Yeah, that's what I thought to be the main reason when I was trying to explain to my mate (who doesn't like boxing) why professionals at the Olympics wouldn't work.
I agree with much of what has been said but also keep in mind the olympic scoring and ruleset. This would quite possibly be difficult for seasoned pros to adjust back to. Emmanuel Steward himself has said that he has amateurs spar aganst Wladimir and they more than hold their own against the champion. And if a young fighter were to lost, but still be competitive in losing against a seasoned and popular pro then he may have earned huge recognition anyway.
you butthurt *****sexual he was just amkin a point why dont you just swap pacs name with floyd or judah or another son of a drug dealer you pos son of a drug abuser.
It became an amateur event. The Olympics never used to be "for amateurs only." For over 2500 years the elite athletic specimens from all over the world have been competing at the Olympics. Only recently were pros not allowed in some sports and it became "amateur only." The Greeks would have laughed than vomited out of disgust when reading all the posts here.
No-one gives a **** what the Greeks would have thought. A young boxer qualifies for the Olympics, lets say he is 17-18...he is drawn against Manny Pacquiao in the first round. Here we have a boy, not only against a man (this is not a rarity in amateur boxing)...but against the P4P #1. Amateur boxing is essentially based around point scoring. Professional boxers are taught to sit down on punches, combining this with their speed and numerous other aspects to their game. What's stopping Pacquiao from walking through anything this boy can offer like a wrecking ball? Headguards won't stop Pacquiao from seriously hurting this boy, and what about bodyshots? I am almost certain that Pacquiao would not do this, but it is basically an example. Same sport, but they are far from being the same.
Well no, that isnt the case at all. The modern olympic games started in 1896 it isnt a continuation of the events in ancient greece. There wasn't any professional athletes 2000 years a go. I think its only boxing and wrestling that dont allow pros. Why would anyone be interested in the olympics if there were no pro athletes, would the 100m be better with no usain bolt? the olympics started as all amateur, then moved to professional as all the best athletes were getting paid or earning prize money
Maybe a 17-18 year old boy should not be chosen as the best fighter his country can offer and if he is, than he is living his dream in representing his country, as would the 30 year old professional be living out his dream in representing his country. I never even said I'm for it because I'm not, just after reading this thread, everything you guys say there is an equal or greater counter-point. Reading this makes me think that pros should be allowed.
Oh yeah, because the Olympics invented sporting to begin with. No. There certainly were paid, prized, and praised professional athletes back in the beginnings of the ancient Olympics approx. 700 BC. Then why the double standard of pros in all other sports, no pros in boxing/wrestling? Because of the violent nature? Because those competing have been raised on that violent nature and no punishment they'd receive in a given match would likely equal the punishment of 10-15+ years of training for that very sport.