(8 of 8)
The desirable direction, toward a more open Olympics, is obvious. But the answers are not all the same for every situation. Should existing programs to identify talent in "emerging sports" be beefed up? Yes, but not against the national grain; there seems to be no good reason, for instance, to push men's field hockey, a good sport unloved here. Should the Celtics be allowed to play basketball in an open Olympics? That is easy: no. Major leaguers in basketball, hockey and soccer should be excluded. It is widely assumed that the 1988 Games will be much less restrictive, but with the many committees in various sports that set the rules with the I.O.C. and with the advantage that Communist countries derive from the present structure, it is likely that problems will persist. Arguing about amateurism will still be part of the Seoul Games. Happily, so will athletes who rise above mean circumstance to sublime accomplishment.
—ByJohn Skow.
Reported by Lee Griggs/Los Angeles and D. Blake Hallanan/Lake Placid, with other bureaus