The Oly Encyclopedia 13

Fallacy #7: The athletes of any one country (eg, the US) can't beat the athletes from another (e.g. Russia).

There is a widespreading in weightlifting circles today that we can be the athletes from the area that was for the Soviet Union, Bulgarians and athletes from any whose litters to be on the rise at any time.

One reason often cited for this state of affairs is that the athletes in certain other countries well use Eastern Europe as an example because that is probably the area most often named by US athletes were and that the drugs are superior to those available to athletes in other countries. This argument overlooks the relatively primitive state of science in general and the pharmaceutical industry in particular in the Eastern European countries. Even if it were true that they have better drugs the discussion about drug testing presented earlier should serve to convince people in this country that arguments of this type are becoming less persuasive.

Another argument often given is that sports science in the Eastern European countries is far superior to that of the United States. In view of the dismal record of Eastern European science overall it is extremely doubtful that sports science in these countries is the equal of let alone superior to the sports science that is available in Western countries Political repression simply does not contribute to an environment in which science flourishes. Moreover, a centrally planned economy does not lead to the kind of economie well being that permits well rounded spending on scientific research or to the development of the kinds of technology that assist in scientific research. To look at just one area, in an age where computer aided research is inextricably intertwined with modern biological research, is it likely that countries with weak computer facilities would lead the world in research in a biological area? Western superiority in medicine, biology, chemistry and engineering strongly suggests that sports science should be better in the West than in Eastern Europe ( an advantage that may not long continue if the countries of Eastern Europe move towards Westernization.)

How then can we explain the outstanding performances of Eastern European countries in the area of amateur porta in general and weightlifting in particular sports have long been in the realm of clinicians, not theoretical or research scientists The best scientists are rarely the best coaches. This does not mean that the best coaches do not employ! the so called scientific method is setting up a hypothesis and then testing it. Coaches employ their techniques in the real world, where double blind verifications and the isolation of all variables that can affect outcomes are not normally possible. In this realm, the inferential thinker is king, not because of his or her sophisticated laboratory but because of his or her special ability to observe complex events and to identify the essential elements. This is something anyone living anywhere can do without a lot of high-tech equipment.

The legendary Bulgarian weightlifting program of the 1970s and 1980s was a case in point; Bulgarian coach Ivan Abadjiev built his team under difficult conditions (and with very limited formal "scientific support). He certainly did not the human, economic or scientific resources of the neighboring Soviet Union of that era, but his team defeated the Soviets on many occasions.

Many European coaches excel in practical training analysis, and many more coaches are applying themselves to weightlifting in Eastern European countries than in the United States. Moreover, many coaches work full time with their athletes in Eastern European countries, where coaching weightlifting is regarded as a true and honorable profession. Consequently, in the course of a lifetime, an Eastern European weightlifting conch may have opportunities to observe many more athletes than his American counterpart. This gives such coaches the potential for enjoying a significant experience edge.

Does this mean that he necessarily knows more? No, because coaching 1,000 athletes can simply mean making the same mistake 1,000 times, while a thoughtful coach who handles ten athletes can learn many valuable lessons. Experience surely makes it more likely that one will learn more, but what a coach learns depends as much on the mental habits of the couch as it does on the coach's experience. When you combine experience with an active mind you get a great coach and I have had the good fortune to meet and learn from some of them.

Finally, the training of Eastern European coaches is far more organized than in the United States in Eastern Europe, coaching is a profession which can be studied in a university with a major in a particular sport. In the United States a prospective coach might major in physical education and then gain practical experience coaching his or her sport. There are few academie degrees in coaching (and there are none in weightlifting coaching). Therefore, it is only reasonable to expect that some terrific coaches have developed under the Eastern European sporting system. However, while the advantages that Eastern European coaches have in many areas are significant, but they are certainly not insurmountable by the coach and athlete who wish to apply themselves by reviewing the published literature, learning from other athletes and coaches and to honing their knowledge and experience in the gym.

Is there another reason for Eastern European superiority? Yes, but it does not lie in the psychological training of the Eastern bloe athlete, although an Eastern European weightlifter, unlike many Americans, may have the advantage of believing he or she can be a champion. It does not lie in the mud at the bottom of the Dead Sea (recently touted as a health food) or any of the other forms of "snake oil" peddled by many would be entrepreneurs in this country. The answer lies in another realm entirely: the economic. In Eastern Europe enormous economic resources have historically been devoted to "amateur sports, to the point where such sports are hardly amateur Young athletes are selected by the state. And other than politics, there is really no other game in town for the youngster who wishes to free himself or herself from grinding poverty and the travel restrictions that have been part of Eastern European life for so long. Notice that the nations that have tended to perform best in amateur sporta have been the most closely tied to the former Soviet Union. A sports system that offers total support to athletes they are competing and thereafter is going! to attract the talented individuals of a nation and will permit them to train with a complete focus on their sport. In the United States there has been nothing comparable. As lucrative as big time collegiate and professional sports can be, they cannot compare with athletics in Eastern Europe, because youngsters can make it big in many ways in the United States, not just through sports. In addition, a lower income person in the United States tends to live more comfortably than a professional athlete in the former Soviet Union. The economic drives for athletic success are simply not as great here.

As a case in point, it is estimated that before the fall of communism there were 300,000 to 400,000 weightlifters in the Soviet Union as compared with fewer than 3,000 in the United States. There are those who argue that numbers do not tell all because there are only two to three times the number of weightlifters in Bulgaria as in the United States. However, what is neglected in such an analysis is that the thousands of athletes training in Bulgaria are the cream of the school system and are enrolled in nearly full time programs with constant professional supervision In the United States more than one-fourth of our participants in weightlifting are masters (athletes aged 40 or above) and another fourth, or more, are transient young athletes who may compete only once or twice with little training and preparation and then disappear. Only a very small number of the remaining U.S. weightlifters are training for international competition, and none of them are truly "professionals who do nothing but train for weightlifting competition (except, perhaps, the handful of athletes who are in the USAW Resident Athlete program in Colorado Springs or individuals who find themselves in similar conditions in other parts of the United States). Moreover, the professional weightlifters in other parts of the world have often been "selected" from many candidates on the basis of their particular talents for weightlifting. Therefore, the real differences between the number of talented and devoted weightlifters who are training in the United States today and the number of athletes who are training in other countries are truly staggering.

Today, there is significant evidence that many of the competitive advantages that Eastern European athletes have long enjoyed are beginning to erode. For one thing, the Eastern European nations are on their way toward Westernization. With that will come a broader focus in the athletic and general tastes of the nation. The youth of these nations will not be forced exclusively into amateur sport, with an emphasis on weightlifting. Another consideration is that the citizenry is unlikely to support amateur sport as fully as the communist regimes did. The need for propaganda will be reduced, and the general population may well put other needs ahead of sport. Still another major phenomenon that will level the playing field is the final elimination of hypocritical amateurism from sport. For many years Western athletes have been denied the opportunity to support themselves through sports or have had to go through ridiculous gyrations to maintain the aura of amateurism while making a living. Today athletes all over the world are moving toward increasingly fairer forms of competition, competition aimed at deciding who is the best athlete rather than who is better at passing a drug test or disguising his or her income.

In short, the opportunities for athletes of all nations to compete in weightlifting are better than they have been in at least a generation. Many people have forgotten or never knew that before state sports became entrenched in Eastern Europe, the United States fielded World and/or Olympic championship weightlifting teams from 1947 to 1952 and from 1954 to 1956, finishing second or third several times before and after that period of dominance, having two individual male world champions as late as the World Championships of 1969. Women from the US have won medals in all but one World's championship from 1987-1996.