Opinion Sporting lessons

Take the 4X400 metres women’s relay team. It won gold with a timing of 3:27.77. The world record is 3:15.17. Even when top countries are part of the CWG,the best athletes don’t necessarily participate. Haven’t several (not just Usain Bolt) dropped out because of dengue and other health and security concerns? In the scare leading up to the CWG,much was made of these drop-outs,concentrated in cycling,athletics,aquatics and the odd tennis-player and archer. In most instances,the reasons for opting out are in the public domain and one discovers that there is more to it than Delhi-belly. Shelly-Ann Fraser tested positive for a prohibited substance and earned a provisional ban. For others,there were injuries and conflicts with tournament and championship calendars.

That the best don’t always participate in the CWG is a fair point. However,especially since India underperformed in tennis,and given our concentration of medals,even if these athletes had participated,our medal tally would probably not have been significantly affected. Barring specialised championships and tournaments,the three multi-sport events are really the CWG,the AG (other regional ones are irrelevant for us) and the OG. Surely,we don’t want to go to town over the South Asian Games.

At the CWG,India’s medal tally has been: 0 (1950,1954); 3 (1958); 0 (1962); 10 (1966); 12 (1970); 15 (1974); 15 (1978); 16 (1982); 0 (1986); 32 (1990); 25 (1994); 25 (1998); 69 (2002); 50 (2006); and 101(2010). Studies float around,attempting to explain sporting performance. These are mostly about the OG,rarely about the AG or the CWG.

While one study differs from another,the broad consensus is that sporting performance depends on per capita GDP,population and host-country advantage. “Depends” is the wrong word to use. What we have is correlation,not causation. Nor do these studies probe inter-disciplinary spread of medals,the point made earlier. On the basis of such studies,host-country advantage adds around 25 per cent to performance. Therefore,our baseline medal performance,so to speak,is around 75. If trends are extrapolated,that is what we should get in Glasgow.

In gold medal tallies,we have ousted England and that is a matter of pride. But that’s partly symbolic. What is more pertinent is the displacement of Canada and whether this third (after Australia and England) can be maintained in Glasgow and thereafter. In the November AG,the baseline should be between 50 and 55 and India will be bunched together with Thailand,Iran,Uzbekistan and Malaysia. China,South Korea,Japan and Kazakhstan will be some distance ahead. Depending on how we perform in that bunched together lot,we can aspire to be fifth. It is fairly obvious that the baseline has improved since the ’90s,becoming more broadbased. The baseline seems to have jumped once in the ’90s and again in the 2000s. Aquatics remains a blackhole and can’t remain so.

However,there has been a dent in athletics,Greco-Roman wrestling and even gymnastics. What explains this? How does one replicate the success in weightlifting,shooting,archery,boxing,wrestling and athletics extend them to aquatics? Sporting federations have begun to claim credit. Cricket is somewhat different. But with the exception of Haryana,there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that public policy has directly helped.

What are the forces driving GDP growth? While economists will think of all kinds of reasons,the crux probably is entrepreneurship (interpreted as risk-taking) and a young,ambitious and hungry India. The individual-driven medal success can also be attributed to similar reasons,with liberalisation facilitating participation in competitions abroad,hiring of foreign coaches,expenditure on training and even sponsorships. Let’s not forget that several athletes have trained in the US and often (shooting,badminton and tennis are examples) private expenditure is involved. In cross-country studies that use population as a variable,India,Indonesia and Bangladesh are underperformers. If they punch below their weight,that’s largely because populations are rural and not integrated.

One should then ask a different question. How has Haryana become mainstreamed and integrated on this factor and what should one do to ensure Jharkhand’s success is not one isolated flash in the pan? Haryana also probably demonstrates a critical element in the composition of public expenditure. Having built sports infrastructure,the rest are fiscal incentives (of different types) directed at individuals,not pointless public expenditure on sports federations and public training. There is a similar message in organising the CWG too. The public administrative system is no longer capable of delivering what it did in 1982. There has been progressive deterioration and decay. Witness how the best village in the world became the worst village in the world in a month and then again became the best village in the world in a week. If there wasn’t a fiasco,that’s largely because of quasi-privatisation. That should be the lesson and the legacy.

The author is a Delhi-based economist express@expressindia.com