Luckily, I live close enough to Canada that I can pick up the CBC broadcast, which I turn to whenever I have the chance. There is some rooting for the home athlete, but necessarily less since there are far fewer events Canadians are competitive in.

I think the tipping point for me came early on after the dramatic US swimming relay win, when the announcers couldn't help gleefully rubbing it in the French team's face. Yuck. This kind of gloating is especially distasteful given how quick people are to jump on other countries' athletes (see: the Usain furor).

In the immortal words of Crash Davis: Act like you've been here before, meat; and don't show the other guy up.

The Olympics are about sport and money. Nothing else. If they were about internationalism or humanity they would promote those things. If they were about a spirit of fair play the IOC wouldn't be bending over backwards to ignore anything that might cost China face.

Sports.

Money.

Nothing else.

The individual performances are still majestic and impressive.

Is that why the NBC identifying graphics are national flags, most of which almost no one can correctly identify? More likely, though, it's that NBC is enamored with chart junk (prettiness over clarity of presentation). The three-letter national code is infinitely more informative than flags.

Gary Kamiya says that "Of course every country wants to win". Not true.

Every country wants to win medals but the only countries who viscerally want to 'win' (as in top the medals table) are those who feel they have a right and a duty to do so, such as the US, China in these games, and the old USSR.

Other countries in their dreams also want to 'win' but they know it won't happen and therefore view the Games differently from a superpower like the US: for them it is not a test of national virility that they must pass or fail, or feel humbled in the eyes of the world if they don't 'win', but for the US (or China or the USSR) it IS an "athletic war between the U.S. and the rest of the world".

Maybe this explains the extreme America-centrism of the NBC Olympics coverage - there's a sheer desparation for success that they must reflect by revelling ad nauseam in US glory while sidelining other countries' successes.

What I learned from NBC is that the Olympics is all about scantily clad men and women rolling around in the sand, or on mats, or in the water.

If its not titillating, its not in prime time. I was traveling for the first week of the Olympics, and saw a lot of the first week broadcast in hotel bars in downtown Denver. Between the beach volleyball, endless water sports, and gymnastics, I felt I was seeing non-stop soft core porn... half of it child porn at that.

I was relieved when I left the hotel bars and went home... where I don't get NBC over the air(San Francisco), and thus, was no longer subjected to the peacock's seemingly never-ending parade of soft core abs and thighs and legs.

I'm not a prude by any means, but I'm cynical enough to suspect that T&A was the real decision maker when it came to what got prime time coverage.

I feel the same way. I watch to see the real Olympic sports, to see the competitors for whom this is the highlight of their sporting career. I don't want to see basketball, soccer, tennis, even though I love those sports in other contexts. I also want to see events, not those little Hallmark hall of fame narratives that just waste time that could be better spent showing badminton or archery.

As for the flag-waving, it's a real problem. I moved to the USA in the eighties, and was utterly shocked by the coverage here, by how slanted it was. If there are four heats in a sprint, and only three have American contestants, then only those three will be shown. Unbelievable!

If it hadn't been for the live streaming by NBCOlympics.com and by other (cough!!) organizations , I probably would not have watched any of the events.

IMHO , Hell is having to watch beach volleyball.

Like the King said in these days we can get our T&A from a lot of other sources without having NBC force it down our throats.

I didn't watch because I think it's crazy to watch something when you can already find out who won. It spoils the experience. And deliberately keeping ones self in the dark seems foolish. When they go back to covering it like a real sports event, and not like trash sports that are edited and put on when convenient, I might watch again.

But not covering core track and field events is just as crazy. Why on earth wouldn't they cover these events? Just because the participants aren't scantily clad enough or because American's don't dominate? I suppose a poor excuse beats none, but that's a poor excuse indeed.

I got sick of volleyball. Barely watched.

Mr. Kamiya:

Television coverage of the Olympics jumped the shark 12 years ago.

I was looking forward to watching the 100-meter run -- and knew the time the event was scheduled. I turned on the TV and kept seeing written promos that the event was coming up. Meanwhile, the network, I think it was NBC, was showing a women's gymnastics EXHIBITION. Yes, an exhibition. The medal competition had ended days earlier.

At the time the 100 meter run was supposed to be on, I was watching a Romanian that the broadcasters said was ranked 23rd in the world. And then another Romanian. Several naps and a couple of hours later, the network showed the 100 -- ON TAPE DELAY.

The "Olympics" had become the World Girls Gymnastics Championship. How difficult is it to show a 10-SECOND EVENT live?

Mr. Kamiya is 100 percent correct in his analysis and observations. Track and field IS historically THE core of the Olympics. It still is in other nations. Witness that the two most widely admired athletes in China today are basketballer Yao Ming and the hurdler who won the gold in 2004, but was hurt this year. The hurdler still is regarded as one of China's best despite the nation's 50 or so gold medals.

What's most dismaying about the coverage is that the world's best athletes are disrespected. Mr. Kamiya rightly points out the terrible coverage of the decathlon. Unfortunately, this lack of coverage has contributed to Americans believing that decathletes are not really great athletes.

You think I'm kidding? I listened to a three-hour debate on talk radio last week. The host said repeatedly that Olympians, including decathletes, are NOT great athletes because they're only on TV once every four years. He mocked the categorization of Bruce Jenner and Michael Phelps as all-time great athletes while insisting that Johnny Unitas, Tom Brady, and Payton Manning were on his list of all-time greats.

In three hours, EVERY caller agreed with his point that decathletes and other Olympians are NOT great athletes and football and basketball players are.

In an article I posted on Open Salon, I argued that Jackie Robinson is the No. 1 athlete of all time while Jim Thorpe, Babe Didrickson Zaharias, Bob Mathias, Daley Thompson, and Jackie Joyner-Kersee deserve consideration.

Bryan Clay is climbing up on my list, but I'm afraid most Americans will name athletes who are great in one team sport.

Shalom,

ZWrite