Professional Amateur Athletes

            It is hard to think of a sporting event that has been more monetized than the Olympics. Corporate partners spend upwards of tens of millions dollars to become an official Olympic sponsor. Host countries and cities spend billions of dollars on building new stadiums, venues, stores, and roads for the two-week event. That does not count the millions of dollars that goes into other countries making a bid to host the games. Fans from around the world also spend large sums of money to on travel, tickets, hotel, food, and other accommodations during the Olympics.

            The only part of the Olympics where money is not supposed to be involved is with the athletes. CNN’s Bob Green colorfully described what made the Olympics special as compared to most other sporting events when he said, “The one firm rule that always governed the Olympic Games was that amateur athletes were permitted to compete. Professional athletes were not.” Starting with the 1972 Olympics, however, that began to change. While professional athletes became more commonplace at the Olympics after the games in Munich, the real sea change occurred with the “Dream Team” of NBA basketball players from America in 1992. Since then, swimmers, gymnasts, and track & field stars have earned millions of dollars in endorsements deals and prize money while still competing as Olympic athletes.

            The perception still largely exists, however, that most Olympic athletes are still “amateurs”. One of the biggest draws of the Olympics is that most competitors in the games toil in obscurity for four-years for one (or a few chances) to compete on an international stage.  Whether it comes to obscure sports such as the modern pentathlon or biathlon to more well known sports such as wrestling or rowing, the ultimate reward is being able to win a medal and bring honor to one’s country.

            While that may be the case, all Olympic athletes have an opportunity to also make a lot of money. In the ultimate pay-for-performance compensation structure, countries reward their athletes for winning medals. In the United States, athletes receive $25,000 for a gold medal, $15,000 for a silver medal, and $10,000 for a bronze medal. While that may seem like a nice chunk of change, athletes in other countries make significantly more money. In Russia, athletes win $135,000 per gold medal, $82,000 per silver medal, and $54,000 per bronze medal. In Uganda, the gold-medalist in the men’s marathon received $80,000 and a pledge by President Yoweri Museveni that his parents would be built a new home by the national government.

            While the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) receives most of its money through corporate sponsorship / donations, many other nations’ government directly subsidize and pay prize money to athletes. In addition, some nations have used the promise of large cash rewards to encourage athletes from other countries to become citizens of that nation. For example, Feng Tianwei was born in China and became a successful table tennis player. Despite being ranked eighth in the world, Feng would not be good enough to make the Chinese table tennis team. Instead of trying to compete for China, Tianwei was one of three players who “were spotted by Singaporean scouts and enticed to emigrate under the country’s Foreign Sports Talent Scheme.” Feng received fast tracked Singaporean citizenship (which is not available to non-athletes) and ultimately earned over $400,000 for her two bronze medals at the games.

            To be clear, we are not criticizing athletes for trying to make money nor countries trying to enticing athletes to become citizens and compete for a nation in Olympics. These are literally and metaphorically the rules of the game and both athletes and countries should take advantage of these rules. These practices, however, appear to counter the ethos of the Olympic Games as they were originally created - especially in the minds of fans, media, and sponsors. Athletic tourism, as with Tianwei, calls into question the idea that amateur athletes are competing for their country or if they are professionals using the guise of nationalism to make money.

            These payment schemes for Olympic also bring up a myriad of other questions that cannot be contained in a single blog post. For example, should countries spend millions of dollars on athletes who usually only gain an international spotlight once every four years? If the “amateur” athletes in Olympics are being paid so much money, shouldn’t the “amateur” athletes at the collegiate level in the United States get paid as well? These are all interesting questions that can and should be examined in more detail. However, there is little question that there no longer any “amateur” athletes competing in the Olympics.