Electronic sports such as "Fortnite" are vastly more popular than Olympic events such as dressage (花式骑术) or curling (冰壶). In fact, they are more popular than most mainstream sports. Only 28% of British boys aged 16-19 watch any traditional live sports; 57% play video games.

Stick-in-the-muds may complain that e-sports are not proper sports. Many parents, observing their bad-tempered teenagers sitting on the so fa all day twiddling their thumbs and shouting "Quick, pass me the shotgun!" at a screen, would agree. Yet video games are highly competitive, with professional leagues that play in crowded stadiums.

There are perhaps only 200 tennis stars in the world who can make a living from playing in tournaments. By contrast "League of Legends", a fantasy game played by teams of five, supports over 1,000 on good wages. Its World Championship final last year was watched by 44 million people.

Critics of e-sports offer moral objections, too. They are addictive, Prince Harry has called for "Fortnite" to be banned for this reason. They are violent. Surely, at a time of global disharmony, it is a bad idea to make simulated killing an Olympic sport. The Olympics aim to promote peace. Finally, video games are commercial. Nobody owns basketball; "League of Legends" is owned by Tencent, a Chinese megacorporation.

None of these arguments is very convincing. The idea that an activity, rather than a substance, can be addictive is controversial among doctors, as is the existence of a causal link between gaming and violence. And the idea that warlike sports have no place in the Olympics is hard to consist with history. Javelin-throwing (掷标枪) and wrestling were introduced in 708 BC. They are still there.