outside the United States? I know there’s a finn, but he’s the only PBA player I know of born outside the US. That’ll hurt bowling’s chances.
I find curling absolutely fascinating. Watch a Canadian Brier final to get a good idea of what great curling is.
It also makes for surprisingly good television – it’s so strategic that there’s tons for commentators to comment on, and miking the players makes the whole package very engaging.
I saw the '07 Brier final live, and it was amazing and fun to be there, but it’s arguably better on television.
The international women’s field is a lot more diverse than the men’s. There are quite a few talented women from South America, Australia and Japan who would definitely be able to compete with the U.S. in the Olympics. There are a few good men from Europe, but since they’d each have to represent their individual countries instead of Europe as a whole, I think the U.S. would probably have no trouble dominating. There is some competition from Japan, but not quite at the same level, I don’t think.
Still, there are lots of other Olympic sports where one country or region typically tends to dominate. I think that if bowling became an Olympic sport and there were more international competitions out there, everyone’s level would rise and it would become much more competitive over time.
I mostly agree, but would qualify it by assessing whether the Olympics is the pinnacle for national team competition. Sure, the Olympics cannot compete with the World Series or NBA finals, but those are events for franchise teams, not countries. I would argue that the Olympics is the pinnacle for national basketball and baseball teams. Soccer should be out - nothing beats the World Cup. Tennis has the Davis/Fed Cups but I think the Olympics are becoming bigger.
You can have my U.S. Women’s Curling Team when you pry them from my cold, dead fingers.
I’m really bothered by any sport in which one medal event is a qualifier for another.
For example, what’s it called? Short track speed skating? The one where you get a bunch of competitors all out on the ice together and they skate? Fine, awesome event, pure speed and tactics to avoid other skaters. I like it. But is it really necessary to award a medal for 200m AND use it as a qualifier for 400m? (I may have my distances messed up there, but I remember this happening in the last Winter Olympics.) If an event is sufficiently distinct to merit its own medal, it shouldn’t be a qualifier, and if it’s sufficiently similar to be used as a qualifier, it shouldn’t merit a medal.
But that’s just my $.02.