Boston Mayor to Olympics: Get Lost!

[Olympic Fan]

I actually kind of like this response:

http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/13325501/boston-mayor-marty-walsh-refuses-sign-host-contract-2024-olympics

Personally, I think the IOC is only slightly less corrupt than FIBA. Every locale that has hosted the Olympics in the last few decades has spent millions and millions of taxpayer money.

[weezie]

I heart Irish people.

[Tom B.]

I actually kind of like this response:

http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/13325501/boston-mayor-marty-walsh-refuses-sign-host-contract-2024-olympics

Personally, I think the IOC is only slightly less corrupt than FIBA. Every locale that has hosted the Olympics in the last few decades has spent millions and millions of taxpayer money.


Charles Pierce wrote this great piece (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-boston-olympic-debacle/) for Grantland a few months ago about the prospect of Boston bidding for and hosting the Olympics. It's worth a re-read now. My favorite line:


And then, of course, there is the simple fact that nobody except authoritarian billionaires ever would get into business with the IOC, which, if it weren’t for the horror show at FIFA, would be recognized as the world’s worst and most entitled group of defrocked royalty and international swindlers since the demise of the Romanovs.

[duke79]

As a tax-paying citizen of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I can only say Thank God.....for this decision. Boston hosting the Olympics had the strong possibility of being one of the greatest boondoggles in history. I have zero faith that the politicians in this state could ever run such a huge event in a competent manner and undoubtedly the taxpayers would be left holding the bag for the billions of dollars of cost overruns.

[cspan37421]

Personally, I think the IOC is only slightly less corrupt than FIBA.

FIBA or FIFA?

[sagegrouse]

As a tax-paying citizen of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I can only say Thank God.....for this decision. Boston hosting the Olympics had the strong possibility of being one of the greatest boondoggles in history. I have zero faith that the politicians in this state could ever run such a huge event in a competent manner and undoubtedly the taxpayers would be left holding the bag for the billions of dollars of cost overruns.

Then, kind Sir or Madam, why did Boston and the commonwealth fight so hard to get the USOC nod as the Olympic host? It screws the other potential U.S. candidates.

[Olympic Fan]

FIBA or FIFA?

Sorry ... I obviously meant FIFA ... don't know how corrupt FIBA might be, but it's not in a class with the FIFA crooks (or the IOC crooks)

[Indoor66]

Then, kind Sir or Madam, why did Boston and the commonwealth fight so hard to get the USOC nod as the Olympic host? It screws the other potential U.S. candidates.

Maybe that was a blessing in disguise for "the other potential U.S. candidates".

IMO the Olympics are a bloated, over indulged extravaganza. They need to be scaled back to being a rational sports event utilizing, mostly, existing facilities and getting the event back to athletics rather than urban renewal.

[Olympic Fan]

Then, kind Sir or Madam, why did Boston and the commonwealth fight so hard to get the USOC nod as the Olympic host? It screws the other potential U.S. candidates.

I would argue that Boston and the Commonwealth NEVER fought hard to get the USOC nod as the Olympic host. The fight was from a committee of powerful million/billionaires (headed by a familiar name to Duke fans -- Steve Pagliuca). The project never had more than lukewarm support from public officials or the public. Governor Baker has NEVER endorsed the project. The mayor has been wishy-washy in his support -- at one point he said he would sign the require contract (the one he refused to sigh that killed the Boston bid), but he's always expressed skepticism about the project. As for public support, no poll has shown that even 50 percent of Boston residents support bringing the Olympics to the hub.

So how did Boston win the USOC vote as the US city to bid for the games? All I can suggest is that we go back and revisit the corruption of that organization.

[77devil]

Maybe that was a blessing in disguise for "the other potential U.S. candidates".

IMO the Olympics are a bloated, over indulged extravaganza. They need to be scaled back to being a rational sports event utilizing, mostly, existing facilities and getting the event back to athletics rather than urban renewal.

Hosting the Olympics is an albatross. Very rarely does the host profit. Ask Montreal, for example, that I believe is still in the red from 1976.

The economics of hosting typically, and conveniently, ignore the opportunity cost of displaced tourism. Boston is full every summer.
The marginal return relative to new capital would be a loser for Boston.

The mayor made the right call notwithstanding the insiders who will miss out feeding at the trough.

As far as the other U.S. cities, only LA makes any sense. D.C. would be an economic and logistical disaster and S.F. is much like Boston-too small and already full. CA government is in such bad economic shape, the voters should pass a resolution that no net public money be spent. That would put an end to it.

[sagegrouse]

Hosting the Olympics is an albatross. Very rarely does the host profit. Ask Montreal, for example, that I believe is still in the red from 1976.

The economics of hosting typically, and conveniently, ignore the opportunity cost of displaced tourism. Boston is full every summer.
The marginal return relative to new capital would be a loser for Boston.

The mayor made the right call notwithstanding the insiders who will miss out feeding at the trough.

As far as the other U.S. cities, only LA makes any sense. D.C. would be an economic and logistical disaster and S.F. is much like Boston-too small and already full. CA government is in such bad economic shape, the voters should pass a resolution that no net public money be spent. That would put an end to it.

I don't have time to look it up, but I believe the 1984 LA Games (Peter Ueberroth) and the 1996 Atlanta Games (Billy Payne) were technically in the black. Now what infrastructure improvements were paid for separately I don't know.

[Olympic Fan]

I don't have time to look it up, but I believe the 1984 LA Games (Peter Ueberroth) and the 1996 Atlanta Games (Billy Payne) were technically in the black. Now what infrastructure improvements were paid for separately I don't know.

Not the greatest source, but according to Wikipedia, the Atlanta used $609 million in taxpayer money for infrastructure ... but beyond that, did make a $10 million profit. A classic example of a government-funded boondoggle (where did that profit go ... not back the taxpayers, I would guess).

The LA Games in 1984 supposedly made a profit of $200 million. but also used $75 million in taxpayer money (mostly to renovate the Coliseum and built a few small facilities for swimming and bike races). Did any of that profit go back to the taxpayers who forked over the $75 million?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games

The two most interesting entries to me are the 1998 Nagano Winter Games, which cost $10 billion in taxpayer money and ended up so unprofitable that the financial records were burned!

Also, Athens in 2004, ended up costing $10-15 million -- and is judged a factor in Greece's current financial crisis.

Apparently, Atlanta is the last olympics to cost taxpayers under several billions -- except for Beijing, where the government costs are not available (but are certainly well in the billions).

I think the reluctance of Boston officials to commit to likely costs in the billions is understandable and praiseworthy.

[gus]

I think the reluctance of Boston officials to commit to likely costs in the billions is understandable and praiseworthy.

Your username makes your criticism especially poignant.

[Olympic Fan]

Your username makes your criticism especially poignant.

I love the competition and the Olympic ideal ... alas, the modern reality -- especially the corruption behind the site selection process -- breaks my heart.

[sagegrouse]

Also, Athens in 2004, ended up costing $10-15 million -- and is judged a factor in Greece's current financial crisis.

.

I believe the figure is Billions.

Building stadiums and other facilities that will be around for decades probably has benefits beyond the Olympics and is open to discussion as "cost of the games."

BTW didja see that part of LA's bid for the games will be a fully renovated Coliseum, whose $500 million costs will be apparently paid for by the University of Southern California? (This assertion courtesy of NPR.) I'll have to check on what the plans are, but it is a obviously more than a touch up.

[BD80]

... Building stadiums and other facilities that will be around for decades probably has benefits beyond the Olympics and is open to discussion as "cost of the games."...

Generally not much of a discussion. What use do most municipalities have for a stadium with such a large capacity? Generally none.

The soccer stadia built by Brazil stand empty, functioning only as parking lots (see John Oliver's takedown of public financing of stadia for pro teams).

Closer to my home is the Pontiac Silverdome, host to Super Bowl XVI. It has lain vacant since the Lions moved back to Detroit and Ford Field. There are three drive-in theaters set up in the parking lot that occasionally get used.

[Dev11]

I believe the figure is Billions.

Building stadiums and other facilities that will be around for decades probably has benefits beyond the Olympics and is open to discussion as "cost of the games."

Turner Field will just barely reach the "decades" designation before it is razed in a few years.

[duke79]

Then, kind Sir or Madam, why did Boston and the commonwealth fight so hard to get the USOC nod as the Olympic host? It screws the other potential U.S. candidates.

Admittedly, this is pure speculation (although I have lived in Mass for almost my entire life, except for college and law school) but I think there is a certain percentage of the business class, the professional class (lawyers, doctors, etc), the politicians and other residents of the Boston area who have a chip on their shoulder and an inferiority complex and who think that Boston should be considered in the same league as the other great cities of the world - New York, London, Paris, Sydney, Tokyo, Moscow, etc. and they view hosting an Olympics as confirmation of Boston's inclusion in this list of great cities. I don't necessarily agree with them on Boston's importance to the world but I think that definitely played into the effort to get the Olympics to Massachusetts. However, I would be in favor of it, IF it could somehow be run on a reasonable budget and not bankrupt the state and city but I'm highly skeptical of that happening. Furthermore, even with improvements, I'm not sure the transportation infrastructure around Boston could ever efficiently handle such an influx of visitors at the same time. Hell, a few snowstorms this Winter almost shut down the entire city of Boston for weeks.

[brevity]

For a multitude of reasons -- including some based in corruption and some just practical -- the costs of being an Olympic Games host have become too prohibitive. It's too-big-to-succeed. At this point I really only see two plausible types of hosts for future Games:

1. Previous hosts with existing infrastructure and minimal updates required;
2. New hosts with global ambitions and money to burn.

It may never happen, but the IOC could consider awarding Olympic packages of two or more Games to potential bidding countries, rather than a single Olympic Games. For example, they could award Turkey the 2024 Summer Games (Istanbul) plus one of the following:

2026 or later Summer Youth Olympic Games (also governed by the IOC)
2036 or later Summer Games

If we keep the Youth Games out of this, we can see a scenario where 3 cities host the next 6 unassigned Summer Games.

2024, 2036 (Istanbul, Turkey)
2028, 2040 (Shanghai, China)
2032, 2044 (Charlotte, USA)

IOC members probably cannot see that scenario, as they would be wined and dined half as often.

[77devil]

I believe the figure is Billions.

Building stadiums and other facilities that will be around for decades probably has benefits beyond the Olympics and is open to discussion as "cost of the games."

BTW didja see that part of LA's bid for the games will be a fully renovated Coliseum, whose $500 million costs will be apparently paid for by the University of Southern California? (This assertion courtesy of NPR.) I'll have to check on what the plans are, but it is a obviously more than a touch up.

I had an interesting conversation with a noted economist in Athens while visiting the Gennadius Library at the American School of Classical Studies in late June. As it was during the brinksmanship between Greece and the Euro Zone, I was obviously interested in his take. At one point, he mentioned the disastrous impact of the 2004 Olympics, and the fact that all the venues go largely unused. This is most often the case, particularly when built from scratch. It took more than 30 years, for example, to pay off the debt for Montreal stadium which consistently losses money.

LA 1984 was a relative financial success as the result of using existing infrastructure as much as possible. The facilities at two major, plus other colleges and universities, the Coliseum, and other existing professional and amateur venues kept building costs to a minimum.

[weezie]

Turner Field will just barely reach the "decades" designation before it is razed in a few years.

:D:D:D sad but funny at the same time, smh.

One other question to the board, who thinks Caitlyn Jenner will be marching with the flag in front of the USA contingent in Rio?

[Tom B.]

LA 1984 was a relative financial success as the result of using existing infrastructure as much as possible. The facilities at two major, plus other colleges and universities, the Coliseum, and other existing professional and amateur venues kept building costs to a minimum.

L.A.'s extensive use of existing facilities was a big part of its success -- The Coliseum, The Forum, Pauley Pavilion, Long Beach Arena, and the L.A. Sports Arena all were used, as were other municipal and university venues around the greater L.A. area.

The other big part was the organizers' use of corporate sponsorship money to foot some of the bill. I think the only two facilities that were built from scratch for the L.A. Olympics were an aquatic center for the swimming and diving events, and a velodrome. McDonald's ponied up some of the dough for the aquatic center, and 7-Eleven kicked in for the velodrome, and each venue was named for its respective corporate contributor.

It's unclear if something like this could be repeated, though. While L.A. saved money by using existing facilities, it resulted in an Olympics that was georgraphically spread out. Track and field at the Coliseum, swimming and diving at USC, gymastics at UCLA, basketball in Inglewood, volleyball in Long Beach -- and other less high-profile sports even more widely dispersed. Now, the IOC wants the venues for at least the major draws (track and field, swimming/diving, gymnastics, and basketball) concentrated in a smaller area around a central, walkable "Olympic Center." That usually means new venues have to be built, even if acceptable venues already exist, because the existing ones aren't close enough together.

[Olympic Fan]

L.A.'s extensive use of existing facilities was a big part of its success -- The Coliseum, The Forum, Pauley Pavilion, Long Beach Arena, and the L.A. Sports Arena all were used, as were other municipal and university venues around the greater L.A. area.

The other big part was the organizers' use of corporate sponsorship money to foot some of the bill. I think the only two facilities that were built from scratch for the L.A. Olympics were an aquatic center for the swimming and diving events, and a velodrome. McDonald's ponied up some of the dough for the aquatic center, and 7-Eleven kicked in for the velodrome, and each venue was named for its respective corporate contributor.

It's unclear if something like this could be repeated, though. While L.A. saved money by using existing facilities, it resulted in an Olympics that was georgraphically spread out. Track and field at the Coliseum, swimming and diving at USC, gymastics at UCLA, basketball in Inglewood, volleyball in Long Beach -- and other less high-profile sports even more widely dispersed. Now, the IOC wants the venues for at least the major draws (track and field, swimming/diving, gymnastics, and basketball) concentrated in a smaller area around a central, walkable "Olympic Center." That usually means new venues have to be built, even if acceptable venues already exist, because the existing ones aren't close enough together.

But even with all this, the LA Olympics did cost taxpayers $75 million. I agree that's small compared to the billions lost since, but it ain't chump change.

And arguing that the communities got all these facilities -- like Turner field ... the taxpayers buy billionaire Ted Turner a new stadium on their dime ... and as thanks, the new owners of the Braves are ready barely two decades later to take the team out of town. Is that a good deal?

[crimsondevil]

But even with all this, the LA Olympics did cost taxpayers $75 million. I agree that's small compared to the billions lost since, but it ain't chump change.

Seems like a relevant question here is who gets the profit if there is any? The city, the organizers, the IOC, some combination? If the city, then LA did make money in 84: they got a $250M return on $75M capital. If the city gets little or none of the profit, then it's a raw deal for anywhere and I will start actively rooting for the U.S. to never host the Olympics again. Even in the first case, as Tom B. said, it would take some changes to the way the IOC wants the games to be run nowadays to make it worthwhile for the host.

[budwom]

Jean Drapeau, the former (male, to be clear) mayor of Montreal, famously declared before the 1976 Olympics there (what a fun time we had) that "the Olympics can no more run a deficit
than a man can have a baby." A cool billion dollar deficit later and the papers were filled with cartoons of the very pregnant Jean Drapeau. Ouch. They still have the World's Crappiest Baseball Park Ever, Stade
Olympique, to show for it, an empty dump in which (seriously) quite a few zombie movies have been filmed.

[sagegrouse]

L.A.'s extensive use of existing facilities was a big part of its success -- The Coliseum, The Forum, Pauley Pavilion, Long Beach Arena, and the L.A. Sports Arena all were used, as were other municipal and university venues around the greater L.A. area.

The other big part was the organizers' use of corporate sponsorship money to foot some of the bill. I think the only two facilities that were built from scratch for the L.A. Olympics were an aquatic center for the swimming and diving events, and a velodrome. McDonald's ponied up some of the dough for the aquatic center, and 7-Eleven kicked in for the velodrome, and each venue was named for its respective corporate contributor.

It's unclear if something like this could be repeated, though. While L.A. saved money by using existing facilities, it resulted in an Olympics that was georgraphically spread out. Track and field at the Coliseum, swimming and diving at USC, gymastics at UCLA, basketball in Inglewood, volleyball in Long Beach -- and other less high-profile sports even more widely dispersed. Now, the IOC wants the venues for at least the major draws (track and field, swimming/diving, gymnastics, and basketball) concentrated in a smaller area around a central, walkable "Olympic Center." That usually means new venues have to be built, even if acceptable venues already exist, because the existing ones aren't close enough together.

Tom, aren't most of these close together? The LA Coliseum, which would be the Olympic stadium again, is adjacent to the USC campus, where the swimming and diving could be held again, as well as other events. The LA Sports Arena is also on the Coliseum grounds. The Staples Center is only two miles away.

Kindly,
Sage
'The old Grand Olympic, which hosted boxing and wrestling at the 1932 Olympics, is also close by, but is now a Korean church and presumably not available'

[gus]

2. New hosts with global ambitions and money to burn.


I'm sure Qatar would be happy to have abused and underpaid Nepalese and Pakistanis build a 26.2 mile long air conditioned hallway.

[Tom B.]

Tom, aren't most of these close together? The LA Coliseum, which would be the Olympic stadium again, is adjacent to the USC campus, where the swimming and diving could be held again, as well as other events. The LA Sports Arena is also on the Coliseum grounds. The Staples Center is only two miles away.


Some are reasonably close together, but I think you'd still need a car or public transportation to move between them. The current model favored by the IOC (and that was used in London and Beijing -- not sure about Athens) has all the main venues clustered in a walkable park-like area.

And they'd need some new venues in L.A. I'm not sure the swimming and diving venue that was built on USC's campus for the 1984 Olympics could be used again -- it's an outdoor venue, and I think the IOC wants indoor venues for the aquatic sports now (nothing like swimming backstroke while staring into the sun, or dealing with the winds atop the 10-meter platform). And I doubt they'd use Pauley Pavilion again for gymnastics, as it's likely too old and too small. I think its capacity with the retractable lower-level seating removed, which is the configuration that would be used for gymnastics, is only about 13,000. Maybe they could find existing venues in the area that have been built since 1984 that would fit the bill -- but again, they might be more spread out, which the IOC won't like (especially for such high-profile sports).

[CameronBornAndBred]

With the ballooning costs for every set of games, at some point there will likely be a point at which no city/country will want to contribute their resources to a lost cause. With that thought in mind, I wonder if they would ever consider setting up a permanent games site. Have the games at the same location every time.

[budwom]

With the ballooning costs for every set of games, at some point there will likely be a point at which no city/country will want to contribute their resources to a lost cause. With that thought in mind, I wonder if they would ever consider setting up a permanent games site. Have the games at the same location every time.

The games will always appeal to some nation(s) as a propaganda fest...it's been this way forever....and I don't just mean in a hugely negative sense (e.g. Germany in the 1930s)...lots of countries are willing to spend ludicrous amounts of
money for the publicity and prestige value....certainly true of China and Russia recently...and my pals in Montreal in 1976 for that matter.

[Bostondevil]

Then, kind Sir or Madam, why did Boston and the commonwealth fight so hard to get the USOC nod as the Olympic host? It screws the other potential U.S. candidates.

Uhm, that wasn't Boston and the Commonwealth fighting. It was some wealthy white men who were doing it for personal reasons, most notable John Fish, CEO of Suffolk Construction Company. (Gee, I wonder what company was going to get most of the contracts to build stuff?) Their plan included using some venues at Harvard, btw, something they never bothered to discuss with Harvard before putting it into the plan.

[Bostondevil]

:D:D:D sad but funny at the same time, smh.

One other question to the board, who thinks Caitlyn Jenner will be marching with the flag in front of the USA contingent in Rio?

Nobody - it's an honor given to an athlete currently competing at the games. Next time the Olympics are in the US though, she will probably be one of the final torch bearers.

[Bostondevil]

And now for my third post in a row. I remember loving the Barcelona Olympics. Let's go back there! Remember the lovely, lovely views from the outdoor diving venue? Those platform divers were taking off with the city of Barcelona as a backdrop.

In truly wonderful Boston sports news, however, Boston IS hosting the 2016 World Figure Skating Championships!! I already have my lower level tickets. You have my permission to feel jealous. There are still good seats left! Come join me! ;-)


I know how to fix judging scandals in Olympic sports, btw. Quit playing national athems and raising flags. Let the competitors compete for themselves. Hold the national pride stuff when they get back home. Somebody told me that the whole national anthem playing was Hitler's idea. I can't confirm that, but I am repeating it. I do know that medals were distributed at the closing ceremony until 1932 where the victory podiums were introduced.

[devildeac]

And now for my third post in a row. I remember loving the Barcelona Olympics. Let's go back there! Remember the lovely, lovely views from the outdoor diving venue? Those platform divers were taking off with the city of Barcelona as a backdrop.

In truly wonderful Boston sports news, however, Boston IS hosting the 2016 World Figure Skating Championships!! I already have my lower level tickets. You have my permission to feel jealous. There are still good seats left! Come join me! ;-)


I know how to fix judging scandals in Olympic sports, btw. Quit playing national athems and raising flags. Let the competitors compete for themselves. Hold the national pride stuff when they get back home. Somebody told me that the whole national anthem playing was Hitler's idea. I can't confirm that, but I am repeating it. I do know that medals were distributed at the closing ceremony until 1932 where the victory podiums were introduced.

Uh-oh. Godwin's Law in the Olympics thread. Shut it down!:rolleyes::o

[Bostondevil]

Uh-oh. Godwin's Law in the Olympics thread. Shut it down!:rolleyes::o

Aw, c'mon, I didn't compare anybody to Nazi's. Just credited Hitler with what may have been a bad idea. Celebrate the athletes, not the country they were born in, or the one their parents were born in, or in the case of the Greek baseball team - the country their grandparents were born in.

[devildeac]

Aw, c'mon, I didn't compare anybody to Nazi's. Just credited Hitler with what may have been a bad idea. Celebrate the athletes, not the country they were born in, or the one their parents were born in, or in the case of the Greek baseball team - the country their grandparents were born in.

I know;). Just yanking your chain a bit. It wouldn't be DBR if we weren't invoking things like that and arguing about playing time, scoring, rebounding, who's gonna transfer and PSI...

[OldPhiKap]

I know;). Just yanking your chain a bit. It wouldn't be DBR if we weren't invoking things like that and arguing about playing time, scoring, rebounding, who's gonna transfer and PSI...

So, to be clear then -- you are the one who invoked Godwin's rule?

[CameronBornAndBred]

Just credited Hitler with what may have been a bad idea.
It's about time someone did!!

Your post is intriguing though...is he really the reason anthems are played? I had no idea, only that the '32 games were obviously a product of a propaganda machine. Obviously they have been politicized, as expected. Boycotts, terrorism, social statements (racial rights, gay rights) have seemingly been a part of the games forever. I like the nations being involved in the capacity that they are; I love the show of patriotism, and feeling as if we truly get to be a part of it. If I were simply rooting for Michael Phelps, I wouldn't care if he got a cramp on the last lap...but I LOVE rooting for the American that is chasing enough medals to fill a leprechaun's pot.
Of course we're spoiled in that we are always contenders, but the little guys seem to show up with just as much pride, even though they never medal.

[devildeac]

So, to be clear then -- you are the one who invoked Godwin's rule?

Semantics, I guess. My understanding was that the person that mentioned/invoked/interjected Mein Fuhrer and/or the Nazis into the discussion automatically activated Godwin's Law and the argument was forfeited/discussion closed. ;)

[OldPhiKap]

Semantics, I guess. My understanding was that the person that mentioned/invoked/interjected Mein Fuhrer and/or the Nazis into the discussion automatically activated Godwin's Law and the argument was forfeited/discussion closed. ;)

So, then, so I am clear -- who is anti-semantic?

(Okay, I'll stop)

[Bostondevil]

It's about time someone did!!

Your post is intriguing though...is he really the reason anthems are played? I had no idea, only that the '32 games were obviously a product of a propaganda machine. Obviously they have been politicized, as expected. Boycotts, terrorism, social statements (racial rights, gay rights) have seemingly been a part of the games forever. I like the nations being involved in the capacity that they are; I love the show of patriotism, and feeling as if we truly get to be a part of it. If I were simply rooting for Michael Phelps, I wouldn't care if he got a cramp on the last lap...but I LOVE rooting for the American that is chasing enough medals to fill a leprechaun's pot.
Of course we're spoiled in that we are always contenders, but the little guys seem to show up with just as much pride, even though they never medal.

Like I said, somebody told me it was Hitler's idea. I haven't found a second source, but, since it's just the DBR and I'm not a journalist, I can repeat it! ;-)

The victory podiums were first used in 1932 in Los Angeles, prior to that medals were handed out at the closing ceremonies and not after each event. I have been told but have not verified that the national anthems were added to the medal ceremonies in Berlin in 1936. Probably because someone wanted and expected to hear Deutschland Uber Alles over and over again.

[Bostondevil]

OK, I just did the research.

Sadly, my friend was wrong. The national anthems were first played in 1924.

Sigh. It was such a good story while it lasted.

[SoCalDukeFan]

Some are reasonably close together, but I think you'd still need a car or public transportation to move between them. The current model favored by the IOC (and that was used in London and Beijing -- not sure about Athens) has all the main venues clustered in a walkable park-like area.

And they'd need some new venues in L.A. I'm not sure the swimming and diving venue that was built on USC's campus for the 1984 Olympics could be used again -- it's an outdoor venue, and I think the IOC wants indoor venues for the aquatic sports now (nothing like swimming backstroke while staring into the sun, or dealing with the winds atop the 10-meter platform). And I doubt they'd use Pauley Pavilion again for gymnastics, as it's likely too old and too small. I think its capacity with the retractable lower-level seating removed, which is the configuration that would be used for gymnastics, is only about 13,000. Maybe they could find existing venues in the area that have been built since 1984 that would fit the bill -- but again, they might be more spread out, which the IOC won't like (especially for such high-profile sports).

I went to the London Olympics. Gymnastics and basketball were not at the central area, nor was soccer. To me the key to success in London was the public transportation system.

I would guess that LA came out way ahead in 1984, even if the taxpayers ponied up $75 Million.

Staples Center could replace Pauley for gymnastics.

SoCal

[BD80]

OK, I just did the research.

Sadly, my friend was wrong. The national anthems were first played in 1924.

Sigh. It was such a good story while it lasted.

Ah, now you are experiencing a small bit of what the carolina faithful have been going through. Facts can be just damn inconvenient

[OldPhiKap]

Ah, now you are experiencing a small bit of what the carolina faithful have been going through. Facts can be just damn inconvenient

"Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts don't stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape."

-- The Talking Heads

[CameronBornAndBred]

OK, I just did the research.

Sadly, my friend was wrong. The national anthems were first played in 1924.

Sigh. It was such a good story while it lasted.
Oh well...at least you were right that Hitler had bad ideas.

[Tom B.]

I went to the London Olympics. Gymnastics and basketball were not at the central area, nor was soccer. To me the key to success in London was the public transportation system.

I would guess that LA came out way ahead in 1984, even if the taxpayers ponied up $75 Million.

Staples Center could replace Pauley for gymnastics.


Huh -- guess I remembered wrong about London. I know there was a big cluster of venues in Beijing, and my recollection was that London had done basically the same thing. I looked it up, and London's Olympic Park contained the track and field stadium, the aquatic center, the basketball arena, the velodrome, the water polo arena (adjacent to the main aquatics center), a multi-purpose arena used for handball and fencing, the athletes' village, and the international media center.

As for the Staples Center, I figured that it would be the basketball venue for any future L.A. Olympic bid, much like The Forum hosted basketball in 1984. Maybe the L.A. Sports Arena could be used for gymnastics.

[Bostondevil]

Ah, now you are experiencing a small bit of what the carolina faithful have been going through. Facts can be just damn inconvenient

You are only allowed to compare me to a carolina fan in the deflategate thread.

[devildeac]

So, then, so I am clear -- who is anti-semantic?

(Okay, I'll stop)

Anti-semantic? Ok, wait for it, Hitler was (among many other evil things).

There, I've done it, too. Invoked Hitler for the 2nd time in the thread, thereby re-activating Godwin's Law and lending further credence to shutting this baby down. Have I made myself clear as water now? Or will we need further revival of this discussion. I'm done. :o

And, just to stagger back on topic, I think this is a great decision to forego further folly of the Boston Olympic bid.

[Bostondevil]

I didn't fight for it, I sure as hell don't want to pay for it, I would want to puncture the tires on the vehicles carrying "VIPs" in their dedicated lanes on the Pike (athletes excepted), but, if it had come to pass, a Boston Olympics would have been spectacular.

[Tom B.]

I didn't fight for it, I sure as hell don't want to pay for it, I would want to puncture the tires on the vehicles carrying "VIPs" in their dedicated lanes on the Pike (athletes excepted), but, if it had come to pass, a Boston Olympics would have been spectacular.


Meanwhile, the preparations for the 2016 Olympics in Rio are going just swimmingly.

Olympic Teams to Swim, Boat in Dangerously Contaminated Rio Waters (https://www.yahoo.com/health/olympic-teams-to-swim-boat-in-dangerously-125430705947.html)

Ew.

[rasputin]

OK, I just did the research.

Sadly, my friend was wrong. The national anthems were first played in 1924.

Sigh. It was such a good story while it lasted.

Did your research include watching Chariots of Fire?

[budwom]

and now Beijing gets the 2022 Winter (yes) Olympics, speaking of countries that don't mind spending billions of dollars for publicity and prestige... the fact
that they don't have mountains or snow doesn't matter, they can stack Tibetans and put snow on them, that should work just fine!

[Jim3k]

Tom, aren't most of these close together?

Some venues were far away. I saw an Olympic preliminary soccer game with my 8-year old daughter at Stanford in Palo Alto. About 350 miles by car. And about 60 from my house.

[Bostondevil]

Did your research include watching Chariots of Fire?

No. But I did listen to some Vangelis.

[Edouble]

"Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts don't stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape."

-- The Talking Heads

Minor quibble... this is one of my favorite bands. The band is Talking Heads, not The Talking Heads.

They actually have an album called The Name of This Band is Talking Heads.

[OldPhiKap]

Minor quibble... this is one of my favorite bands. The band is Talking Heads, not The Talking Heads.

They actually have an album called The Name of This Band is Talking Heads.

Yeah -- but I refuse to recognize that fact.

BTW -- Remain in Light has truly held up as one of the best studio albums produced IMO. But there is an OT thread for that discussion. . . .

[cspan37421]

and now Beijing gets the 2022 Winter (yes) Olympics, speaking of countries that don't mind spending billions of dollars for publicity and prestige... the fact
that they don't have mountains or snow doesn't matter, they can stack Tibetans and put snow on them, that should work just fine!

This decision is looking to be one of the more reasoned and principled stands in recent memory.

Putting financial considerations aside, I thought the Sochi decision was a little nuts for a winter olympics, but this shows that the decision was not a one-off thing. No snow? No problem! If you're a winter olympic athlete, you must look back on the notion that they were once held in Lillehammer and think it must have been a dream, something too good to be true.

[not that politics didn't play a role! But at least Norway has snow]

[SoCalDukeFan]

Huh -- guess I remembered wrong about London. I know there was a big cluster of venues in Beijing, and my recollection was that London had done basically the same thing. I looked it up, and London's Olympic Park contained the track and field stadium, the aquatic center, the basketball arena, the velodrome, the water polo arena (adjacent to the main aquatics center), a multi-purpose arena used for handball and fencing, the athletes' village, and the international media center.

As for the Staples Center, I figured that it would be the basketball venue for any future L.A. Olympic bid, much like The Forum hosted basketball in 1984. Maybe the L.A. Sports Arena could be used for gymnastics.

I think the early basketball games may have been played in the Olympic Park but the bronze and gold medal games were not.

I am somewhat torn on this. I have been to two Olympics and they were great. I think 1984 was good for LA. London did a superb job and my week was unbelievable. However it is pros, there is corruption, it can be expensive. I think LA could handle 2024 and would do well but I won't lose sleep if hey don't get it.

SoCal