Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/18/18 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    That is one of the most difficult things about people discussing Olympic costs. You have one side of the argument that acts like the infrastructure built for the Games is going to evaporate as soon as the Games are over and the other side acts like those costs are meaningless. I think it is somewhere in between. if the Games spur infrastructure investment that is a benefit to host, that cost shouldn't carry as much weight as over-zealous infrastructure building that amounts to very little. The rail line that Korea built will be well used after the Games and spur development in the county. So including the 4 billion dollar development investment is a little suspect.
  2. 1 point
    As much as I watch the Olympic Games, my visual curiosity grows, so it made me to learn how to read in Hangul. Certainly, the message that PyeongChang 2018 is sending through its look, is unity and uniqueness along the Korean Peninsula and local culture despite the 38 parallel. I also enjoy watching the host cities written in their local languages, such as Sochi. Hopefully, this keeps going at Tokyo 2020 & Beijing 2022. I hope Paris 2024 look could depict a centennial renovated Art Déco look, just like PIerre de Courtin might have seen Paris back in the 1920's.
  3. 1 point
    The people here tell me that Gangwon was a relatively undeveloped area of Korea, particularly due to the closeness of the border. The line has been created ex nihilo, it is not replacing a former slower route. Gangneung and Alpensia will benefit the most, since they are serviced by KTX stations. For the Games as a transportation mean is is relatively cheap (not free, in Sochi the train was free) and fast (17 mn between both Olympic areas) with trains every 20 min or so. Far better that taxis and busses on the congested highway. i concur that the benefit ratio/cost of this line seems higher that the railway line in Sochi.
  4. 1 point
    To put it into words of one of the Canadian commentators one time. She's a b!tch, she is unpopular on the circuit and skaters give her a hard time knowing she'll get over-aggressive and get DQed.
  5. 1 point
    The film was made on a very small budget - plus I doubt the IOC would have supported the film and allowed use of their trademarks.
  6. 1 point
    Oh no. The whole film pretty much leads up to “The Incident”. And when it comes, it’s played out graphically. Let’s just say the film plays with the fact that different people have different, often totally contradictory, accounts of what happened. The blame though falls fairly heavily in the film on her ex and, especially, her “bodyguard”. Tonya doesn’t get away totally scot-free either, but does elicit some sympathy.
  7. 1 point
    At least it is unlikely that any Norwegian bids will come forward. There are still too many pissed off people from the two previous attempts, and after Sochi the general idea of spending billions on a WOG and hence indirectly supporting IOC has little popular support. If I were a part of IOC, I would now be desperate to get the WOG back to Europe or North America were the real winter sport interest is, or they risk to slowly become less relevant. It is good to diversify, but after three WOGs in Asia (Sochi is also Asian by many definitions) they'd better off focusing a bit on the core winter markets. The problem is, that IOC' reputation after Sochi is still shattered, even if some positive steps have been taken lately.
×