Pierre Coubertin, founder of the modern Olympics, famously said that it was more important to participate than win. Such idealism, however, has been more the exception than the rule at the Games.

Noble intents have their value in every walk of life true, but entering a sports event and being content to lose would be anathema to a serious performer. It also diminishes the spirit of competitiveness, which is the basis of the event in any case, whatever the other virtues.
Ambition, pride, ego and nationalistic spirit — apart from skill and expertise, of course — are some of the attributes that drive athletes to excel in competition. The bigger the stage, the greater the craving for reward and glory; and it does not get bigger than the Olympics.
“I was not talented enough to run and smile at the same time,’’ said the great Czech long-distance runner Emil Zatopek when asked about his unusual facial expression when running. This about sums up the mind-set of the champion performer, even if unlike Zatopek, some of them can also smile in competition!
Usain Bolt, the astonishing Jamaican sprinter is one of these, though in the lead-up to the London Games, which begin this week, he had enough reason to frown. His compatriot from Jamaica Yohan Blake beat him in the 100 m in one of the warm-up competitions.
With serious threat building up from the likes of Asafa Powell and Tyson Gay too, the 100 m sprint — traditionally the blue riband event at the Olympics — promises to be a humdinger.
But it is only one of several superb contests on the agenda: think Roger Federer versus Andy Murray or Novak Djokovic for example.
In this galaxy of outstanding performers what can one expect from Indian athletes? A fair bit of success I would venture. It is foolish to believe we can suddenly harvest dozens of medals, but there is good reason not be as pessimistic as has been the case for several decades.
Some fans, disgruntled by the protracted controversy over the tennis combos for the Games and other minor mishaps have argued that this will have put Indian athletes under unnecessary stress and therefore at a disadvantage. I agree only up to a point.
What’s the Olympics without some controversy? When was the last time an Indian contingent left the country in the ideal frame of mind? Indeed, is the ideal frame of mind for any athlete participating in the Olympic placid and pressure-free? Or does should some ‘creative tension’ actually help prime them up for performing at their best?
There are no clear-cut answers, but it has often been seen that athletes excel themselves in this arena against all odds. Abhinav Bindra’s gold medal at Beijing (india’s first ever outside of hockey) was got with the shooter under a lot of stress, and at one stage in a near-hopeless situation.
My hunch is that India could double the three medals won in Beijing. This is not only because the country is sending its largest-ever contingent (83), but also because many of the athletes have shown encouraging pre-Olympic form in a variety of disciplines.
Saina Nehwal appears to have shrugged off her trepidations about the Chinese badminton stars; the archers — men and women — have threatened to put an end to the long-standing stranglehold of the South Koreans; the shooters, led by Bindra and Gagan Narang are serious medal contenders.