Talk | Olympic champions actually make money by selling nude photos, and the foreign system doesn't seem to be so good

Talk

2024-05-29 16:33Published on the official account of the "Body Talk" column of Beijing Tencent News and Sports

Written by | Horsen

Edit | Xu Song

British divers Jack Laugher (Jack Laugher) and Noah Williams (Noah Williams) have uploaded some unspeakable photos and videos on an online astringent platform less than a week after they were announced to be selected for the British Paris Olympic team......

Although the two athletes are men, it doesn't seem incomprehensible given that some of the British's tendencies have become well-known stereotypes online.

However, the crux of the matter lies in the motive of these two buddies for "going to the sea" - they claim that the reason why they did such a thing is all to raise funds for the Paris Olympics!

It may sound like a bit of a stretch, but Jack Lovell is no ordinary diver, but in 2016, he won the men's double three-meter springboard title at the Rio Olympics with his partner Mills – the first diving gold medal in British Olympic history!

At the Rio 2016 Olympics, Jack Lovell (first from left) was in tears when he learned that he had won the gold medal

Such a top athlete will also be short of money?

But what's even more ridiculous is that the British national diving team and the diving club where the two buddies work fully agree and understand the statement given by the two, and say that this is a last resort caused by financial problems.

According to the Sun's speculation, the two male bodhisattvas can earn at least thousands of pounds through the astringent platform, which is more than enough to help them prepare for the Paris Olympics.

How to say that...... Is it really a bit hard to evaluate?

Presumably, everyone has seen a lot of news about domestic champions working as bathers or setting up stalls, and when talking about such incidents, there is often a universal four-word answer at the end, called "system problems", as if all evil can be attributed to "system".

But now, in order to earn money for training, the British Olympic champion actually has to go to the astringent platform to sell his hue, could it be that their system is also wrong?

1. Where did all that money go

Since such a thing of arresting horses has been made, according to the principle of "asking questions in a fixed manner", it is natural that the British government should be severely tortured first.

But if you look closely, it seems that they seem to be a little innocent?

It is an obvious fact that since the London Games, Great Britain has been able to finish in the top four of the Olympic medal table at almost every edition – a feat that would have been the result of a strong national commitment.

Especially after the Tokyo Olympics, in order to motivate the Olympic athletes to reach the peak in Paris, Boris Johnson, then British Prime Minister, announced for the first time that the government would allocate 77 million pounds a year to support all Olympic athletes.

Great Britain is a standard sports powerhouse and an Olympic gold medal powerhouse

£77 million! That's a lot of money!

But the question is, why would the British Olympic team, who is sitting on such a large sum of money, let such an Olympic gold medalist who made history for the British diving team go out for a few thousand pounds?

It turned out that the British Sport Bureau said that the 77 million pounds would be used for more than 1,200 athletes in 51 summer Olympic sports, as well as teams at the Winter Olympics and Paralympics.

On average, the amount of money allocated to each athlete is only tens of thousands of pounds - but this is still a lot of money?

However, the money will not be distributed equally, and the distribution power is not in the hands of the athletes.

2. The British Sport Board, an alternative national system

To explain how the British special investment in the Olympic funds came from, we must start with the 1996 Atlanta Olympics.

At that Olympics, the total number of gold medals won by the British team was ...... 1。

It's embarrassing that Britain can't be found in the top 20 of the medal table at all, and even North Korea (2) is in front of Britain.

Medal table for the 1996 Atlanta Olympics

This is certainly unacceptable for the empire on which the sun never sets, which has always been proud, and the situation must be changed!

How to change? Throw money!

As a result, the British government decided to set aside a portion of the proceeds from the national lottery issued at the time as a special fund for the Olympic Games, known as the "National Lottery Fund".

This funding has been further increased in 2005, when London was confirmed as the venue for the 2012 Olympic Games.

So, who holds the money?

是英国体育局（UK Sport）。

This is a civilian institution with an official background, and as for the purpose of its existence, its former president, Liz Nickel, made it very clear -

“不仅仅是参与，关键是要赢。 ”（This is not about taking part. It's about winning）

In recent years, it has been criticized by Chinese public opinion for its "gold medal theory", and after changing the name of "zero compromise", it is very marketable in the UK

Even the official website of the British Sport Board introduces itself like this-

"Our task [at UK Sport] is to ensure that there are enough resources to support British athletes competing at the Olympic and Paralympic Games to maximise their chances of winning medals."

To put it simply, the British Sporting Board does allocate funds for athletes participating in the Olympic Games, but there is only one criterion for the priority and amount of their funding, and that is:

Whether you can win the gold medal.

3. Do not suffer from widowhood but unevenness

So, in the UK's traditional strengths, such as rowing, sailing and cycling, as well as for athletes who are more likely to win medals, the British Sport Board's funding is generous, as warm as spring.

Rebecca Romero, who won a silver medal in rowing at Athens 2004, was encouraged to switch to track cycling because she was considered extremely athletic by sports bureau analysts, and invested a lot of money and good coaches, and sure enough, she won the gold medal in this event at the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

Romero (second from left) won a silver medal at the Athens Olympics before moving to cycling to gold in Beijing

However, for athletes who have low hopes of winning a medal, or even have little hope of winning a medal due to age or form, it is ...... I'm sorry, but the landlord's family doesn't have any food left.

For example, more than a dozen members of the British gymnastics team have joined forces to launch a lawsuit against the coach of the gymnastics team and the sports board for the long-term systematic abuse of them by the coach and the gymnastics team, forcing them to take drugs, and mentally PUA them......

Amanda Redding, the former coach of the British gymnastics team, has been sued by athletes for "systemic abuse".

As for why the coach did this?

Of course, it is for the results, and only when the results are produced can you apply for more project grants from the Sports Bureau - for a niche event like gymnastics, the amount of funding almost determines the life and death of the team.

Sounds cruel, right? But for this naked jungle distribution principle, the British Sport Board also gave it a nice name, called the "zero compromise" principle.

But if you think about it carefully, isn't this the "gold medal theory"!

4. Athletes who are divided between rich and poor

There is a well-known saying that "good steel is used on the blade", and those who can produce results can enjoy more resources, and this starting point cannot be said to be problematic.

But if the criteria for the allocation of funds become completely profit-oriented, then there are often some unpleasant deviations in implementation.

For example, team sports like the three balls tend to be more influential in the Olympics, but in terms of actual results, you need to invest in a few, or even a dozen athletes, and you can only win one gold medal.

On the contrary, in swimming or track and field, investing in a talent like Adam Peaty may win several gold medals, focusing on a full cost performance.

Adam Peaty, the frog king, is one of the most cost-effective investments for the British Sporting Board, but he has not been able to win the sport's favor in this Olympic cycle

If you were an official of the British Sporting Board, what would you choose?

The answer is self-explanatory.

An even more serious consequence is that this pattern of jungle distribution will inevitably lead to extremely serious agglomeration effects.

Those of the UK's Olympic strengths, even if they don't require much money, are still competitive enough; But on the contrary, if the investment in those less successful sports is reduced, the consequences will not only be the hopelessness of winning Olympic medals, but may even lead to a drastic deterioration of the living environment!

For example, the 77 million pounds in preparation for Paris this time, some ace athletes have enjoyed it early in the morning -

Jason Kenny, British track cyclist and seven-time gold medallist, told reporters that the funding from the British Sport Authority will give talented people a chance to perform, which is a very positive and necessary move.

British legend Jason Kenny, who belongs to a niche sport of track cycling, has never bothered about training money

Tom Dean, a swimmer who won two gold medals at the Tokyo Olympics, is adamant that his success comes entirely from the money provided by the British Sporting Board, which has helped him and his family through the most difficult times of their lives.

On the other hand, Britain's No. 1 hammer thrower, Taylor Campbell, had to auction off souvenirs from his Tokyo Olympics on e-commerce platforms in order to maintain his daily training routine, including a Samsung Galaxy S21 limited edition phone engraved with the Olympic logo and wireless Bluetooth headphones.

Athletes like Campbell are actually the majority of life

He told Sky News: "Although I have received funding from the British Sporting Board, the amount is too small to make a living. ”

Compared to cycling and swimming, hammer throw is not a particularly commercial sport, but why is the allocation of funds so favorable?

Naturally, because Campbell's results are not good, he is enough to hit the top eight in the hammer throw event, and there is almost no hope of winning gold, so naturally he can't get money......

And the main owner of our article, poor Jack Lovell, even if he is the world-breaking No. 1 celebrity in the British diving world, and still holds the title of "MBE" granted by the queen in his hand, but after all, he is an old man, and Paris is estimated to have no results, and of course there is no money allocated to you.

No wonder I can only be a male bodhisattva......

What kind of system made such an excellent athlete finally go to the astringent platform?

In the face of reporters' questions, Nikle, the former president of the British Sports Agency, replied like this -

"We're not going to give in, we're not going to give everyone a point, we're going to put in the same amount of money as we do in the order of the rankings."

'We're investing in medals, we're totally centered on that, and there's no guilt about it.'

"We have to make a difficult choice."

5. Gold medal supremacy, everything is the same

In fact, in today's world, with the exception of soccer and basketball, as well as baseball, cricket, ice hockey and rugby, which are popular in certain regions, most niche sports have a very difficult environment to survive.

Even in the United States, where the commercialization of sports is extremely mature, the well-known NBA stars with salaries of hundreds of millions of dollars cannot hide the fact that unpopular sports cannot support themselves.

In 2022, the U.S. Olympic Committee released an athlete report showing that more than 90% of Olympians need as much as $20,000 a year to train and live while preparing for the competition, but fully 1/4 of these athletes earn less than $15,000 a year!

And that's not even counting the medical expenses that you would have to pay if you were injured or injured during the game!

Therefore, for the vast majority of countries in the world, the only way to do well in the Olympics is to throw money at it.

It doesn't matter if it's called a "national system" or "zero compromise" or whatever.

The United Kingdom, Japan, and Germany have all had a history of reducing their spending on special funds for Olympic sports, but the result was a sharp decline in the results of the Olympic gold medal table.

Then, under the pressure of public opinion, it increased its investment in Olympic sports and returned to a glamorous position in the medal table.

At the very least, one thing should be clear to us from our knowledge of the British Sporting Board, and that is that Olympic sports are indeed a game that only major countries can play, and the purpose is precisely to decorate their face with the gold medal table.

And with so many resources mobilized, it certainly can't be just a sportsmanship for the sake of showing love and peace.

Gold medals are always the first pursuit of all people.

This is not the case only with China's "national system", but also in the United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, and the United States, but with slight differences in name and the way resources are mobilized.

And what happened to Jack Lovel also fully shows that even in foreign countries where the air is sweeter, athletes in unpopular sports who cannot guarantee the ability to win gold will also receive neither attention nor funding......

This is probably the cruel side of competitive sports, which in the past we have been more inclined to blame on institutional problems, but this time, the incident of Jack Lovell's dedication to love may make us more aware that the moon inside the wall and outside the wall are not that different.

View original image 869K

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

•