Saturday, August 30, 2008 Batuhan: Restructuring our Olympic strategy By Allan S.B.Batuhan Foreign Exchange
THE final flag has been lowered, the final hymn sung.
Beijing 2008 is now part of sporting history – the golds, silvers and bronzes distributed to the sporting men and women who have dedicated the best years of their lives training for their one moment in time.
Our athletes have come back to the country, empty-handed this time, but proud to have represented their country in this arguably, the greatest of all sporting endeavors mankind has ever known.
As a Filipino, I feel proud of our sportsmen and women who represented us in the face of formidable competition. I feel proud of their indomitable spirit to compete, despite knowing that theirs is but a valiant and defiant demonstration, and fully aware that they have very little chance of prevailing against dominant opposition.
However, as an impartial observer, I feel slightly embarrassed and, of course, very disappointed. Looking at other countries – some much smaller and some even poorer than ourselves – whose athletes have returned laded with the athletic loot, I can only wish that we had some of their secrets, or whatever it is that made them successful, despite their limitations.
Great Britain, whose team I support next to our own, is not much larger than the Philippines. Population wise, it has fewer people than we have. And yet, it is a sporting powerhouse, winning medals in every conceivable competition in the Olympics roster. What is so different with them compared to us?
The obvious, of course, will be the difference in wealth.
Britain is a rich nation, no doubt about that. Its people are also relatively more affluent than our own citizens. This means the country can afford more sports facilities, hire more coaches, and fund more sports programs than we can. This advantage naturally translates into much greater medal potentials for Britain compared to the Philippines.
But having lived in both places for many years, there are a lot more differences beyond the obvious disparity in material resources.
The most significant perhaps is the bottoms-up approach in training athletes for major competitions like the Olympics.
Britain’s greatest medal prospects come not from the affluent gentry living in countryside manors, but from underprivileged kids coming out of urban council estates – our equivalent of squatter areas. Clearly, the council houses are way better off than our squatter areas, but they are relatively poor, nevertheless.
This is Britain’s secret, which seems to have escaped us in its obvious logic.
They tap from this vast pool of potential sportsmen while they are young and trainable, and bring them up to be excellent athletes as they mature.
This approach does not really cost millions – in fact quite the opposite. Giving underprivileged kids the chance to train and pursue their sporting dreams, and supporting them as they do this, is a cost effective way to prepare for sporting success.
In contrast, the Philippines looks from a very narrow pool of often relatively privileged individuals, coming from the more affluent families and better schools. Whilst this is a quick and painless way of filling team rosters at short notice, this is very self-limiting, and does not allow us to draw from the best our country has to offer. More next week.
