Question

consider this claim:
since it has a level of athleticism similar to that required for traditional olympic fencing, lightsaber dueling should be made an olympic sport.
now consider how someone might argue against this. which sentence presents the strongest and most reasonable counterclaim to the above claim?
because lightsaber dueling is a new sport, there are not enough experienced competitors from different countries to make it a worthwhile olympic event.
allowing a \sport\ based on a movie series to become an olympic event is so frivolous that it would spell the end of the olympics as we know them.
lightsabers are made of rigid plastic with led lights, making them incredibly different from the traditional metal sabers, foils, and epees used in fencing.

Explanation:

To find the strongest counterclaim, we analyze each option:

• The first option argues about the lack of experienced competitors from different countries, which is a reasonable logistical concern for an Olympic event (needing global participation and depth of talent).
• The second option is overly dramatic (claiming it would "spell the end of the Olympics") and not a reasonable, measured counterclaim.
• The third option focuses on the equipment difference, but the original claim is about athleticism, so this is less relevant to countering the "athleticism - based" argument for including it. So the first option is the strongest as it addresses a key Olympic requirement (global, experienced competitors).

Answer:

A. Because lightsaber dueling is a new sport, there are not enough experienced competitors from different countries to make it a worthwhile Olympic event.