Could Brazil's Financial Crisis Lead to Olympic Cancellation?
Apr 20, 2016
Jeremy Botter
http://www.flotrack.org/article/41140-could-brazil-s-financial-crisis-lead-to-olympic-cancellation
It is not a likely scenario. But warnings of financial peril have begun to emerge from leaders in Rio de Janeiro, the host of the XXXI Olympiad scheduled to begin in August.
No.
But it could make other nations look more closely at the logistics of hosting the Olympics.
I remember complaining 6 years ago of how terrible a decision this was by the IOC. Now it's 2016 and I'm still right. (probably with a bunch of other people to be fair)
Standing by what my 16 year old self said the day Rio got it, I'm boycotting it completely, no merchandise this year like I usually get, and not even watching a single event. It it petty? Sure, but every reasonable person knew this was going to be a bad idea, just how Qatar is a terrible world cup destination.
Quote from: tower912 on April 20, 2016, 06:55:13 PM
But it could make other nations look more closely at the logistics of hosting the Olympics.
Their is only one city in the world that has all the facilities to run the Olympics ... LA/Orange County. For years the word has been that LA/Orange country is the emergency backup. UCLA's dorms would serve as the Olympic village.
It's never happened. Maybe this is the year.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 20, 2016, 07:33:22 PM
I remember complaining 6 years ago of how terrible a decision this was by the IOC. Now it's 2016 and I'm still right. (probably with a bunch of other people to be fair)
Standing by what my 16 year old self said the day Rio got it, I'm boycotting it completely, no merchandise this year like I usually get, and not even watching a single event. It it petty? Sure, but every reasonable person knew this was going to be a bad idea, just how Qatar is a terrible world cup destination.
You should be grateful that the IOC selected Rio. You want the financial mess in Chicago and Illinois to be even worse?
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on April 20, 2016, 07:47:31 PM
You should be grateful that the IOC selected Rio. You want the financial mess in Chicago and Illinois to be even worse?
This. + Infinity
Quote from: tower912 on April 20, 2016, 06:55:13 PM
But it could make other nations look more closely at the logistics of hosting the Olympics.
Boston was going to be the US nominee for 2024, but local concerns about finances caused them to give it up.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/sports/olympics/boston-2024-summer-olympics-bid-terminated.html?_r=0
http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/02/news/economy/olympics-cost/index.html
I've always been against nations building stuff just for the Olympics/World Cup. They always sell it as an economic boom, but the infrastructure is rarely maintained/used.
Now, if a country or group of countries already has everything in place, go nuts.
Seem like a good way to invite corruption, waste of resources, etc.
Quote from: Heisenberg on April 20, 2016, 07:40:04 PM
Their is only one city in the world that has all the facilities to run the Olympics ... LA/Orange County. For years the word has been that LA/Orange country is the emergency backup. UCLA's dorms would serve as the Olympic village.
It's never happened. Maybe this is the year.
No longer true. Beijing is also ready to take the games on a moment's notice, and i've heard they are the first option if Rio falls through.
Wouldn't most or all of London's facilities be around?
Quote from: GooooMarquette on April 20, 2016, 09:02:24 PM
Wouldn't most or all of London's facilities be around?
I think London reduced the size of their olympic facilities greatly. Plus Olympic Stadium is going to be the new stadium for West Ham starting next season so that's out as well.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on April 20, 2016, 09:02:24 PM
Wouldn't most or all of London's facilities be around?
London built lots of structures designed to be taken down. I bet there's less left than you'd think.
Quote from: MUDish on April 20, 2016, 07:48:45 PM
This. + Infinity
LA made it happen with a profit. Comes down to leadership, good management, etc. Salt Lake City also pulled it off.
Peter Ueberoth and Mitt Romney
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 20, 2016, 09:24:40 PM
LA made it happen with a profit. Comes down to leadership, good management, etc. Salt Lake City also pulled it off.
Peter Ueberoth and Mitt Romney
We're talking about Chicago/Illinois here, where there's been no state budget for 9 months, and corruption reigns. The Olympics would have been perfect here.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 20, 2016, 09:24:40 PM
LA made it happen with a profit. Comes down to leadership, good management, etc. Salt Lake City also pulled it off.
Peter Ueberoth and Mitt Romney
Was the same money being spent in 1984 as it is now? I feel like every new place has to "out do" the one before
Quote from: Heisenberg on April 20, 2016, 07:40:04 PM
Their is only one city in the world that has all the facilities to run the Olympics ... LA/Orange County. For years the word has been that LA/Orange country is the emergency backup. UCLA's dorms would serve as the Olympic village.
It's never happened. Maybe this is the year.
Are you sure cities such as New York, Chicago, Dallas also are not viable?
LA smartly used existing facilities or built facilities that were reused. Atlanta too. And those games were 32 and 20 years ago.
But I have no doubt that Chicago would have blown their budget completely.
Quote from: #UnleashWally on April 20, 2016, 09:32:28 PM
Are you sure cities such as New York, Chicago, Dallas also are not viable?
Chicago doesn't have a big enough stadium for the opening ceremony and track. They could pull off most other things with the UC, soldier field, mccormick place and the lake but the track is an issue. Plus no olympic village either.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 20, 2016, 09:35:39 PM
Chicago doesn't have a big enough stadium for the opening ceremony and track. They could pull off most other things with the UC, soldier field, mccormick place and the lake but the track is an issue. Plus no olympic village either.
They could use the 15(?) colleges that have dorms in Chicago for that. You're right that the only physical venue issue would be the track field. What does Depaul's track look like? Or if there was reallllly a pinch, what would the logistics be of building a track from the Chicago Fire's stadium.
Edit: If this was truly an emergency backup, the opening ceremony would most likely be cut/shortened
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on April 20, 2016, 09:34:40 PM
LA smartly used existing facilities or built facilities that were reused. Atlanta too. And those games were 32 and 20 years ago.
But I have no doubt that Chicago would have blown their budget completely.
I do remember some of the plan. The Olympic Stadium was supposed to be in Washington park on the Southside and they were gonna build it to be reduced in size later. Olympic village was going to be on Notherly Island and then converted to condos. Most everything else was going to be in existing facilities with McCormick place taking pretty much all of the indoor events. Hardly a budget breaker.
The best thing to happen to Chicago in the last ten years was losing the Olympic bid.
Quote from: MUDish on April 20, 2016, 09:28:06 PM
We're talking about Chicago/Illinois here, where there's been no state budget for 9 months, and corruption reigns. The Olympics would have been perfect here.
Exactly....lack of leadership. My point is it can happen, but Chicago is corrupt to the core and devoid of leadership. So I don't disagree with you, it would have been a disaster for Chicago. My point was more that it has been successfully done in this country, SLC, Atlanta, LA, with the proper management and leadership.
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 20, 2016, 09:29:10 PM
Was the same money being spent in 1984 as it is now? I feel like every new place has to "out do" the one before
Atlanta was profitable, too. That was in the 1990's. SLC was in the 2000's. I understand your point, but the "out do" model is as much a knock on the incompetency of the organizing committees, cities, etc, that use the Olympics as a way to FUEL infrastructure. They reap what they sow. That's about management, that's about leadership. You can't always have the shiniest toys and expect the piper doesn't demand payment. Too many cities, local gov'ts, etc, don't quite get this.
Quote from: MomofMUltiples on April 20, 2016, 08:42:59 PM
No longer true. Beijing is also ready to take the games on a moment's notice, and i've heard they are the first option if Rio falls through.
This makes a lot of sense... If Site A is no longer viable, why choose a Site B when Site C is 10x more corrupt.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on April 20, 2016, 07:53:17 PM
Boston was going to be the US nominee for 2024, but local concerns about finances caused them to give it up.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/sports/olympics/boston-2024-summer-olympics-bid-terminated.html?_r=0
LA was submitted for 2024 instead of Boston because they have all the facilities already.
Beijing just won the 2022 Winter Olympics. They are using all the facilities from 2008. They only have to build like a bobsled course and something for skiing.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 20, 2016, 09:35:39 PM
Chicago doesn't have a big enough stadium for the opening ceremony and track. They could pull off most other things with the UC, soldier field, mccormick place and the lake but the track is an issue. Plus no olympic village either.
Chicago is not even remotely close to pulling off the Olympics now. As I noted above, their is only one city in the world that naturally has all the facilities needed ... LA/Orange County.
Chicago currently has no venues for
* rowing (river to small, lake to wavy),
* white-water rafting,
* equestrian,
* swimming complex (no pool with 10,000 seats),
* tennis complex (no tennis stadium with 15,000 seats),
* soccer (need multiple 50,000 to 100,000 seat stadiums).
* velodrome (with 5,000 to 10,000 seating).
* shooting range with seats.
* golf course willing to have 10,000 to 30,000 fans trample it.
* mountain biking (Chicago is pretty flat, plan was to have this in southern WI near Alpine valley)
* field hockey
* rugby
Additionally,
* the UIC could host boxing (which was the plan) and that takes the entire games.
* McCormick could host gymnastics (which was the plan) but that also takes the entire games.
So what is the indoor venue for ...
* tables tennis,
* weightlifting,
* archery
* handball
* judo
* fencing
* water polo
* Taekwondo
* shooting
* badminton
* basketball (need more than the UC)
* wrestling
_______________
remember this is the Olympics, millions will descend on the city. All these events have thousands that want to attend. Cannot host them at some High school with decent facilities, like asking the NCAA to host the FF in the Mecca.
Quote from: Heisenberg on April 21, 2016, 11:22:03 AM
Chicago is not even remotely close to pulling off the Olympics now. As I noted above, their is only one city in the world that naturally has all the facilities needed ... LA/Orange County.
Chicago currently has no venues for
* rowing (river to small, lake to wavy),
* white-water rafting,
* equestrian,
* swimming complex (no pool with 10,000 seats),
* tennis complex (no tennis stadium with 15,000 seats),
* soccer (need multiple 50,000 to 100,000 seat stadiums).
* velodrome (with 5,000 to 10,000 seating).
* shooting range with seats.
That's never stopped people before. Just put up a few folding chairs on the south side and you're good.
Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on April 21, 2016, 07:54:59 AM
LA was submitted for 2024 instead of Boston because they have all the facilities already.
Beijing just won the 2022 Winter Olympics. They are using all the facilities from 2008. They only have to build like a bobsled course and something for skiing.
Notice the trend with the winter games ...
2014 - Sochi
2018 - Pyeongchang, South Korea
2022 - Bejing
And the summer games ...
2008 - Bejing
2016 - Rio
and the world cup ...
2010 - South Africa
2014 - Brazil
2018 - Russia
2022 - Qatar
-------------------
The developed world does not want these events anymore. They cost too much money. The developing world, usually run by some strongman, loves them as they think they are bragging events for their legitimacy.
I think all three events are at risk unless they start putting serious spending caps on their costs. The IOC and FIFA have no such interest as they are as corrupt as any international organizations in the world today.
Quote from: Heisenberg on April 21, 2016, 11:32:50 AM
Notice the trend with the winter games ...
2014 - Sochi
2018 - Pyeongchang, South Korea
2022 - Bejing
And the summer games ...
2008 - Bejing
2016 - Rio
and the world cup
2010 - South Africa
2014 - Brazil
2018 - Russia
2022 - Qatar
-------------------
The developed world does not want these events anymore. They cost too much money. The developing world, usually run by some strongman, love them as they think they are bragging events for their legitimacy.
I think all three events are at risk unless they start putting serious spending caps on their costs. The IOC and FIFA have no such interest as they are as corrupt as any international organizations in the world today.
It is false to say that the developed world does not want the World Cup.
For 2018, England bid and joint bids were submitted by Spain/Portugal and Netherlands/Belgium
For 2022, the US, South Korea, Japan and Australia all submitted bids.
The US is likely going to bid on the 2026 Cup, along with Canada, England, Australia and others.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on April 21, 2016, 11:36:33 AM
It is false to say that the developed world does not want the World Cup.
For 2018, England bid and joint bids were submitted by Spain/Portugal and Netherlands/Belgium
For 2022, the US, South Korea, Japan and Australia all submitted bids.
The US is likely going to bid on the 2026 Cup, along with Canada, England, Australia and others.
Their not submitting the unlimited bids that the developing world is submitting, which is why the developed world is not hosting these events.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on April 21, 2016, 11:31:47 AM
That's never stopped people before. Just put up a few folding chairs on the south side and you're good.
Nice!
Each host city is allowed a demonstration sport. Maybe Chicago could have "drive by" as its sport.
Quote from: Heisenberg on April 21, 2016, 11:44:02 AM
Their not submitting the unlimited bids that the developing world is submitting, which is why the developed world is not hosting these events.
If by "submitting the unlimited bids" you mean "bribing FIFA officials," I agree with you.
Heisy I'm not saying you're wrong Chicago couldn't hold the games in a pinch but a lot of things you mentioned they have. McCormick place is HUGE, they can hold more than just gymnastics for table tennis, weight lifting, fencing etc. For golf, they were gonna use the cousins for the western open. Soccer, soldier field, northwesterns football stadium, U of I etc.
Even equestrian they had a course down state they were gonna use. Again, it would be an absolute logistical nightmare but closer than you think.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on April 21, 2016, 11:55:32 AM
If by "submitting the unlimited bids" you mean "bribing FIFA officials," I agree with you.
Correct, the IOC and FIFA all but demand a ridiculous amount of spending on venues and bribes for them.
Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on April 21, 2016, 07:54:59 AM
Beijing just won the 2022 Winter Olympics. They are using all the facilities from 2008. They only have to build like a bobsled course and something for skiing.
And create some actual snow.
Quote from: Heisenberg on April 21, 2016, 11:22:03 AM
Chicago is not even remotely close to pulling off the Olympics now. As I noted above, their is only one city in the world that naturally has all the facilities needed ... LA/Orange County.
Chicago currently has no venues for
* rowing (river to small, lake to wavy),
* white-water rafting,
* equestrian,
* swimming complex (no pool with 10,000 seats),
* tennis complex (no tennis stadium with 15,000 seats),
* soccer (need multiple 50,000 to 100,000 seat stadiums).
* velodrome (with 5,000 to 10,000 seating).
* shooting range with seats.
* golf course willing to have 10,000 to 30,000 fans trample it.
* mountain biking (Chicago is pretty flat, plan was to have this in southern WI near Alpine valley)
* field hockey
* rugby
Additionally,
* the UIC could host boxing (which was the plan) and that takes the entire games.
* McCormick could host gymnastics (which was the plan) but that also takes the entire games.
So what is the indoor venue for ...
* tables tennis,
* weightlifting,
* archery
* handball
* judo
* fencing
* water polo
* Taekwondo
* shooting
* badminton
* basketball (need more than the UC)
* wrestling
_______________
remember this is the Olympics, millions will descend on the city. All these events have thousands that want to attend. Cannot host them at some High school with decent facilities, like asking the NCAA to host the FF in the Mecca.
Thanks for this. This post got me thinking (some of your posts do not--lol). The list points out the almost silly range of physical attributes for an Olympic site. Setting aside all the uber expensive yet rarely used venues like velodromes and large swim arenas....the site also needs ocean water (sailing), rivers (rowing), hills/mountains (biking). Consider that the Olympic shopping list also includes stadiums and built up venues for all their myriad of sports, housing, transportation, etc. Since Atlanta and LA, they have added more sports, further straining the ever expanding scope of this event.
I wonder if its time for the Olympics to consider that the scope of the games, number of sports, differing geography required, expanding number of venue has rendered them a bloated greedy overly ambitious seller of a circus maximus.
The fact that cities compete, and that there always seems to be a greater fool city to chase their five golden rings is fine by me. That the Olympics pit cities against each other to vie for hosting is also OK. I guess I object to the IOC's ever expanding sports tent....to me its too big...whats next skateboarding, roller hockey, bmx, etc? Bigger and bigger is not better
Oh yeah...and Rythmic (ribbon) Gymnastics is not a sport
Quote from: houwarrior on April 21, 2016, 02:33:38 PM
Thanks for this. This post got me thinking (some of your posts do not--lol). The list points out the almost silly range of physical attributes for an Olympic site. Setting aside all the uber expensive yet rarely used venues like velodromes and large swim arenas....the site also needs ocean water (sailing), rivers (rowing), hills/mountains (biking). Consider that the Olympic shopping list also includes stadiums and built up venues for all their myriad of sports, housing, transportation, etc. Since Atlanta and LA, they have added more sports, further straining the ever expanding scope of this event.
I wonder if its time for the Olympics to consider that the scope of the games, number of sports, differing geography required, expanding number of venue has rendered them a bloated greedy overly ambitious seller of a circus maximus.
The fact that cities compete, and that there always seems to be a greater fool city to chase their five golden rings is fine by me. That the Olympics pit cities against each other to vie for hosting is also OK. I guess I object to the IOC's ever expanding sports tent....to me its too big...whats next skateboarding, roller hockey, bmx, etc? Bigger and bigger is not better
Oh yeah...and Rythmic (ribbon) Gymnastics is not a sport
I top of all of the above ... the number of ATHLETES that will participate in the Rio games is now more than 10,000!
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on April 21, 2016, 11:36:33 AM
It is false to say that the developed world does not want the World Cup.
For 2018, England bid and joint bids were submitted by Spain/Portugal and Netherlands/Belgium
For 2022, the US, South Korea, Japan and Australia all submitted bids.
The US is likely going to bid on the 2026 Cup, along with Canada, England, Australia and others.
Not to mention, specific to the world cup, fifa made a concerted effort to get "other" countries (non US, Europe) as hosts. This was supposedly all part of sepp blatters initiative to bring more structured development/infrastructure to 2nd/3rd world soccer countries
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 21, 2016, 09:31:46 PM
Not to mention, specific to the world cup, fifa made a concerted effort to get "other" countries (non US, Europe) as hosts. This was supposedly all part of sepp blatters initiative to bring more structured development/infrastructure to 2nd/3rd world soccer countries
As John Oliver says ..."FIFA is an international criminal organization, which occasionally stages soccer matches ..."
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 21, 2016, 12:04:14 PM
Heisy I'm not saying you're wrong Chicago couldn't hold the games in a pinch but a lot of things you mentioned they have. McCormick place is HUGE, they can hold more than just gymnastics for table tennis, weight lifting, fencing etc. For golf, they were gonna use the cousins for the western open. Soccer, soldier field, northwesterns football stadium, U of I etc.
Even equestrian they had a course down state they were gonna use. Again, it would be an absolute logistical nightmare but closer than you think.
White water rafting was going to be out in Rockford.
Quote from: houwarrior on April 21, 2016, 02:33:38 PM
Oh yeah...and Rythmic (ribbon) Gymnastics is not a sport
I've long felt that any competition where the winner is decided by a judge rather than a clock or scoreboard is not really a sport, even if the competitors are tremendous athletes. After all, the Olympic motto is "Faster, higher, stronger," not "more graceful in the eyes of at least 3 out of 5 judges." But I actually liked rhythmic gymnastics. Especially the part where they throw the ball around. It was basically a really good circus act. I'd rather watch that than regular gymnastics.
Quote from: PTM on April 22, 2016, 07:13:17 AM
White water rafting was going to be out in Rockford.
Whitewater rafting Capitol of northern Illinois!
Quote from: houwarrior on April 21, 2016, 02:33:38 PM
Thanks for this. This post got me thinking (some of your posts do not--lol). The list points out the almost silly range of physical attributes for an Olympic site. Setting aside all the uber expensive yet rarely used venues like velodromes and large swim arenas....the site also needs ocean water (sailing), rivers (rowing), hills/mountains (biking). Consider that the Olympic shopping list also includes stadiums and built up venues for all their myriad of sports, housing, transportation, etc. Since Atlanta and LA, they have added more sports, further straining the ever expanding scope of this event.
I wonder if its time for the Olympics to consider that the scope of the games, number of sports, differing geography required, expanding number of venue has rendered them a bloated greedy overly ambitious seller of a circus maximus.
Agreed. This is why developed countries/cities are getting more wary of hosting the Olympics, and a fundamental difference from something like the World Cup.
The scope of the Olympics is ever expanding, which leads to a need for venues that are so sport-specific that they are often useless once the games are over. In contrast, the World Cup can use soccer/football stadiums that already exist, and will have a purpose long after the Cup is over.
Quote from: houwarrior on April 21, 2016, 02:33:38 PM
Thanks for this. This post got me thinking (some of your posts do not--lol). The list points out the almost silly range of physical attributes for an Olympic site. Setting aside all the uber expensive yet rarely used venues like velodromes and large swim arenas....the site also needs ocean water (sailing), rivers (rowing), hills/mountains (biking). Consider that the Olympic shopping list also includes stadiums and built up venues for all their myriad of sports, housing, transportation, etc. Since Atlanta and LA, they have added more sports, further straining the ever expanding scope of this event.
I wonder if its time for the Olympics to consider that the scope of the games, number of sports, differing geography required, expanding number of venue has rendered them a bloated greedy overly ambitious seller of a circus maximus.
The fact that cities compete, and that there always seems to be a greater fool city to chase their five golden rings is fine by me. That the Olympics pit cities against each other to vie for hosting is also OK. I guess I object to the IOC's ever expanding sports tent....to me its too big...whats next skateboarding, roller hockey, bmx, etc? Bigger and bigger is not better
Oh yeah...and Rythmic (ribbon) Gymnastics is not a sport
THANK YOU. It's about frickin' time.
Quote from: Benny B on April 22, 2016, 12:10:35 PM
THANK YOU. It's about frickin' time.
And synchronized swimming....
Quote from: GooooMarquette on April 22, 2016, 09:27:53 AM
Agreed. This is why developed countries/cities are getting more wary of hosting the Olympics, and a fundamental difference from something like the World Cup.
The scope of the Olympics is ever expanding, which leads to a need for venues that are so sport-specific that they are often useless once the games are over. In contrast, the World Cup can use soccer/football stadiums that already exist, and will have a purpose long after the Cup is over.
The World Cup is hosted by Countries, the Olympics by cities.
Large developed countries can make a case for 12 major 100,000 or so soccer stadiums. Large countries, like the US or Germany probably have them ready and only need to refurbish some of them and they are good to go.
Developed countries like South Africa, Brazil and Qatar do not need all these stadiums. They is why they build them from scratch and many of them have not been used since. It is a waste of time, money and resources.
The Olympics is one city and its surrounding area. To build world class facilities for two weeks is a giant waste of money. For instance, Chicago would have built a 15,000 outdoor seat tennis stadium and 40 courts in a giant tennis complex that would rival Flushing Meadows NY (US Open) or Indian Wells CA. What would Chicago do with that after the games? Bid for a ATP/WTA
(professional) tournament? That's 1 week a year. What about the other 51? Host the State High School tournament? That two more weekends a year (boys and then girls). Maybe they could get creative and host the B1G championships or even the NCAA. But that would not be every year and would only use it a few more days a year. What about the other 340 or so days in the year?
Multiply this example by about 15 and you'll understand why Boston bailed on the games, and they should have. As I noted before, LA/Orange county is the only City in the world that already has every venue at a world class level. Maybe LA should be the preferment home. Anti-Americanism prevents this from ever being an option.
This is why the Olympics games might be doomed (in the next decade or two) unless they make major changes like cutting back (hard) on the sports or not demand the massive and ridiculous infrastructure build-out they do now.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on April 20, 2016, 09:34:40 PM
LA smartly used existing facilities or built facilities that were reused. Atlanta too. And those games were 32 and 20 years ago.
But I have no doubt that Chicago would have blown their budget completely.
It is my understanding that the Braves will be moving into their new ballpark next year. "Turner Field" will be undergoing it second refit to accommodate Georgia State Football. I guess by hosting the Olympics you can get a new ball park every 20 years or so.
Quote from: PTM on April 22, 2016, 07:13:17 AM
White water rafting was going to be out in Rockford.
?
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5d/0f/2a/5d0f2a0ad7b4f0ad123a8277ea1b6006.jpg)
I'm not buying the SLC argument.
Summer Olympics >>>> Winter Olympics.
Sure, it took leadership and management to keep costs controlled and I recognize that.
However, it just seems like the Summer Olympics are just a different beast and more widely viewed.
Am I wrong?
Quote from: CTWarrior on April 22, 2016, 09:21:40 AM
I've long felt that any competition where the winner is decided by a judge rather than a clock or scoreboard is not really a sport, even if the competitors are tremendous athletes.
So, boxing isn't a sport?
Quote from: warriorchick on April 24, 2016, 02:08:08 PM
So, boxing isn't a sport?
I'm sure Bags would agree with me but Olympic boxing scoring is one of the worst scoring systems in all of sports.
Quote from: houwarrior on April 22, 2016, 03:30:14 AM
As John Oliver says ..."FIFA is an international criminal organization, which occasionally stages soccer matches ..."
Didn't he say that about the US gov't too?
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on April 24, 2016, 01:09:11 PM
I'm not buying the SLC argument.
Summer Olympics >>>> Winter Olympics.
Sure, it took leadership and management to keep costs controlled and I recognize that.
However, it just seems like the Summer Olympics are just a different beast and more widely viewed.
Am I wrong?
Well, most of the winter games have lost money, too. SLC didn't, of course it was on track too and then they got good management in there that turned things around.
Nagano, Torino, Sochi, Albertville all lost money. Vancouver and SLC were the exceptions.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 24, 2016, 03:39:18 PM
Well, most of the winter games have lost money, too. SLC didn't, of course it was on track too and then they got good management in there that turned things around.
Nagano, Torino, Sochi, Albertville all lost money. Vancouver and SLC were the exceptions.
Probably because Vancouver had much of the infrastructure in place. When I think winter and snow, I sure as hell don't think of Italy or Japan
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 24, 2016, 04:01:48 PM
Probably because Vancouver had much of the infrastructure in place. When I think winter and snow, I sure as hell don't think of Italy or Japan
You don't think of the Italian Alps? Nozawa Onsen, Hakuba or Shiga Kogen? World class skiing in both countries.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 24, 2016, 04:01:48 PM
Probably because Vancouver had much of the infrastructure in place. When I think winter and snow, I sure as hell don't think of Italy or Japan
Read a book.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 24, 2016, 04:07:40 PM
You don't think of the Italian Alps? Nozawa Onsen, Hakuba or Shiga Kogen? World class skiing in both countries.
See Ive been skiing once and hated it so when I think of winter sports it's hockey, speed skating and bobsled for me.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 24, 2016, 04:13:31 PM
See Ive been skiing once and hated it so when I think of winter sports it's hockey, speed skating and bobsled for me.
You hated it cause you fell down too often chitown. City boy.
Quote from: jsglow on April 24, 2016, 04:20:34 PM
You hated it cause you fell down too often chitown. City boy.
I couldn't get off the damn bunny hill. It was awful.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 24, 2016, 04:45:43 PM
I couldn't get off the damn bunny hill. It was awful.
Take glow and chick jr. with you next time. You'll ski.
Quick funny skiing story Chi. There's a point where every kid passes his old man athletically. For my son and I that happened in deep powder at 11,000 feet at Alta. Damn kid nearly left me to die up there.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 24, 2016, 04:13:31 PM
See Ive been skiing once and hated it so when I think of winter sports it's hockey, speed skating and bobsled for me.
So speed skating and bobsledding went better for you? ;)
Quote from: GooooMarquette on April 24, 2016, 08:22:55 PM
So speed skating and bobsledding went better for you? ;)
Touche, I think it's just because the rink I used to play hockey at is where Shani Davis used to train.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 24, 2016, 03:39:18 PM
Well, most of the winter games have lost money, too. SLC didn't, of course it was on track too and then they got good management in there that turned things around.
Nagano, Torino, Sochi, Albertville all lost money. Vancouver and SLC were the exceptions.
No doubt there is management involved here but the # of events and participating countries is limited in the Winter Games (as opposed to the Summer Games) and that is a big factor in why the Summer Games costs are much greater and harder to contain.
"The Summer Olympics includes 28 sports with 38 disciplines and the Winter Olympics includes seven sports with 15 disciplines.
Following the 2002 Games, the IOC decided to limit the program of the Summer Games to a maximum of 28 sports, 301 events, and 10,500 athletes."
SOCHI 2014: "98 events over 15 disciplines in 7 sports were included in the 2014 Winter Olympics....Over 2,800 athletes participated from 88 National Olympic Committees + 1 Independent entry."
LONDON 2012: "26 sports, featuring 39 disciplines, were contested during the Games across 34 venues...about 10,500 athletes from 204 National Olympic Committees (countries)"
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on April 24, 2016, 08:45:38 PM
Touche, I think it's just because the rink I used to play hockey at is where Shani Davis used to train.
About my 5th grade...There was a public park rink about 3 blocks from my house in Madison, where I was playing (badly) in a pickup hockey game.
I got kicked off the ice (deservedly, as I sucked) when some other guys arrived. A group joined that included....A local guy from a speed skating family (his brother was in my grade school class) and a couple really good players (all around my age). They were REALLY good...but I enjoyed watching
In historical hindsight it was pretty cool watching hockey played at lil' ole' Westmoreland Park rink by Eric Heiden (5 Olymp Golds), Mark Johnson, and Bob Suter (both, later on the Miracle on Ice hockey team). Small damn world
Quote from: PTM on April 22, 2016, 07:13:17 AM
White water rafting was going to be out in Rockford.
It's white water kayaking and it was going to be in the lagoon in Lincoln Park, at a cost of several hundred million to tear it up and redesign it for that purpose.
But that is cheaper than the estimated 500 million to build a massive break front on the lake for the rowing events. That way the city would have been in the background.
-----
At the time of the bidding I remember joking with a few members of the Chicago2016 group that since the US won 36 gold medals in Beijing in 2008, I would use that as the over/under on the number of indictments for bribery, fraud and corruption in connection with building all the venues. Everyone agreed you should take the over.
And if you think we were kidding ... Google "Michael Scott Chicago Olympics". He was real estate developer heavy into Chicago politics through Cook county President John Stoger and Governor Blago. He lead a group of highly connected Chicago politicial types that purchased land near Washington Park, the site of the cycling Veldrome if Chicago won the bid. Of course their plan was to sell the land to Chicago2016 at a huge profit. And yes they bought the land before the final draft said the Veldrome was going in that spot, so "they knew."
Chicago lost the Olympic bid in October 2009. In November 2009 Scott was found floating in the Chicago River near the Merchandise Mart with a gun shot to the head. The corner ruled it a sucide, apparently Scott shot himself in the head and then threw himself in the river. Nothing to see here folks, case closed.
The Olympics were going to be The ultimate kid in the candy store for Chicago corruption. I'm glad Chicago didn't get it because I'm not sure it could've survived everybody trying to get their pound of flesh out of that project. Think bloody meet in the water with the school of sharks.
Quote from: houwarrior on April 24, 2016, 11:09:54 PM
About my 5th grade...There was a public park rink about 3 blocks from my house in Madison, where I was playing (badly) in a pickup hockey game.
I got kicked off the ice (deservedly, as I sucked) when some other guys arrived. A group joined that included....A local guy from a speed skating family (his brother was in my grade school class) and a couple really good players (all around my age). They were REALLY good...but I enjoyed watching
In historical hindsight it was pretty cool watching hockey played at lil' ole' Westmoreland Park rink by Eric Heiden (5 Olymp Golds), Mark Johnson, and Bob Suter (both, later on the Miracle on Ice hockey team). Small damn world
Very cool.
Quote from: Heisenberg on April 25, 2016, 04:58:44 AM
It's white water kayaking and it was going to be in the lagoon in Lincoln Park, at a cost of several hundred million to tear it up and redesign it for that purpose.
But that is cheaper than the estimated 500 million to build a massive break front on the lake for the rowing events. That way the city would have been in the background.
-----
At the time of the bidding I remember joking with a few members of the Chicago2016 group that since the US won 36 gold medals in Beijing in 2008, I would use that as the over/under on the number of indictments for bribery, fraud and corruption in connection with building all the venues. Everyone agreed you should take the over.
And if you think we were kidding ... Google "Michael Scott Chicago Olympics". He was real estate developer heavy into Chicago politics through Cook county President John Stoger and Governor Blago. He lead a group of highly connected Chicago politicial types that purchased land near Washington Park, the site of the cycling Veldrome if Chicago won the bid. Of course their plan was to sell the land to Chicago2016 at a huge profit. And yes they bought the land before the final draft said the Veldrome was going in that spot, so "they knew."
Chicago lost the Olympic bid in October 2009. In November 2009 Scott was found floating in the Chicago River near the Merchandise Mart with a gun shot to the head. The corner ruled it a sucide, apparently Scott shot himself in the head and then threw himself in the river. Nothing to see here folks, case closed.
The Olympics were going to be The ultimate kid in the candy store for Chicago corruption. I'm glad Chicago didn't get it because I'm not sure it could've survived everybody trying to get their pound of flesh out of that project. Think bloody meet in the water with the school of sharks.
Shoulda stayed at Dunder Mifflin.
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1607/1607.04484.pdf
Hoopaloopin' here. A study was done about how much it costs to actually host an Olympics, overruns vs. projections, etc. Bottom line, it always overruns projections and it usually is a money loser.