I, PeSzy, thought that the biggest advantage of armwrestling is that it's very cheap. It only takes one table, one hoist, about 100 kilograms of weight, and you can train whole groups of athletes. It's got to be an advantage, right?
Not really! Now I understand it. Why? Let me explain.
Guys, most people are snobs. They like to impress others with their possessions and status. That's why they proudly walk around with bags filled with, say, tennis racquets. The fact of owning a tennis racquet tells others about your high material status because the equipment and club membership cost quite a lot. Meanwhile, think about it – you will never meet anyone showing off their... tennis table rackets. Two very similar sports disciplines, but so different at the same time.
Tennis – insanely popular with the media. Table tennis – popular only within the small groups of professionals.
There's no way to show off being an armwrestler in a chic way. There's nothing to show! We obviously can't be carrying around tables or weights.
Cheapness – it's both an advantage and disadvantage of armwrestling. There's nothing we can do about it; we must accept it as a given.
Contemprary sports disciplines can be divided into a few groups. The first is disciplines which are popular with both the media and the general public. Within them, leading, are football and cycling. Everyone plays football everywhere, everyone rides a bike (more or less athletically), and the media obsessively follow and show both cycling and football.
On the other side of the spectrum is a group of sports heavily broadcast by the media but pursued only by small groups of athletes. Some of these are for example speedway or ski jumping. Both are watched by enormous numbers of spectators, but are performed only by, literally, a few competitors.
Where can we find armwrestling in this?
Where and what are the chances for it to enter the so-called “Olympic family”? Considering that, as mentioned by Anders Axklo, breakdance has now promoted into the Olympics?
I can't answer this question.
In my opinion, the prestige of the Olympic Games in the 21st century has been falling significantly and the so-called Olympic idea is no longer as attractive as it used to be.
Among the athletes who deal without the Olympic titles are for example golf players, and golf is a very popular sport among the media. Iceboating doesn't cry after the Olympics either, and it's a completely niche discipline.
How I see it is that the most important matter is for our sport to settle comfortably in the structure of every country. Within those which fall under the influence of Ministries of Sports. The other issue are the sponsors. It's also a great unknown. When we fix this mess, if we fix this mess...
Shortly – let's do us, train and fight.
This year's Santa surely won't bring us the Olympic wills for Christmas!