Ballroom Dancing In the Olympics?

In yet another assault on all that is decent and traditional, the International Olympic Committee is considering adding Ballroom Dancing, a/k/a DanceSport (no, I'm not kidding) to the Olympics roster. Just what the world needs - another "sport" without a ball, without a goal, but with a panel of judges.

The problem is rooted in a misunderstanding of the difference between sport and other hard activities. The IOC looks at several factors to decide whether an activity can be considered an Olympic sport - among them are physical strenuousness, history and tradition, popularity and cost. Also, a big plus for "DanceSport" (yes, I smirked as I typed that) is that it has gender equity built in, since the heterocentric norms of the activity require that teams consist of one of each gender.

If you're going to include activities based on physical strenuousness, history, tradition, popularity and cost, why not include the marching band tuba player? What about roofing? Rolling out dough for quiche?

It's remarkably simple - real sports don't have subjective judges. Sure, tennis might have a line judge, but that's just a referee, there to decide what really happened. You don't see judges awarding points to tennis players because their form was perfect, or because they really captured the spirit of the crowd. Even ugly tennis players get calls going their way, unlike in gymnastics.

Ballroom dancing is not a sport. Ice dancing, figure skating, diving, gymnastics and equestrian dressage are not sports. They are activities, all of which are far beyond this writer's abilities, but so are sewing, playing the flute, and speaking French. All these activities are fine pursuits, but they are not sports.

Sports have real scores - scores that keep track of objective things. Did the ball go through the hoop, between the uprights, or over the fence? While, on occasion, there may be some dispute as to whether those things actually happened, the point of the sport is to make them happen. And artistry isn't the point, or even relevant, except as a means to the end. Nobody gives points to a quarterback who throws a great spiral if it's not caught. Nobody cares if a pitcher lands gracefully.

There are no gray areas if you focus on objective scoring, though there are a few areas where the scoring may be so difficult as to allow subjectivity to creep in. Olympic boxing is a sport in its ideal, but judges are given such a difficult task in deciding whether a punch was landed or blocked that some inadvertent subjectivity is bound to occur. The point, though, is that a punch is a punch, not an artistic statement.

Similarly, it would be possible to create real sports out of many of the pseudo-sports that infest the Olympics. How high can the ice dancer throw his partner? Put bars up for them to clear. How far can they jump? How long can they spin without vomiting? Note that the entertainment of these activities would actually increase if they were converted to real sports!

The Olympic Motto is "Swifter, Higher, Stronger". The ancient Greeks didn't seek "Prettier, Perkier, More Graceful". We've already slid way too far down the slope of sports that Dick Button can gush about without adding ballroom dancing to the menu.

Symbolism Run Amock

Chiefs fans get free prostate cancer screenings tomorrow.