I like the Olympics, and spent a good amount of time watching the various competitions over the weekend. That said, I think it's a shame that so many of the events that don't fit my definition of the word "sport" (both in the summer and winter games) garner the most attention.
My definition of "sport" is a competition where a clear winner or loser can be determined based upon concrete fact: having the fastest time, scoring the most points/goals, lifting the most weight or knocking your opponent out. Things like gymnastics, synchronized swimming, diving or figure skating, etc. where there are judges who determine the score and who is best are not sport, as far as I'm concerned. They are athletic showcases, subject to subjective (and corruptible) judging. It's the difference between being able to say "I/we won because we were the fastest/scored the most and any layman who witnessed the competition could tell you who won" AND "I/we won because someone specifically trained to do so judged us to be the best."
Two things to add - one, I am not saying that I don't think gymnasts or divers or figure skaters are not athletes - clearly they are athletically gifted and true competitors, but as far as I'm concerned their "sports" are closer to beauty pagents than they are to actual sport.
Second, I realize that many competitive games - soccer or baseball, for example, also include subjective aspects - referees calling outs or fouls, awarding penalties and so on which can vastly alter the outcome. This is a flaw in those sports, but even still, the end result is something anyone can point to and say "this team won," even if subjectively, one thinks that the win/loss was unfair. Unless there is evidence of corruption among the officials, the human element added to games of baseball, soccer, basketball and whatever else is an acknowledged element, just as is the weather.
That's my olympics/sports rant.
