Tokyo Summer Olympic Games 2020 News

[Quaker2001 251]

25 minutes ago, Monzanator said:

@Quaker2001 Stan Kroenke build the SoFi stadium for LA Games. Let's don't pretend it's was Los Angeles money, it was Kroenke's private money. And I know you probably had the Memorial Coliseum in mind but with Coliseum alone LA's bid wouldn't be such a no-brainer. Other than the Gulf oil countries, Russia and China not a single country in the world can afford to host the Olympics without any care for public finances. I'm just waiting for Doha to host the Summer Olympics in 2030s, that is another no-brainer given how Qatar has pretty much raised their game into hosting the football World Cup, the second-biggest sportin event in the world after the OG.

No he didn't.  Not even close.  Yes, that's all Kroenke's money that built the stadium there, but he did that for him and his football team.  That the LA Olympic bid benefits from it is their good fortune, not Kroenke's desire to benefit them.

 

LA's bid still would have been a no brainer if it was centered around the Coliseum (which already had plans for a $270 million renovation, again privately funded).  If SoFi  hadn't been built, LA still would have the 2028 Olympics right now.  How would it have been different?

 

Los Angeles is in a very advantageous position that they can rely largely on private funding and a lot of the infrastructure projects going on in Southern California aren't tied to the Olympics.  They can do things almost no other city or country can do.  I don't know what we'll see in 2032 and beyond.  Doha is anything but a no-brainer, especially if the World Cup doesn't go so well (and it's a lot more infrastructure they'll need to pull that off than the World Cup).  Being able to afford an Olympics isn't just about having tons of cash on hand but having a plan in place that can be properly executed.  And the IOC needs to recognize that rather than pushing the "first ever Olympics in South America" agenda.  This is on them to entice more cities and work with them.  To do that, they need to be a less shitty organization.  Not sure I believe they have that capability though

[OlympicsFan 858]

It is very easy to reduce costs. Either you build less expansive venues or you reuse venues. Building less expansive venues usually means less capacities which means less ticket revenue and less chances for the local population to watch, so this isn’t really a good option. This means that the best option would be to reuse venues. In this day and age it is impossible to build a swimming stadium or a ski jumping hill and to get back the costs later by constantly hosting competitions there. This means that only cities that already have most of the venues should host the Olympics. In most cases those will be cities that hosted the games before. I also refuse to believe that the major cities I named earlier wouldn’t be able to open up 10-15k hotel beds for athletes if they know about it multiple years in advance, especially with more and more tourists choosing Airbnb over hotels. Of course this wouldn’t work for places like Sochi, which means that those places shouldn’t host the Olympics. Maybe the IOC could set a budget for all the possible hosts (say 1-2 billion dollars) or they could favor the bids with the most efficient budget, kind of how it is often done with construction projects.

[Orangehair43 251]

The new variants mean 2021 sporting calender might be just as disrupted as 2020 as more and more athletes cant leave or enter their own countries.

[rybak 3,217]

5 minutes ago, Orangehair43 said:

The new variants mean 2021 sporting calender might be just as disrupted as 2020 as more and more athletes cant leave or enter their own countries.

It's so sad to see that you can only complain and that you doesn't want post anything positive anywhere.

[Quaker2001 251]

8 minutes ago, Orangehair43 said:

The new variants mean 2021 sporting calender might be just as disrupted as 2020 as more and more athletes cant leave or enter their own countries.

No it won't.  Most of the sports world was completely shut down for a good part of 2020.  That won't be the case in 2021.  Some large scale events like the Olympics might be in trouble, but we're slowly learning to co-exist with this virus and hopefully continue to manage to fight against it in ways we couldn't in 2020 other than to shelter in place and close everything down.

[Quaker2001 251]

28 minutes ago, OlympicsFan said:

It is very easy to reduce costs. Either you build less expansive venues or you reuse venues. Building less expansive venues usually means less capacities which means less ticket revenue and less chances for the local population to watch, so this isn’t really a good option. This means that the best option would be to reuse venues. In this day and age it is impossible to build a swimming stadium or a ski jumping hill and to get back the costs later by constantly hosting competitions there. This means that only cities that already have most of the venues should host the Olympics. In most cases those will be cities that hosted the games before. I also refuse to believe that the major cities I named earlier wouldn’t be able to open up 10-15k hotel beds for athletes if they know about it multiple years in advance, especially with more and more tourists choosing Airbnb over hotels. Of course this wouldn’t work for places like Sochi, which means that those places shouldn’t host the Olympics. Maybe the IOC could set a budget for all the possible hosts (say 1-2 billion dollars) or they could favor the bids with the most efficient budget, kind of how it is often done with construction projects.

If it was so easy, why isn't it being done already?  Your last point rings true.  If the IOC were more responsible, they'd choose the more sensible and sustainable bid rather than the ones making lavish promises, but having no legacy plan.  But that would require the IOC to put the needs of host cities ahead of their own wants and desires.  Good luck getting that to happen.

 

So yes, the question is how to balance the needs of a large capacity arena for competitions and use the rest of the time?  Any city could use a community swimming pool, but how do they balance that need with having a full-sized venue to host competitions?  A swimming venue can be used for other things.  Or they put a pool at an existing venue that already has the capacity.  If it is planned in advance, it can be successfully pulled off.

 

As for the hotels, the issue isn't just capacity.  You can't trust the athletes as if they were tourists.  Not only do you need beds for them, but they need dining, transportation, security, medical services, etc.  Most hotels can't provide that.  And even if they could, who is covering it at all?  If I'm a hotel operator, I want my rooms filled by paying customers, not giving them away free to athletes and then having to take care of them.  If that's the arrangement, then why would a city want to bid for the Olympics if their tourism business is going to be marginalized by the IOC needing their resources?

[De_Gambassi 1,223]

Contrary to a common opinion, I believe the IOC should be given some credit when it come to the standards they have been setting for the olympic venues. They are very ok with temporary venues, they are ok with stadiums that seat only 4 or 5,000 spectators, they are not asking stands that seats thousands of VIPS on golden seats. They are even ok now with using facilities in another country, etc.

 

When you compare it with the other giga sporting event, namely the FIFA World Cup, it's really day and night.

 

There are not a lot left they can do in that regard to cut costs except dropping some sports only because they are requiring an extra venue which as far as I'm concerned is the last sensible reason why a sport should be dropped from the olympic program.

[Orangehair43 251]

3 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

No it won't.  Most of the sports world was completely shut down for a good part of 2020.  That won't be the case in 2021.  Some large scale events like the Olympics might be in trouble, but we're slowly learning to co-exist with this virus and hopefully continue to manage to fight against it in ways we couldn't in 2020 other than to shelter in place and close everything down.

All true but countries are becoming stricter with borders - Israel has banned all flights for at least a week with as far as I can tell no exceptions for sportspeople travelling abroad to compete. The UK is bringing in hotel quarantine and while team sports flying on private jets to competitors in a bubble might manage to get an exemption i'm not sure individuals or small entourages flying commercial will. When you have the risk of the vaccine failing due to varients sport will be far down the list.

[OlympicsFan 858]

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

If it was so easy, why isn't it being done already?  Your last point rings true.  If the IOC were more responsible, they'd choose the more sensible and sustainable bid rather than the ones making lavish promises, but having no legacy plan.  But that would require the IOC to put the needs of host cities ahead of their own wants and desires.  Good luck getting that to happen.

 

So yes, the question is how to balance the needs of a large capacity arena for competitions and use the rest of the time?  Any city could use a community swimming pool, but how do they balance that need with having a full-sized venue to host competitions?  A swimming venue can be used for other things.  Or they put a pool at an existing venue that already has the capacity.  If it is planned in advance, it can be successfully pulled off.

 

As for the hotels, the issue isn't just capacity.  You can't trust the athletes as if they were tourists.  Not only do you need beds for them, but they need dining, transportation, security, medical services, etc.  Most hotels can't provide that.  And even if they could, who is covering it at all?  If I'm a hotel operator, I want my rooms filled by paying customers, not giving them away free to athletes and then having to take care of them.  If that's the arrangement, then why would a city want to bid for the Olympics if their tourism business is going to be marginalized by the IOC needing their resources?

1) It isn’t done/hasn’t been done until recently because then the IOC would make less money and in addition to that it would be more difficult to give the games to disctators. Also the hosts couldn’t show off how amazing they are, so it is also partly due to the vanity of political leaders.

 

2) I would like an outdoor pool with temporary stands (kind of like it is done for Beachvolleyball). The 2009 swimming world championships were great and swimming should be an outdoor sport (during the summer).

 

3) The host would pay the hotel owners. Say we have 10000 athletes and they stay on average 7 nights in a room that usually costs 100 €, then the total amount would be 7 million €. Obviously there will be all kinds of extra costs, but I don’t see how it would amount to 50 million € or more, which still would only be around 1/10th of the costs for the Olympic village in 2012. If countries can get private investors to build an Olympic village that is turned into affordable housing after the games, then that would also be a good option. Maybe it would be an option in general to get private investors to finance (some of) the venues and after the games they can do with them whatever they want. That might lead to a more effective approach and would take pressure away from the tax payers, who then might look more favorably at their city hosting the Olympics.

[Orangehair43 251]

London and plenty of other places feel too wet for outdoor swimming especially as outdoor training pools don't exist in many countries so many swimmers won't get the practise of adapting to competing in the rain.