Sorry for the double post but easier this way -- didn't find the exact piece I read but there are plenty out there.
[the above two feature many of the same photos]
This one has summer and winter venues:
It's amusing how we are talking about approving something that would break the dreams of so many children who they and their family sacrifice alot for them to pursue their dream in elite sports.
I believe the Olympics can work but they need to downsize it- in terms of making a competition format that is more TV appealing. Or the IOC can better invest in sporting associations, providing funding to help these sports get televised or get some sort of coverage on their own.
There are things about the Olympic movement that cannot be recreated at a World Championship but the world is changing. It's a shame that people write off the Winter Games as a joke because it's just insulting to the athletes who work so hard to make it so their story of sacrifice and determination to represent their nation can be heard and acknowledged once every four years.
^^ I understand your point about some of the building having no life after the Olympics. I agree that is a waste of resources on so many different levels.
However, some of the venues in the pictures above are 50+ years beyond their peak - they are obsolete and need to be torn down. I live in a neighborhood where the original homes that are 50+ years old; they are being torn down to make way for the new. Its called urban renewal.
Also Sarajevo did a have civil war there so what happened to those venues could be expected. The situation was so sad.
Since there are already world competitions in all the winter sports, I would have no problem with the Olympics being done away with. They have become much too costly and sometimes at a cost to the underprivileged of the country they are being held in.
@GF2445: Hmm, well, I guess I see little if anything in the current Olympic format that is laudable, so it it hard for me to take seriously the notion that this prone-to-corruption pageant is something worth saving for what to me would be misguided dreams. I would hope that athletes are pursuing excellence in their sports first and foremost, not an Olympic medal just for the sake of an Olympic medal. Not to mention that many peoples' lifelong dreams fail to materialize -- nobody now can seriously dream of a calling or profession in a lot of things that have changed, very recently. I have a lot of family members and friends in medical fields who are so disillusioned with the way medicine is right now and can't wait to retire or otherwise get out of it. That's a lot more tragic to me than wanting to get rid of the Olympics, or downsize them a lot. I could go on with other examples (the loss of true journalism also springs immediately to mind, with very personal examples), but a lot of things change and a lot of dreams remain castles in the air, and preserving dreams is not a reason to continue something so misguided and potentially harmful as the Olympics in their current format, imo.
Anyway, I just found your response so interesting. I couldn't imagine that view but am glad you shared it -- it certainly was informative.
@concorde -- you are right that many of the venues are old, but most of them had notes that they were used very little after the games or haven't been used in a while even if not completely derelict. Athens was only ten years ago -- that artificial whitewater stadium had to have been a colossal (pun intended) waste of resources. And Calgary -- the thing is, some of the venues are still in use, and notice some of the comments under those photos hotly stating that fact. So they could still be in use despite their age, at least in some cases. Bobsled/luge tracks could last for many, many decades, if maintained and if there were use for them. But many facilities fell immediately into decay, like those noted from Athens and Torino.
Agreed! Then they can actually complete the infrastructure they were hoping to finish for 2014.
Originally Posted by sky_fly20
This is very interesting situation for sure. It might come down to only 2 bidders left in this circle (Almaty VS Beijing). Both are from Asia and have major issues with Human Rights. Beijing also has an issue with air-pollution. IOC has a long road ahead for sure for the next coming year.
It's time for austerity then. I'm not an expert, but I think that host nations always want to make something huge in order to impress the world, spending mounts of money with luxurious arenas and instalations as result (Beijing comes to mind, but was not the only case of course). The main criteria for the host nation choice should include how much infrastructure is already done, while everything else should cost just the necessary. Corruption aside, Sochi was ultra expensive because everything had to be made from nothing there.
Yuna's Ice Rink
winter olympics doesn't have the prestige compared to summer olympics imo.. basically the countries competing are limited.. not all athletes can afford to compete in a winter sport..
I recall the days when the Winter Games were described as small, laid back, comfortable, "homey." Where the "true Olympic spirit" was more in evidence.
The Summer Games were always the showy, more vulgar, Games.
Now the two are inseparable.
Take the opening ceremonies, for example. Not that long ago, there were a few speeches, then the athletes marched in, a little music. The end. Now it's a four hour extravaganza.
ETA: The real factor in determining the number of participating nations in the Winter Games isn't money... heck Ethiopia has a pretty stellar Olympic program in track... but climate.
You just aren't going to get a lot of participating nations from the tropics, unless they happen have a few athletes who were raised in other nations. You really aren't going to find many home-grown alpine skiers from Nigeria.
In search of a summer sport to love <3
A friend I were just chatted about Rio the other day. I really doubt they'll be able to pull this off.
As far as 2022 goes, who knows what will happen. I don't think Almaty will draw tons of tourists. Too bad it's grow into too huge of a spectacle for the homey Lake Placid to host it.
That's sad :/
Originally Posted by rallycairn
Hmmm, I'm unsure if it's because Putin set the precedent of $50BN that required everyone to do the same thing. Vancouver was done for less than 1/10 of that, and Torino about the same ballpark figure. I would expect that whoever hosts next will want to look at the previous host cities as a case study to see what did and didn't work, and would NOT want be looking to spend the same amount of money that the Russians did.
Originally Posted by Meoima
I would be in favour of the games returning to a city that hosted within the previous 20 years or so, like Vancouver, Torino, Nagano, Lillehammer. They already have the infrastructure. The Russians did pull off Sochi despite initial hiccups (and what games don't have those?) and bad publicity in the West / some international press.
Or we could just have Innsbruck host them every year. :P
I do wonder though that Salzburg built everything for their 2014 bid ahead of time and it was done at minimal cost. If they're already in place, why did they not proceed to try for 2018, 2022? The games could use only existing venues. The 1948 summer games were done in London and were considered the "austerity games" due to it being after WWII (St. Moritz, as well), to the point that the athletes were advised to pack their own towels. But it was well-done and completed on a relatively small budget, with good attendance.
Everyone back to Lillehammer!! :P
Or if they return to Vancouver, they could use everything already in place, house the athletes on chartered cruise ships (since the Pacific coast cruises all seem to dock in Vancouver and use it as a home base - and I'm only half-joking about this), and the monorail and highway to Whistler are well-used there and in good working condition.
The Olympics are a dream for many athletes--the pinnacle of the sport and the ultimate goal they're chasing. Not even to win a medal--for most of them--but to simply be there. It's also a rare moment when people outside of the hardcore fanbase tunes in to certain sports. Fans are made there; I'm not sure certain sports could even survive without the Olympics.
It would be a shame if the Olympics were cancelled altogether because of monetary troubles or accusations of being too big a spectacle. That being said, the financial issues of hosting really need to be sorted out. Maybe we should just have the Olympics rotate between the places that already have the facilities? I imagine maintaining the infrastructure will cost less than building from scratch every time.