[ABHI_1512]

Originally Posted by saket77

Yes, not the fault of either of the athletes. It is the fault of the Olympics Committee. And a reflection of what the 'extra-liberal' mentality of some societies can lead to.

My heart goes out to the athletes who lose such contests. For us, it might be just a sport or even entertainment. For them, it is their career, their reputation and their pride. And nobody should be forced to compromise on their years of hard work in guise of such absurd classifications. Very unfortunate.

Bringing in ‘extra-liberal’ mentality in sports ? Really ?

I will try to answer each of your peeves here. IOC only considers the passport record as someone being considered as male or female apparently and as far as Imane Khelif is concerned, she is considered a female as per her passport. So there is nothing called ‘extra- liberal’ here. One can challenge the criteria of using passports as to define the gender though, but that’s another topic as I mentioned earlier as well.

IBA had disqualified her before but there is at least nothing in the public domain which says Imane Khelif is not a female. Now IBA itself has been de recognised by IOC due to financial irregularities and governance issues. So there is no reason for the IOC to adhere to any preconditions anyways. Nothing ‘extra- liberal’ there as well.

Now, coming to the moot point- this is not the first time that Imane Khelif is in a boxing ring. She has lost many a matches despite being what is now projected because of her appearance. So does that mean that boxers who have defeated her before were also men ?

Physical attributes are always a factor in sports. Not everything though depends on physical attributes only and talent and dedication also counts. Pulling down someone just because of her physical attribute is derogatory when nothing is proved beyond doubt !!

[dust-n-bones]

Is it me alone who thinks the way medals are given at olympics is unfair?

Consider a medal in 200m medley in swimming as an example. You do a 'heat', semi and then a final. Each contest a little less than 2 minutes. And the celebrated Léon Marchand gets his gold.

The workload is so low that swimmers regularly contest in 4-5 events and keep making records for the max medals won. The same is true in (short form) athletics, gymnastics, shooting, and many others.

Compare that with Djokovic. He has to essentially win another grand slam for his medal. Or Lakshya Sen in badminton. And you multiply that effort by 11 when you bring in team sports like hockey, football, basketball. The long periods they have to stay at the top of their game every other day, during which a single lapse in concentration (or brilliance by the opponent) can knock you out, is exhilarating to watch. And heart breaking when they do slip up, and are done for, for the next 4 years.

After winning a whole championship, all that the winning team gets is a share in a single medal.

I can in no way undermine the effort each of these athletes puts in. All the same, the 'medal distribution system' is grossly unfair, is what I think.

[DigitalOne]

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

IOC only considers the passport record as someone being considered as male or female apparently and as far as Imane Khelif is concerned, she is considered a female as per her passport. So there is nothing called ‘extra- liberal’ here. One can challenge the criteria of using passports as to define the gender though, but that’s another topic as I mentioned earlier as well.

IBA had disqualified her before but there is at least nothing in the public domain which says Imane Khelif is not a female. Now IBA itself has been de recognised by IOC due to financial irregularities and governance issues. So there is no reason for the IOC to adhere to any preconditions anyways. Nothing ‘extra- liberal’ there as well.

Nice jugglery of words.

You are right as far IOC is concerned only about the gender as per passport and they don't look at other criteria.

IBA had, not once but twice, ruled Imane Khelif out for failing to meet 'gender eligibility' criteria for the female category. That the IBA was de-recognized for unrelated issues doesn't make their criteria or their judgement invalid.

Again, you are correct that IOC can stick on to their more liberal passport gender only criteria and allow the said athletes to participate but does that make it right?

Further reading: Indian Express

Do IOC and IBA regulations differ?

Yes. In 2021, the IOC left it to international sports federations to develop their own set of rules but keeping in mind key principles of ‘fairness’, ‘inclusion’, ‘non-discrimination’, ‘evidence-based approach’, ‘no presumption of advantage’, and ‘prevention of harm’. This advisory meant every sport could have its own set of regulations. Testosterone levels were no longer part of IOC’s regulations.

Before this, the IOC had specified a testosterone limit – below 10 nanomoles per litre (nmol/L) for women athletes who had transitioned from male to female if they wanted to participate in the female category.

[ABHI_1512]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

Before this, the IOC had specified a testosterone limit – below 10 nanomoles per litre (nmol/L) for women athletes who had transitioned from male to female if they wanted to participate in the female category.[/b]

Do you have anything to show that Imane Khelif is not a female ? Any report or any test ? Did IBA release any test report based on which she was disqualified ? If yes, please post them here and I will listen to you that Imane Khelif is a cheater. If not, no one has the right to berate an athlete who is equally trying to make a career out of boxing.

Funny thing, Imane Khelif also participated in Tokyo Olympics without any issue as well as other IBA recognised tournaments. In fact, IOC has also issued a statement regarding this very thing.

Tomorrow someone will say Serena Williams is a man or for that matter Martina Navratilova is a man just because of their appearance, does that hold good ?

If Imane Khelif has done something illegal, ban her all for life. But this hounding of her on social media must stop, certainly until proven otherwise. Now whether that’s jugglery or not, you decide. I am okay either way.

[DigitalOne]

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

Do you have anything to show that Imane Khelif is not a female ?

If Imane Khelif has done something illegal, ban her all for life. But this hounding of her on social media must stop, certainly until proven otherwise. Now whether that’s jugglery or not, you decide. I am okay either way.

I never said she is not a female. I never said she is doing anything illegal. All I said are the following:

She and the other Chinese athelete in question have been twice disqualified for failing 'gender eligibility' criteria at IBA tournaments.

IBA criteria is stricter than IOC criteria. In other words, IOC has more liberal criteria.

If IBA had not been de-recognized (for totally unrelated financial ghotalas) and IBA criteria had been in use in these Olympics these two athletes may have been disqualified. I use the word may, intentionally.

These athletes are not doing anything illegal. They have qualified as per the IOC rules, they should be allowed to compete. I am in agreement with you that Social media hounding against these athletes must stop.

All that, however, doesn't make it fair for the other athletes, IMHO.

Finally, nobody is talking about appearance of the athletes, for God's sake. Please read the article I linked. There is specific quantifiable criteria for the gender eligibility tests.

[ex-innova-guy]

Djokovic vs. Alcaraz for the Olympic Gold Medal.

Can Djokovic potentially add the only silverware (gold medal) that he hasn’t won? It can also be redemption day for Djokovic after the recent Wimbledon loss.

Only time will tell.

[saket77]

Abhi, my brother- first of all, this is simply not a black or white case. As I am not the only one raising the flag. And I will tell you why 'extra-liberal'.

Before I share my POV, my response to your points:

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

IOC only considers the passport record as someone being considered as male or female apparently and as far as Imane Khelif is concerned, she is considered a female as per her passport. So there is nothing called ‘extra- liberal’ here. One can challenge the criteria of using passports as to define the gender though, but that’s another topic as I mentioned earlier as well.

Passport entries cannot & should not be treated as a qualifying or defining criteria for something as big as the Olympics. The purpose of both bodies governing their domains have their own set of objectives to be met which cannot be interchanged.

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

IBA had disqualified her before but there is at least nothing in the public domain which says Imane Khelif is not a female. Now IBA itself has been de recognised by IOC due to financial irregularities and governance issues. So there is no reason for the IOC to adhere to any preconditions anyways. Nothing ‘extra- liberal’ there as well.

IBA, as you say, was banned due to completely unrelated issues. This doesn't make their entire findings fallacious. If some athletes were unable to participate because of IBA's findings basis medical tests- it only emphasizes today that a gap has been created in the policies in its absence which allowed the same athletes to compete in broad woman's category.

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

Now, coming to the moot point- this is not the first time that Imane Khelif is in a boxing ring. She has lost many a matches despite being what is now projected because of her appearance. So does that mean that boxers who have defeated her before were also men ?

Still, Khelif holds a 37-9 record as a fighter at the amateur level and has a professional record of 1-0. At the amateur level, she has 5 knockouts and has not lost a bout since 2022. Impressive, isn't it?

But not really something to debate about. The question here is fairness in sport. Khelif's biological condition, it doesn't give her an elixir or a magical potion to win all contests. But surely gives her an upper hand. Isn't this a disadvantage for others competing? She might even lose the next contest- doesn't prove anything. That is why I said in my previous reply- it is not the fault of either of the athletes; It is the fault of the governing body who should maintain a level of fairness especially in a contact sport like boxing. What keeps them from creating a separate category is the extra liberal mindset. Period.

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

Physical attributes are always a factor in sports. Not everything though depends on physical attributes only and talent and dedication also counts. Pulling down someone just because of her physical attribute is derogatory when nothing is proved beyond doubt !!

This is the only part of your post where we can both agree upon, but again partially. The disagreement here is the point where our 'doubt' creeps in.


The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is in charge of boxing in Paris.

The controversy seemed to have arisen as both bodies- IBA & IOC have different medical standards for competitors. The IOC has stated that Khelif is an eligible competitor. IBA previously did not find her eligible.

Khelif was disqualified from the 2023 World Championships in New Delhi due to "elevated levels of testosterone". Lin Yu-Ting of Taiwan, who is also participating in the Paris Olympics, was also disqualified last year. A gender eligibility test found that she had XY chromosomes, which are typically found in males. Most women have XX-sex chromosomes. Any women with XY chromosomes will have a distinct advantage over XX only Chromosome women. I hope you will agree. This is where that 'doubt' creeps in for me.

Another point- At the heart of the controversy is the IOC's recent change in guidelines on testosterone levels. Athletes are no longer required to undergo hormone-level modifications to compete. Moreover, the IOC has held that testosterone was not always a determinant of physical advantage. The word to note here is 'always'. You can also read it in this way that testosterone levels can be a factor determinant depending on side of the debate table you are on.

The term flying around is the 'Differences of Sexual Development' or DSD, which is a rare condition where people raised as females have XY sex chromosomes and testosterone levels in the male range- as per the official Olympics site. These women also have higher muscle mass, skeletal advantage and faster twitch muscle.


It may also include differences in genitalia from those typically associated with gender at birth. Thus, in combat sports like boxing, this can be a serious safety issue.

However, IOC rules say the inclusion of athletes with DSDs should be the default, and they should only be excluded from women's competition if there are "clear fairness or safety issues". I am actually amazed that they didn't find one here. Extra-Liberal?


This link may interest you if you still want to read more- where IAAF, on same set of conditions, disqualified other athletes in the past. I will quote some excerpts:
https://olympics.com/en/news/semenya...af-regulations



"These athletes cannot take part in women's races from 400m to one mile, including combined events (such as the pentathlon, heptathlon, or decathlon) over those distances, at an international competition. Nor can they set world records in these events in non-international competitions where they are allowed to compete."



"The IAAF insists the DSD Regulations are necessary "to ensure fair and meaningful competition within the female classification, for the benefit of the broad class of female athletes.



"The IAAF is convinced there are some contexts, sport being one of them, where biology has to trump identity," it said when the CAS suspended the rules applying to Semenya.



"The IAAF also believes the right to participate in sport does not translate to a right to self-identify into a competition category or an event, or to insist on inclusion in a preferred event, or to win in a particular event, without regard to the legitimate rules of the sport or the criteria for entry," it said."

"The responsibility we have is to protect that so-called 'level playing field', and we have done that."

I guess tables have turned in 2024.

[amitoj]

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

Physical attributes are always a factor in sports. Not everything though depends on physical attributes only and talent and dedication also counts. Pulling down someone just because of her physical attribute is derogatory when nothing is proved beyond doubt !!

Couldn't agree more. And I am appalled at some of the comments here by others. Should Michael Phelps be banned because of his abnormal wingspan and double jointed ankles that gave him a clear biological advantage over others? Should very tall people be banned from basketball? This whole thing is so unnecessarily blown up by false outrage. 10 years ago nobody would have batted an eyelid because there wasn't this much of phobia and misinformation.

The Shameful Controversy Over Olympic Boxer Imane Khelif

[Chetan_Rao]

Amelie Mauresmo, two-time major winner and former world#1 female tennis player would be 'controversial' in today's times, and probably be hounded out of tennis via social media if she belonged to the current playing generation.

[ABHI_1512]

Meanwhile, Sports 18 is celebrating the week from 3rd August to 9th August as a MEDAL WEEK !!

Jokes have now started to play in real time

[NomadSK]

Can someone explain in technicality of the scoring system, how the Boxer Nishant Dev lost his bout.

To me as a naïve onlooker, it looked all the way that he was being more aggressive and dominating in the ring, no-where it looked like he would lose the bout.

In-fact the opponent looked down and out after 2 mins only, to my eyes

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

Meanwhile, Sports 18 is celebrating the week from 3rd August to 9th August as a MEDAL WEEK !!

I'm having high hopes from Lakshya Sen and Neeraj Chopra atleast.

[ABHI_1512]

Originally Posted by NomadSK

Can someone explain in technicality of the scoring system, how the Boxer Nishant Dev lost his bout.

In-fact the opponent looked down and out after 2 mins only, to my eyes

The first round was clearly Nishant all the way but the next two rounds were probably where Verde won it. Going by what I saw, Nishant looked tired in the final round and may be that costed him. Of course, the judges view the fight on their parameters and that is where it will differ from our point of view. May be the first round heroics from Nishant gave us hope and that’s why we probably can’t fathom the defeat on points !

As for Lakshya, he has a tough fight on his hands against Axelsen but I will look forward to the match since I believe he has it in him to put it across Axelsen.

We can of course win some medals but to celebrate an anticipatory medal is a first for me !!

Also, I saw the Archery competition yesterday featuring Dipika Kumari. As much as I have seen her from the past years, she had immense talent in her right from the days she started but didn’t quite realise her full potential. Much like another yesteryear great Limba Ram who never won an Olympic medal ever. By the way, the Koreans were on another league altogether, landing 10’s on demand almost !

[volkman10]

India will take on either Argentina or Germany in the semi-final on the 6th of August.

Another superb performance from PR Sreejesh today, saving India on multiple occasions.

A red card for Amit Rohidas in the second quarter threatened to change the momentum of the match, but India put in a very gritty and determined performance to take the game to a shoot-out and claim victory despite being one man down for a majority of the game.

[dailydriver]

Lakes hoya Sen defeated Lakshya Sen in the men's badminton singles semifinals today. For, it was completely his game to lose. He had three game points in the first set and yet lost it by conceding five consecutive points to his opponent.

In the second, he was leading 7-0 at one point but succumbed to pressure and eventually had to let go of the game. On the obverse side, his opponent-the defending champion Viktor Axelsen of Denmark exhibited the power of self belief by chasing the impossible. Hope he wins the gold tomorrow.

Lakshya will now aim for the bronze at least.

As a side note, throughout the Olympics, in most matches involving Indian shuttlers, Prakash Padukone sat in the coaches' corner. But couldn't see any useful/insightful/actionable advice coming from him. He was no doubt a great player, but whether he is an equally good on field mentor is a question that begs an answer.

Edit: Men's tennis singles finals is on now: Djokovic is playing Alcarez. Must be an interesting watch.

[volkman10]

Djokovic, 37, winning an Olympic final against an opponent 16 years younger and vaccinated.



The missing piece of the puzzle for Novak Djokovic. He's beaten Carlos Alcaraz 7-6 (7-3) 6-6 (7-2)