This user has no status.
Member
There are many sports struggling with this meaning that they have only "educated" spectators and the rest of the population says "Wau this is interesting let's watch one hour" only if it gets broadcasted once per 4 years during OG but they would never watch it regularly. It's not the best comparison but once someone mentioned archery in another thread I know little bit about such discussions in fencing where FIA tries to desperately invent some new rules (e.g. like having doubles in fencing, rectangle field instead of long stripe or mandate "opened" masks with plexi so you can see athlete's eyes) but they are either so crazy that the game would be ruined as it is known for last 100 years (and therefore rejected by normal involved people who love it and not only potential money from more broadcasts) or they are not enough. In the end unless you know the thing very well or you have very good comments and all the slow motion replays and electronic pens showing how fast and difficult some moves were you cannot watch it and even with that only real TV sport fanatics are usually in the mood to swallow such show for more then 10 minutes.
Therefore I'm afraid that without crazy things like the deciding game being wrestling or kick-box instead of TT it will be harder and harder to fight popularity of all established big sports and all the "new" which are having specific regional popularity and all the attributes to be exported to the rest of the world and catch an eye of general (more or less dumb) population easier then TT...
Therefore I'm afraid that without crazy things like the deciding game being wrestling or kick-box instead of TT it will be harder and harder to fight popularity of all established big sports and all the "new" which are having specific regional popularity and all the attributes to be exported to the rest of the world and catch an eye of general (more or less dumb) population easier then TT...