> it sounds like a person who devoted most of their time to training was not considered a fair sport. Amateurism in sports is a complex subject, but in many wa

> it sounds like a person who devoted most of their time to training was not considered a fair sport. Amateurism in sports is a complex subject, but in many ways has its roots planted in classism. Its similar to how unpaid internships nowadays can reinforce a class divide in certain fields -- those with family support or independent wealth are able to take unpaid internships while those that need the money can't afford to take those opportunities. In similar ways, requiring athletes to be amateurs didn't mean that amateur athletes didn't devote a lot of time to training, it meant that those that couldn't afford to spend their time training while unpaid couldn't compete. Late 19th century definitions of amateur went even further than that: It restricted "amateurs" to those who had never profited for physical labor. That meant if you worked as a bricklayer and trained unpaid on the side, you were ineligible to compete.