Re:Bill Watterson’s refusal to license Calvin and Hobbes (2016)
by melling on Saturday July 16, 2022 @06:18AM
(#32116662)
This had nothing to do with selling out. Olympic athletes were supposed to be amateurs and not professionals.
If you were paid to be an athlete then you had a competitive advantage, or so was the thinking.
Re:Bill Watterson’s refusal to license Calvin and Hobbes (2016)
by usrusr on Saturday July 16, 2022 @07:30AM
(#32117039)
The amateur/pro separation is spelled out most clearly in the early history of cycling, and it has very little to do with the punk rock idea of selling out: gentlemen with a family name so big they likely had minor celebrity status even before sports showing off how far and fast they could go starting to hire a series of pacemakers to draft behind. Then one day, particularly strong pacemakers got sponsorship, starting in their own name, with their own relay of pacemakers, and they took the prestigious titles. Gentlemen were not amused and started their own racing series. Members only. (right before falling in love with the speed provided by the internal combustion engine)
Re:Bill Watterson’s refusal to license Calvin and Hobbes (2016)
by Lio on Saturday July 16, 2022 @10:10AM
(#32118298)
In the UK we have the split between Rugby Union and Rugby League, now two distinct sports. The history of that split gets to the heart of British class distinction and is more interesting that you might at first think.
There's a good description of it here[1] but the TL;DR is:
In the South of England rugby was played by independently rich amateurs and in the North of England it was played by the working class men who needed to support themselves and their families and wanted it to become professionalised.
The groups couldn't agree and so split. With the rules of Rugby League supposedly changed to make it more appealing to paying crowd.
1. https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/sport/2019/10/split-bet...
Re:Bill Watterson’s refusal to license Calvin and Hobbes (2016)
by coldtea on Saturday July 16, 2022 @07:08AM
(#32116927)
That might have been the thinking, but it was also totally associated with selling out, and being an inferior athlete, morals wise.
Re:Bill Watterson’s refusal to license Calvin and Hobbes (2016)
by mcv on Saturday July 16, 2022 @06:30AM
(#32116716)
While it certainly sounds more honest and less commercialised, it also means that high level sports is mostly a rich-people's game. Poor people often can't afford to say no to money.
Re:Bill Watterson’s refusal to license Calvin and Hobbes (2016)
by watwut on Saturday July 16, 2022 @06:45AM
(#32116796)
At some point, they even found it dishonest to train for event specifically.
Re:Bill Watterson’s refusal to license Calvin and Hobbes (2016)
by kingkawn on Saturday July 16, 2022 @09:15AM
(#32117708)
Especially if you were Native American
Re:Bill Watterson’s refusal to license Calvin and Hobbes (2016)
by vajrabum on Saturday July 16, 2022 @12:10PM
(#32119416)
Did you see they restored the 2 Olympic medals for the pentathlon and decathlon to Jim Thorpe just the other day. Long overdue.
making money as an athlete used to disqualify you from the olympics