For a top golfer, one big tournament win can deliver a multimillion dollar payday. For some past Olympians, even covering their costs to compete used to be a struggle.
“The world has changed,” declared Lord Sebastian Coe this week as he attempted to shake up athletics with a simple proposal: a $50,000 bonus for winning an Olympic gold medal.
The move by World Athletics’ president made it the first international sports federation to put a financial figure on Olympic success — bringing into sharp relief Coe’s own running days, when he recalled British athletes scrounging for rail tickets and meal vouchers.
The decision to reward track and field winners, starting from the Paris Games this summer, has again drawn attention to the yawning financial gap between rewards for top professionals in tennis, golf and football and those of elite Olympians, particularly in the event’s more niche disciplines.
Raymond Flynn, the two-time Olympian and founder of athlete agency FSM, said prize money was “long overdue” and “a step in the right direction”, though he did not envisage the financial rewards ever matching “the levels NBA, NFL athletes make”.
Within the Olympic community, it has rattled purists who cling on to ideals that put the Games’ spirit of amateurism above money and opened sharp divisions at sporting federations whose main focus is on reinvesting in grassroots athletics and maintaining technical standards.
Coe’s move breaks with the 128-year history of the modern Games, reigniting the debate about whether the International Olympic Committee, which does not award prize money, should directly share a portion of its revenues with the athletes who draw in spectators, broadcasters and sponsors.
The non-profit IOC, whose revenues were $7.6bn from 2017-21, said it redistributes 90 per cent of its income to national Olympic committees, international sports federations and hosts and that they should decide how to “best serve their athletes and the global development of their sport”.
Others point out that paying prize money will sound the starting gun on a race for even bigger rewards, as athletes in highly watched, commercially lucrative events such as the 100-metre race demand more for winning gold, while a pistol shooter must remain content with a pat on the back and a cold shower.
“Some gold medals will be worth more than others,” said someone close to another Olympic federation. “If there’s prize money it should be the IOC giving equal prize money to each event rather than different federations paying.”
While purists contend that prize money goes against the ethos of the modern Olympic movement, professionalism has permeated the Games for decades. Governments and national bodies already offer bonuses to medallists, while sponsors offer financial incentives to the best-performing athletes. In that respect, World Athletics’ move is not so new, according to longtime observers.
“People who win gold medals in track and field don’t need extra money. They’re getting sponsors, they’re getting paid to compete in events,” said David Wallechinsky, a founding member of the International Society of Olympic Historians.
“[But] if you’re someone competing in one of the lesser known sports, boy you could use that money,” he added.
Adding to the intrigue is that Coe is widely seen as a potential contender in the race to succeed IOC president Thomas Bach, the German-born former foil fencer who has been in the role since 2013. His presidency is due to end next year.
“It’s the start of his presidential campaign,” said someone who works for a different federation. “This [prize money] clearly is not what the IOC wants.”
Beyond wider concerns about the spirit of the Olympics, World Athletics’ introduction of prize money could heap pressure on others to follow suit.
“It would certainly influence other federations,” Flynn, who was an Irish middle-distance runner, said. “Hopefully it will lead to all athletes having prize money for medals.”
World Olympians Association president Joël Bouzou, who competed in the modern pentathlon for France in several Games, said critics should not “be against” athletes being rewarded for their efforts and that it was important to give them a solid financial base for their retirement.
But he added: “With so little time before the [Paris] Games, other sports can’t adapt.” Some federations argued that a discussion should have been held before the announcement.
Smaller federations are also more reliant on the IOC for their income to fund their sport’s operation. Bouzou cautioned that bonuses for top performers “shouldn’t be to the detriment” of grassroots development.
World Athletics also has the advantage of being one of the richer federations, generating $54.9mn in revenue in 2022, a year after the Tokyo Games.
Revenue for World Archery, on the other hand, totalled Sfr7mn in 2022, although it has only five events at this year’s Games. The federation has no plans to introduce bonuses for Olympic medallists, according to secretary-general Tom Dielen. World Archery pays prize money at its own events, including its World Cup, supporting athletes’ journeys to the Games.
“One federation has decided to do it one way, others will do it another way,” Dielen said, adding no two sports are “the same — that’s what makes the Olympics so special”.
Read the full article here
