Every Saturday morning, at 9 a.m., more than 50,000 runners set off to run 5 km around their local park. The Parkrun phenomenon began with a dozen friends and has inspired 400 events in the UK and more abroad. Events are free, staffed by thousands of volunteers. Runners range from four years old to grandparents; their times range from Andrew Baddeley’s world record 13 minutes 48 seconds up to an hour.

    Parkrun is succeeding where London’s Olympic “legacy” is failing. Ten years ago on Monday, it was announced that the Games of the 30th Olympiad would be in London. Planning documents pledged that the great legacy of the Games would be to lever a nation of sport lovers away from their couches. The population would be fitter, healthier and produce more winners. It has not happened. The number of adults doing weekly sport did rise, by nearly 2 million in the run-up to 2012—but the general population was growing faster. Worse, the numbers are now falling at an accelerating rate. The opposition claims primary school pupils doing at least two hours of sport a week have nearly halved. Obesity has risen among adults and children. Official retrospections continue as to why London 2012 failed to “inspire a generation”. The success of Parkrun offers answers.

    Parkun is not a race but a time trial: your only competitor is the clock. The ethos welcomes anybody. There is as much joy over a puffed-out first-timer being clapped over the line as there is about top talent shining. The Olympic bidders, by contrast, wanted to get more people doing sports and to produce more elite athletes. The dual aim was mixed up: The stress on success over taking part was intimidating for newcomers.

    Indeed, there is something a little absurd in the state getting involved in the planning of such a fundamentally “grassroots” concept as community sports associations. If there is a role for government, it should really be getting involved in providing common goods—making sure there is space for playing fields and the money to pave tennis and netball courts, and encouraging the provision of all these activities in schools. But successive governments have presided over selling green spaces, squeezing money from local authorities and declining attention on sport in education. Instead of wordy, worthy strategies, future governments need to do more to provide the conditions for sport to thrive. Or at least not make them worse.

答案精析：根据题干中的different和Olympic games可定位至第三段第四句。定位句中的by contrast前后内容对“公园跑”和奥运会作了对比。by contrast前面的内容说到，“公园跑”并不是一种比赛，而且它欢迎所有人参加。by contrast后面的内容说到，奥运会拥护者想让更多的人进行体育运动，以产生更多的精英运动员。由此可见，“公园跑”的目的并不在于产生精英，原文中的elite athletes对应C项中的elitism，因此选择C项。

错项排除：由原文定位句可知，“公园跑”的目的不在于发现人才，因此A项错误。文章指出公园跑的目的在于大众参与，而非大众竞争，因此排除B项。文章第三段指出，公园跑能吸引首次参加运动的人，因此D项错误。