The competition between USA, Russia, and China is what gets people to tune in, really. With anyone of those countries not participating, viewership tanks, is my guess.

There's also the whole thing about eschewing politics. Traditionally wars were paused for the Olympics, but I'm pretty sure that's irrelevant today, especially when the US led a boycott of the Moscow Olympics in 1980 and then Russia boycotted the Los Angeles Olympics in 1984. It's really about viewership.

Oh and the IOC is notoriously corrupt. If Russia pays to participate, the IOC will find every which way to let them, no matter how badly they cheat and genocide, same with the US and China.

[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Is it?

I'm in the UK, and I don't think the British (or any other European country) particularly gives a fuck about how any of those countries do. Ask most people in the UK who America's best gymnast was and most couldn't tell you.

What people want to see is the best, which to do so needs involvement from the largest countries (the three named). If any of these countries is banned from these sports, chances are that any funding for them is killed pretty quickly, and suddenly those great athletes aren't world-beaters any more.

[–] Countess425@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Like I said, it's about viewership, and the UK brings very little of that compared to the US, Russia, and China.

If you really cared to see the best, you'd know who Simone Biles is. Everyone tunes in to see their guys win.