'Far Eastern Olympics'

ATHLETIC trophies are so easy to get these days, all you need is cash. Trophies of all shapes and sizes can be bought off the rack. You can have them personalized even if you're not into sports. What I cannot understand though is that, despite modern technology, we seem to have lost good design and craftsmanship. Trophies today are not only tacky, they are made of cheap materials that tarnish in more ways than one. You cannot sell or pawn a modern trophy, unlike older ones that were usually made of sterling silver. I acquired one from a junk shop (upscale ones are called antique shops): a large silver trophy engraved with the words, "Far Eastern Olympic Association Permanent Trophy Track and Field Sports Presented by The Governor-General of the Philippine Islands Hon. W. Cameron Forbes 1913." Aside from its metal value, there was some historical value in it as well. Forbes (pronounced Por-bes) is not just the name of a major street in Sampaloc, Manila, it is also the name of the premiere gated community in the country -- Forbes Park. This piece of history I now use as a wine cooler during parties.

How come I had never heard of the Far Eastern Olympic Association? A bit of research produced some data. In 1912 E.S. Brown, president of the Philippine Athletic Association and Manila Carnival games, proposed the creation of the Far Eastern Olympic Games to China and Japan. At the end of January 1913, the bi-annual games were inaugurated in Manila. William Cameron Forbes was the first president of the Philippine Amateur Athletic Association from 1911-1913. The second games were held in Shanghai in 1915, the third in Tokyo in 1917, where the games and association were renamed the Far Eastern Championship Games/Far Eastern Amateur Athletic Association because the nationalistic Japanese wanted the word "Olympic" dropped. Eventually it became known as the Far Eastern Games and what little I know of the fifth one held in Shanghai comes from a 1921 article by Camilo Osias proudly highlighting, "The First Victory of Filipino Athletes on Foreign Soil." I do not have the statistics for previous games but we won so many medals then compared with our poor harvest in contemporary Southeast Asian and Olympic Games.

Why do we always speak of our athletic glories in the past tense? When we speak of the economy and other good times, we also do so in the past tense? Surely, there is a way to explain this. But as I looked at the roster of events and the names of the athletes who brought home the bacon: Eduardo Suela, Pedro Zorilla, Alberto Nicolas, Moises Reyes Lucas, Antonio Alo Pedro Abiera, Vicente B. Lopez, Valentin Malinao, Francisco Danao, to name a few, not a single one rang a bell. Have we forgotten so easily? Aside from the names, the 1921 roster showed that we had such a strong team that we won in practically all events except the five-mile run, pentathlon and 440-yard swim. We always shared the spotlight with Japan that won second place over-all, while China only won three medals, all gold for the pentathlon, discuss throw and running high jump. In two events, pole vault and 440-meter dash, the Philippines won the first, second and third places. Today, China and Japan are formidable athletic teams, what happened to us?

I regained my humor after reading the article twice. I was reading a 1921 article with a modern 2004 mind-set temporarily losing context. I blamed our athletes and athletic program without realizing that the statistics of 1921 should not be compared with 2004. In the 1921 Far Eastern Games there were only 350 athletes from three countries: China, Japan and the Philippines. In 2004 Athens Olympics, there are over 200 accredited Olympic committees from various countries. In 1921, the Philippines sent 143 athletes, about a third of the total athletes then competing in the Far Eastern Games. In Athens, we have a contingent of 16 athletes broken down as follows: two badminton players, four boxers, three into taekwondo, three swimmers, two athletics (whatever that means) one marksman and one archer. We may have the greatest athletes but we are limited by numbers. How can we make a dent when we have 16 athletes competing with 339 from Great Britain, 361 from Japan, 459 from China (with an additional 110 from Chinese Taipei), 585 from the Russian Federation, and 796 athletes from the United States of America?

In 1921, Osias already outlined the need for a large park or stadium where Filipino athletes could train. At least the Rizal Memorial Coliseum was built. Then Osias justified funding with words that sound like the advice given by the Philippine Olympic Committee or Philippine Sports Commission today:

"An all important consideration in a nation-wide program of physical education is money. The people must realize that money appropriated for a universal program of athletics is money not spent but invested. We must be consistent and systematic in our preparation... No shortsighted policy or halfhearted efforts can accomplish real results. We must build for the future and to do this we must act immediately and continue active preparation."

This column should not depress readers, but when you look back, you should ask when will we learn and be liberated from our past?

Comments are welcome at aocampo@ateneo.edu