The Olympics are awesome and should remain. They bring together the entire world for a peaceful two weeks of competition. Sure, there is corruption at the IOC and incompetent countries/cities get to be hosts. Sochi 2014 was the worst when Putin's mafia buddies stole tens of billions of dollars. We can even quibble about standards and what sports should/not be included. But generally speaking, the Olympics are amazing and virtually everyone who has ever competed in one counts it as a life highlight. Reform it, don't end it. A good start would be to only choose sane and well-run cities. Mitt Romney and Salt Lake City did a fantastic job in 2002. Peter Ueberroth made a big profit for Los Angeles in 1984. Having the right people in charge makes all the difference.
-
120
-
Stop wrote:
The Olympics are expensive, leave the countries that host them with a huge deficit and a bunch of useless white elephant facilities, and increasingly cannot be hosted anywhere but in a few countries. Populations are turning against having the games and don’t want their cities to bid when people are struggling financially. They are often accompanied by human rights abuses - such as clearing out poorer areas - increased policing and surveillance, and are heavily corrupt.
Beyond that though, they also have an outsize profile - an athlete can set records, win world championships, but if you didn’t win this one specific event every four years you’re seen as a failure. It’s a lot of unnecessary pressure for an arbitrary event. The Olympics also don’t bring sustained viewership to sports and most sports would be better off investing in better promoting their world championships, which are much more accessible to hold.
The ideology behind the Olympics is outdated - first they were conceived as a demonstration of European superiority, it shifted in the Cold War to proxy warfare through sports, and then the idea of global unity through competing together. Those billions could be much better spent on global initiatives that actually promote peace and unity not just for elite athletes. There’s no indication that emphasis on elite sports leads to more fitness in the general population and money would be better spent making trails and facilities available to everyone. And perhaps without the Olympics there’d be less incentive to drug use if the idea that success at this one event defines athletic careers.
Is it time to stop investing in an expensive, exclusive Olympics?
Great post!
24 -
It wouldn't be so bad if the IOC did not have so many insane requirements for hosting the Olympics. The problem is the IOC, not the Games themselves. Reforming the IOC would be a better solution than axing the Olympics altogether.
That said, organizations don't reform themselves. Don't think the IOC is going to voluntarily tone it down and reduce their privilege and power. Perhaps the solution is an alternative like the Goodwill Games again.
81 -
Little Dicky Pound wrote:
Stop wrote:
The Olympics are expensive, leave the countries that host them with a huge deficit and a bunch of useless white elephant facilities, and increasingly cannot be hosted anywhere but in a few countries. Populations are turning against having the games and don’t want their cities to bid when people are struggling financially. They are often accompanied by human rights abuses - such as clearing out poorer areas - increased policing and surveillance, and are heavily corrupt.
Beyond that though, they also have an outsize profile - an athlete can set records, win world championships, but if you didn’t win this one specific event every four years you’re seen as a failure. It’s a lot of unnecessary pressure for an arbitrary event. The Olympics also don’t bring sustained viewership to sports and most sports would be better off investing in better promoting their world championships, which are much more accessible to hold.
The ideology behind the Olympics is outdated - first they were conceived as a demonstration of European superiority, it shifted in the Cold War to proxy warfare through sports, and then the idea of global unity through competing together. Those billions could be much better spent on global initiatives that actually promote peace and unity not just for elite athletes. There’s no indication that emphasis on elite sports leads to more fitness in the general population and money would be better spent making trails and facilities available to everyone. And perhaps without the Olympics there’d be less incentive to drug use if the idea that success at this one event defines athletic careers.
Is it time to stop investing in an expensive, exclusive Olympics?
Great post!
Are you high? That was no where near a great post. It was full of self supporting, dubious assumptions from a mind numbing, contrarian position. I’m guessing this dude never broke 4:30 in the HS mile.
The Olympics, since their inception, are some of the most compelling competitions on earth. It drives innovation, greater knowledge of the human body, brings nations and people together with a common purpose.
Oh boohoo, there’s corruption! There’s technological advances! There’s money spent and made! There’s politics! Some are treated unfairly! Whatever.
56 -
Stop wrote:
The Olympics are expensive, leave the countries that host them with a huge deficit and a bunch of useless white elephant facilities, and increasingly cannot be hosted anywhere but in a few countries. Populations are turning against having the games and don’t want their cities to bid when people are struggling financially. They are often accompanied by human rights abuses - such as clearing out poorer areas - increased policing and surveillance, and are heavily corrupt.
Beyond that though, they also have an outsize profile - an athlete can set records, win world championships, but if you didn’t win this one specific event every four years you’re seen as a failure. It’s a lot of unnecessary pressure for an arbitrary event. The Olympics also don’t bring sustained viewership to sports and most sports would be better off investing in better promoting their world championships, which are much more accessible to hold.
The ideology behind the Olympics is outdated - first they were conceived as a demonstration of European superiority, it shifted in the Cold War to proxy warfare through sports, and then the idea of global unity through competing together. Those billions could be much better spent on global initiatives that actually promote peace and unity not just for elite athletes. There’s no indication that emphasis on elite sports leads to more fitness in the general population and money would be better spent making trails and facilities available to everyone. And perhaps without the Olympics there’d be less incentive to drug use if the idea that success at this one event defines athletic careers.
Is it time to stop investing in an expensive, exclusive Olympics?
You made a couple good points. 1968 Olympics in Mexico, Mexican government made left wingers and student protesters disappear. Hundreds, maybe thousands. Disappear like never to be seen or heard from again. Technically Mexico is not an Underdeveloped Country but we need to have Olympics in the five or ten wealthiest nations in the world. I like the idea of Olympics in Underdeveloped Nations but if governments in not so wealthy countries are going to kill hundreds, maybe thousands of their citizens to make room for Olympics, no. T&F needs Olympics. Other sports, as posters have said like baseball, soccer and tennis do not need Olympics. I think it's exciting seeing T&F athletes choke who have dominated in smaller meets. World Championships and Olympics are different levels of pressure. Would Jim Ryun have choked and fallen down in a W.C? Look at Hicham el G. Hicham el G. dominated World Championships. Hicham el G. would have zero Olympic 1500m gold medals if Noah N. did not suffer an auto collision and miss 2004 Olympics. Olympic pressure for T&F athletes is off the chart!
00 -
They are always adding new sports. I hear 2024 is considering adding swinging to the schedule.
20 -
Bad Wigins wrote:
The olympics is a window into the 19th and early 20th centuries. Who goes to the gym to do flips on a mat or vault over a pommel horse?
But it's also a good showcase for what the real sports are. A real sport can live without the olympics and has its own bigger championship, such as
boxing
baseball
basketball
soccerSwimming is borderline. Rhythmic gymnastics and curling can't outdo their olympic exposure in off years, so they're not sports. Track is very close to this category if not there already.
It would be funny to have American football in the olympics.
Olympic/Amateur Boxing is a Meritocracy, Professional Boxing is a Business, In Amateur Boxing Tournaments are held to determine each Country's Representative, Then in the Olympics each Country's Representative is in a Tournament to decide the Winner, In Pro Boxing it is all risk vs reward The Managers and Promoters see the fighter as an asset and only allow That fighter to fight someone if the money is at least worth the risk, so all fighters will say the will fight ANYONE, but many times fights are not made because the Promoter sees the fight as too risky, So if someone is REALLY GOOD BUT UNKNOWN or do not generate enough Money that fighter will be avoided like the plague until they show signs of being shot, or the management of a name/star fighter makes a mistake and gives that relatively unknown and/or fighter who does not generate enough Money a shot.
I prefer Meritocracy and would prefer Pro Boxing be a Meritocracy, but that will never happen.
00 -
No!
00 -
Not time to get rid, but reforms are needed.
20 -
sub sub elite local hobby jogger wrote:
It wouldn't be so bad if the IOC did not have so many insane requirements for hosting the Olympics. The problem is the IOC, not the Games themselves. Reforming the IOC would be a better solution than axing the Olympics altogether.
That said, organizations don't reform themselves. Don't think the IOC is going to voluntarily tone it down and reduce their privilege and power. Perhaps the solution is an alternative like the Goodwill Games again.
Also, one of the things that drives up the cost is that cities often tack on huge infrastructure projects (like a new highway or rapid rail system) that are not really needed.
10 -
The Olympics should be held on Zoom to save money. Did we not learn anything from Covid?
30 -
Very legitimate questions, but with TV revenue in the billions, the Olympics are not going to stop any time soon. Cities voluntarily bid for the Games. If they don't do their due diligence and realize that the economic and social costs of holding the Olympics exceed the benefits then it's on them. Nobody forces a country or city to hold the Games.
There is no greater world platform for promoting a sport than the Olympics so there is no downside to participating for the sport itself.
02 -
douglas burke wrote:
I prefer Meritocracy and would prefer Pro Boxing be a Meritocracy, but that will never happen.
Which legendary pro boxing champs didn't "merit" their status? Ali? Foreman? Tyson?
Sure there's been bums at the top and there's wrangling over the fights, good contenders not getting their shot, but in the end the money ensures you'll see the best vs the best. The fans demand it. And there's no question that it's a higher level of boxing.
Even amateur is self-sufficient outside of olympics, Golden Gloves etc.01 -
Bad Wigins wrote:
douglas burke wrote:
I prefer Meritocracy and would prefer Pro Boxing be a Meritocracy, but that will never happen.
Which legendary pro boxing champs didn't "merit" their status? Ali? Foreman? Tyson?
Sure there's been bums at the top and there's wrangling over the fights, good contenders not getting their shot, but in the end the money ensures you'll see the best vs the best. The fans demand it. And there's no question that it's a higher level of boxing.
Even amateur is self-sufficient outside of olympics, Golden Gloves etc.
Look at RIGO (William Rigondeaux) he totally dominated Nonito Donaire was considered The best in his Weight Division and could not get any big fights, Until he got older and looked like a shell of himself, meanwhile Donaire got LOTS of big fights in spite of losing every round
Charley Burley called the greatest fighter ever by the great Archie Moore NEVER got a title shot, and had to fight fighters much bigger to get fights, he dominated Sugar Ray Robinson and Robinson who many consider the best ever never gave him a title shot, in spite of them being the same weight. LOTS OF EXAMPLES
01 -
Simple answer would be to just use the same venue in a fairly neutral location
00 -
The Olympics whole "raison d'etre" was amateurism and amateur sports. Without that the Olympics has no reason to exist. EVERY sport has a World Championships; no need for an Olympics.
When IOC introduced golf that did it for me. Olympics has been all about $$$$$ since Atlanta '96 = the tackiest Olympics.
Get rid of the effer. Centro Jr. just doesn't compare to Wottle. Not near the magic of Wottle.
I will watch Youtube of Munich before I watch Beijing 2008.
Fair?
03 -
One trend that's become apparent is that more authoritarian and fewer democratic countries are hosting the games. Why? It takes absolute control to force the games and all that it entails on the population. Democratic countries get pushback from their citizens who don't want the cost, traffic and hassle of hosting. I love the Olympics but cannot get jazzed about seeing it every four years in China and Russia.
00 -
Shrimpie wrote:
One trend that's become apparent is that more authoritarian and fewer democratic countries are hosting the games. Why? It takes absolute control to force the games and all that it entails on the population. Democratic countries get pushback from their citizens who don't want the cost, traffic and hassle of hosting. I love the Olympics but cannot get jazzed about seeing it every four years in China and Russia.
2024 Olympics are in Paris. 2026 Winter Olympics in Italy. 2028 in Los Angeles.
40 -
Due to the arrogance of the IOC, WADA, and other alphabet-soup groups of "world sport", they will all die of their own financial weight. I look forward to it.
10 -
I certainly wouldn’t miss it. It’s Getting old and boring.
01
