Some sensible suggestions, but others I disagree with.
Agree on horses. There are major issues of accessibility & cost. If we're going to have any horse event it should be one which isn't in now, i.e. mounted archery. 'Cos it's bloody brilliant to watch & requires tremendous skill.
I'm not keen on subjective impressions stuff, but I can accept some of the points scored events, with certain provisos. They have to drop all the 'artistic impression' marks. It's got to be on the precision, height, difficulty etc. of the moves.
Therefore drop, or change the marking of, any sport which currently requires mincing around. E.g. tumbling is very impressive to watch, & needs great skill & strength (thus fitting the Olympic criteria pretty well), but the posing & arm-waving required by the judging makes it entirely inappropriate, and a lot worse to watch. The gymnasts hurling themselves around is what counts, & what people like to see. Cut the crap & I'd let it stay.
Ditto with other gymnastics. This means, of course, no rhythmic gymnastics.
Fewer swimming events. Dominate swimming, & you're near the top of the medals table straight away.
Shooting's fine, IMO. It's physical skill, & objectively marked.
None of the team sports where the Olympics are secondary to the world championships or equivalent. So, no football, no rugby (keep it out!), no cricket.
Every sport should have wide (in a geographic sense) appeal. Baseball, for example, wouldn't qualify because not enough of the world plays it at a competitive level. This would also keeps out kabaddi & some other regionally popular sports, but provides an incentive for those sports to spread.
Basketball should be dropped. Too big outside the Olympics. Any sport which players are paid to play by rich firms (miscalled clubs) which see participation in the Olympics as a distraction should be out.
Tennis - again, too big & rich outside the Olympics.
