Why India has only 65 athletes in Olympics?

Question

Considered it is 2nd populated country, less than Cuba

Answer 1

Well, Cuba is a lot more richer, has more facilities for the athletes to train in.. Economically India is the poorest country in the Olympics.. So that is your question

And the government has to pay for the athletes.. And I think they hate more important issues than the Olympics..

Answer 2

There is not a clear relation between population and number of athletes!

India is poor they are more interested in making awkard movies than sports, they have dirtiest water in the world ... many factors influence that and perhaps by considering all of them this number is even great;-)

Sahand Elmi

Answer 3

India has lots of problems when it comes to it Olympic Comitee. Back in the day they used to send pretty strong Field Hockey team which for 80 years qualified for the games and won man Golds for the country and in track Sikhs like Malikha Singh gave pride to the nation but starting in the 80s India started to get more biased when it came to sending athletes. They wanted a more diverse group (i.e. more Hindus) so they started sending less sikh's punjabi's muslims in favor of central and southern hindus. Thats when indias medal count lowered and lowered to the point that they didn't when in a gold for 28 years. Now the whole counrty gets happy over a silver in athens or one gold in beijing. If you think I am being like a Sikh Al Sharpton blaming the majority over all the problems think again check any records over olympic athletes and medal counts of india and see how the name Singh gets replaced with something else like rangdevi and india's position in medal goes from 15th to 50th India's Olympic Comitee needs to change the racists biased and frankly incompetent.

Answer 4

too much.... curry

*hides*

Answer 5

It's a lot. There probably are more non-participants, like spiritual guides, financial planners, political chum chas, cooks, etc.

Remember, Indians only play and watch Cricket. Thank God that's not an event. Another 20 would have bled the country.

Answer 6

a lot of countries can't afford to send as many athletes as they'd like to.

Answer 7

Well, India has been very bad at winning, and

uh.....

Answer 8

You don't relate population to the number of athletes a country produces ... Most of the events (of Olympics) are not popular in India , which is the main reason why not a lot of Indians qualify for Olympics .

The Govt.  ignorance towards the sports in young , the peoples ignorance towards the sports fuel for the poor performance of Indian athletes in the qualifier matches.

We got our @ss kicked out in Hockey, which is supposed to be our national sports ..

We scuk hard so as our Govt. attitude towards sports ..

Answer 9

I think it  is political biase not religeon. When we sent one athlete 3 political bigshot we wont win any medal. Infact there was a minister in Kerala who was so mad that he didn't get to go. If we give chances to the young talent India could be superpower like our IT industry.

Answer 10

Indians are physically weak lot, to be effective in athletics and most of the games in Olympics are not popular in India.

The most popular game in India Cricket is not in Olympics and the fact that their hockey team did not qualify for Olympics has reduced the count further.