Jump to content

Aquatics Centre Construction Thread


Recommended Posts

When are asshole premium members going grow up and stop clicking -1? When will this fucking website grow up and get rid of "rating" people's posts? I'll fucking comment on it if I like. Double standard Rob? Yes, I think much.

No, not at all. I'd rather everyone was capable of rating posts than just Premium members, but it's whiney gits like yourself which led the mod to restrict it to Premium Members only, which I think was a shame, but there's not a lot I can do about that. Funny how you've never ONCE commented or thrown a hissy fit about Premium Members having this function when I've marked your posts up though. Why's that eh? :rolleyes:

And yeah, Aquatics center sucks for spectators in games times mode. I actually agree with Baron on this one.

Good for you. It clearly doesn't (not ideal for some at the back does not = sucks and I've yet to hear an argument which shows this) but you never change your mind once you've made a decision so I don't see much point arguing.

All of Baron's points regarding the roof, lighting etc were answered by me earlier in this thread; there was some confusion earlier from him about the different between the Centre in Games mode and legacy mode. I think we basically concluded he doesn't like the roof aesthetically which is fine, he's obviously entitled to that that point of view.

But that's quite different to calling the venue terrible when it obviously isn't.

Who cares what Rogge says, he's fucking PR man. He gives blow jobs to everybody!

Blowjobs to everybody? Now who's being childish? He's a diplomat, not a liar. If there were fundamental problems with this venue he wouldn't have praised it to the extent he did a few days ago. He was obviously very pleased by it, as am I having seen it on TV.

And swimmers, divers have come into this venue and praised it too. And the few thousand spectators in the venue for its launch a few days ago loved it. The big advantage, for those unsure of the roof etc, that this structure most certainly does have over the Water Cube is atmosphere. The roof keeps the crowd noise in superbly.

Anyway, as I said, being as truthful as I can, there are some seats nearer the back where the view isn't ideal, but that doesn't mean it's terrible in Games time mode, far from it. It is and will be one of the best Aquatics Centres in the world next year - not without a few small compromises - but those compromises do not make it a terrible venue, not even close.

Edited by RobH
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 334
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

But look at this other pic taken from deck level with w/ the lites turned off... it's that hulking black whale or dark mama heaving over you. I find it quite oppressive... I think it's the dumbest de

When are asshole premium members going grow up and stop clicking -1? When will this fucking website grow up and get rid of "rating" people's posts? I'll fucking comment on it if I like. Double standa

Huh??? I'm a registered member of USMS and swim with a local masters team. How much of your life did you waste not doing any exercise? I mean, you're still fat....would love to get a look at your t

I certainly respect Jaques opinion, he went overboard on praise, if he didnt like it he would diplomatically say its a good venue. He knows his stuff, its an awsome venue, it has its issues, what building is perfect. Less than a year to go woo hoo

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I certainly respect Jaques opinion, he went overboard on praise, if he didnt like it he would diplomatically say its a good venue

Exactly the point I was trying to make. As a diplomat-at-heart there was no need to praise it quite as much as he did. The fact that he really went out of his way to praise this venue shows he doesn't see the compomises as as big an issue as some here do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Three shortlisted to run 2012 Olympic aquatics centre

LONDON, July 29 (Reuters) - International service company Serco Group is among three bidders shortlisted to run the 2012 Olympic aquatics centre and handball arena after the London Games have finished, the public body responsible for the venues' legacy said on Friday.

The other shortlisted bidders are Greenwich Leisure Ltd and Parkwood Leisure, both of which have largely worked with local authorities in running leisure centres.

"We are delighted by the calibre of shortlisted candidates to operate two of London's best sporting facilities," Peter Tudor, director of venues at the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC), said in a statement.

The chosen operator will be appointed in early 2012, ahead of the summer Games, and the contracts are expected to run for 10 years.

The 269 million pound aquatics centre, with its distinctive sting-ray shaped roof, was completed this week and was the focus of London's one-year-to-go celebrations.

Designed by Iraqi-born architect Zaha Hadid, it will be reduced in size from 17,500 seats to 2,500 when it re-opens in 2014. Experts say it will need subsidies if it is to fulfil the OPLC's ambition of both elite and community use, despite an expected 800,000 visits a year.

The copper-clad 44-million-pound handball arena, to be called the multi-use arena after the Games, is to be a centre for community sport and will also be used to host a range of sporting, community, entertainment, cultural and business events.

The 7,500-seat arena, which will also re-open in 2014, is expected to attract up to 600,000 visits a year.

...

Reuters

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, not at all. I'd rather everyone was capable of rating posts than just Premium members, but it's whiney gits like yourself which led the mod to restrict it to Premium Members only, which I think was a shame, but there's not a lot I can do about that. Funny how you've never ONCE commented or thrown a hissy fit about Premium Members having this function when I've marked your posts up though. Why's that eh? :rolleyes:

OH yeah, it's MY fault. I'd rather NO ONE be able to rate people's posts AT ALL. There's no point, and it's just used a tool for people's personal little retributions. THAT'S WHY I COMMENT ON IT. People commenting on it has NOTHING to do with the it being restricted to the idiots who are willing to flush 14.99 US down the toilet for stupid "features" like that. I mean really, you can go to hell for that one. I mean really just **** off.

And the Aquatics center is a poor design, YES, IT IS. Legacy mode, GREAT, but games times mode, it's crap. Sure the Athletes, media, and the AA ticket holders will be just peachy, but the experience is denigrated for everyone else. Water Cube was a superior venue, heck even ATLANTA gave ALL spectators a better viewing experience.

But Rob, LOCOG could take a **** and you'd call it a masterpiece, or at the very least, make excuses for the smell.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
But Rob, LOCOG could take a **** and you'd call it a masterpiece, or at the very least, make excuses for the smell.

Run out of arguments have we? :rolleyes:

Let me see, only yesterday I said I thought the obverse of the medal design wasn't really my cup of tea because I felt it too busy, I've constantly said I don't like the wings on the aquatics centre and more than once in this argument with you I've admitted they are not an ideal solution and have some problems for some spectators, I'm still bloody nervous about that big red tower going up outside the stadium, I sent a email to London 2012 when they ditched the stadium wrap complaining of their decision, I'm not happy they didn't reply to said email, I've criticised aspects of the ticketing, I don't like the mascot costumes much, I think the website looks amateur and have said so more than once, and I think it's taken a long time for the branding to take off. All of these points of criticism I've said more than once on these forums and if you weren't so up your own arse you'd realise this.

And the reputation points feature, we GET you don't like it but why not just ignore it rather than calling those who use it idiots with an agenda? As I said, I've marked posts of yours UP on several occassions and you've never seen the need to complain then, nor have you seen the need to complain when other people get marked up or down. You ONLY EVER cry about Premium members having this feature when someone marks YOUR posts DOWN. Everyone else on this forum has either learnt to grudginly live with this feature or likes and uses it. YOU are the only one STILL, after a year, having hissy fits when you lose a point.

BTW, there's a feature I don't like much on these forums either; the ignore list. It means the onus is on me to block out posts like the above rather than the moderator on this forum ensuring they are sanctioned as they should be.

You're entitled your opinion OTO, but you've not backed it up with much fact so far, and when you get called out you resort to insults and claim my opinion is not worth anything. Congratulations; you've somehow managed to go down in my estimations.

Edited by RobH
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And the reputation points feature, we get you don't like it, but why not just ignore it rather than calling those who use it idiots? As I said, I've marked posts of yours up on several occassions and you've never seen the need to complain then.

Because you ARE idiots. Even more so now that the playing field is entirely unequal when it comes to that "system". Even marking a post UP can be used as a from of passive retribution, that's all that system is, really, either way. Nine times out of ten the negative mark is given simply because someone just doesn't like the poster or just doesn't like what said poster is saying, and that's ridiculous. RATING PEOPLE'S POSTS EITHER WAY IS RIDICULOUS! Will I claim to have never used it? No, but I'd much rather it go away and I'm not going sit by idly either while others use it to sling arrows at me and not attempt to "fight back" as it were. You want to call things and people childish? Call that system as such and then look in the mirror, because I've long known you're one of the biggest users of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Because you ARE idiots.

I'm using a feature given to us by the moderator, a feature which only came into being after I had 8.5k posts here. I was arguing and debating on these forums long before you registered and started throwing around your insults (i.e. when this forum was a better place), and long before the reputations points feature was here.

You can't therefore accuse me of not arguing my points, something which I always do and something which I have done in this thread to an extent members like you don't actually deserve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using a feature given to us by the moderator, a feature which only came into being after I had 8.5k posts here. I was arguing and debating on these forums long before you registered and started throwing around your insults (i.e. when this forum was a better place), and long before the reputations points feature was here.

You can't therefore accuse me of not arguing my points, something which I always do and something which I have done in this thread to an extent members like you don't actually deserve.

I don't care what you think, I really don't. Who gives a CRAP how many posts you have here or how long ago you registered? You think that bestows you with some sort of special place? I've never understood how "post count" was supposedly indicative of a persons "higher status" nor how long ago someone registered was supposed to be either. Look at that asswipe Baron. Isn't he the guy who will write things like "rag head muslims" and such. "I support torture" etc, and yet, he's "so respected"? WTF? And this ratings system is a JOKE. As a non paying poster here, I can rate only positive and only ONE per day. You think the ratings system is never abused? You think people (actually a certain someone - not speaking of you here) didn't use that system, in it's previous incarnation, to go back and rate as many posts of mine as they could negative in one day, including going back in time to find posts of mine in threads that were long dead and negative marking them? Huh? Yes, I know they did. Give me a break!

The ratings system as it stands today is even more clownish than it used to be!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point about me raising my post count was to show how long I'd been here without this feature, not to make out that somehow I'm better than you, but once again you read what you want to read. :rolleyes:

And I don't condone people being twats with the system. Lee left for a few months because someone was spamming his posts like that, and I'm sorry you had the same problem.

But perhaps we should propose banning kitchen knives worldwide, because a few people can't be trusted with them. Yeah, let's punish the majority, great idea.

Or perhaps, on the other other hand, we should close the forum down altogether because people can be right twats even with the basic functionality of posting.

Look, this has got bloody stupid and I can't believe we're still arguing this stupid point. I -1ed your post because I thought it was dumb, quite frankly, and I wish you could do the same to any of my dumb posts if you felt so inclined (take that up with the mod). I don't like the fact that it's a Premium only feature. I use it as a nice extra to the main functionality on this forum, marking posts up and down all the time and thinking no more of it. I honestly can't believe someone would get so upset by this, but if you have been spammed perhaps it's best you PM the mod rather than taking your annoyance out on me and others who use this system with no malice. Just a thought. :)

Edited by RobH
Link to post
Share on other sites

But perhaps we should propose banning kitchen knives worldwide, because a few people can't be trusted with them. Yeah, let's punish the majority, great idea.

Rob, I just see no point in a ratings system at all. It serves no purpose, or if it serves anything, it serves those looking to abuse it. It really does no good, is a flawed concept, and causes more division. I'm not the only one who feels this way.

People should just post, and if other's don't like it (of if they do), that's life, but no need to "mark it" like a dog marking it's territory, + or -.

For someone who is as generally as reasonable as you, I find it odd that you even defend the systems existence.

My last public reply on it. If you want to discuss further, you can pvt message me. I don't ignore or block anyone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine, then we'll agree to disagree. No problem. :)

I know a few members don't like the reputation points system, but no others have been quite so vociferous or unecessarily insulting towards me when I've used it (you'd think I'd kicked up puppy to death from some of your over-the-top responses, honestly). And I'm still not happy you thought it ok to denigrade the validity of my opinion on London 2012 matters given how much time and effort I spend keeping this forum up to date, especially since I do criticise things when I feel it necessary.

I'll draw a line under this rubbish, but I'm not happy. <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites

Valid point.

No, not really. You're another one who uses that line when I have the temerity to praise something you happen not to like. It says a lot more about you and your ability to debate than about me.

Rather than debating with someone who has spent years following this projet, it's easier to claim I have no ability to criticise i.e. the lazy way out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, not really. You're another one who uses that line when I have the temerity to praise something you happen not to like. It says a lot more about you and your ability to debate than about me.

Rather than debating with someone who has spent years following this projet, it's easier to claim I have no ability to criticise i.e. the lazy way out.

Probably because Michelle feels there IS no debating with you when it comes to LOCOG. I've presented my arguments about the Aquatics Centre (to get back on topic), and I think it makes it a bad design for games time use by ALL PARTIES involved, not just the competitors. But you always come back with "ohhh, but it's not that bad". Yes, yes it is. IT IS that bad. Why the hell did LOCOG ever pick Zaha Hadid's design? There were BETTER ONES. You yourself say this one has "compromises". It sucks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, got your pvt msg Rob. Whatever. :rolleyes:

LOCOG's made it's fair share of blunders when it comes to design choices, and you're never particularly harsh on them, you DO always try to find a way to make an excuse for them, ALWAYS, and qualify the situation somehow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably because Michelle feels there IS no debating with you when it comes to LOCOG. I've presented my arguments about the Aquatics Centre (to get back on topic), and I think it makes it a bad design for games time use by ALL PARTIES involved, not just the competitors. But you always come back with "ohhh, but it's not that bad". Yes, yes it is. IT IS that bad. Why the hell did LOCOG ever pick Zaha Hadid's design? There were BETTER ONES. You yourself say this one has "compromises". It sucks!

As I've said repeatedly, I think there's a difference between a compromise which isn't great for some spectators or the aesthetics of the exterior, and calling this venue a dud or terrible. I'm sorry, but I just wouldn't go that far with my criticisms of it. If you think that's fawning to the ODA (not LOCOG by the way), so be it. What you see as "no debating with me" is actually you failing to persuade me of your - in my opinion - rather extreme position on this venue.

Why was this design picked? Well, cynics would say it was good to to get an Iraqi born architect on board during the height of the second Iraq War. That sounds a little far fetched to me. Her design during the bid phase was awesome - I don't know that the alternatives were better as you claim - and none of the compromises we see now were evident. She was on board from the early stages, and worked with the ODA when it became clear the original plans were not workable (this was, as I think DarJoLe explained a while ago partly because of a cock-up in measuring the land available for this venue, I'm not quite sure how they managed that one but there you go).

So yes, we have a compromise, partly because of finances, partly because of initial mistakes in planning before London won, but mostly because of a want not to be left with a huge venue which will never be filled post-2012. The temporary wings are certainly not ideal, nor are they particularly beautiful, but I'm not going to be pushed into saying I think the venue is terrible because of them.

Edited by RobH
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, got your pvt msg Rob. Whatever. :rolleyes:

LOCOG's made it's fair share of blunders when it comes to design choices, and you're never particularly harsh on them, you DO always try to find a way to make an excuse for them, ALWAYS, and qualify the situation somehow.

There's a differences between "making excuses" and trying to find reasons "WHY" things are done the way they are. I've said many times I don't much like the wings, for example, but I've qualified that with explanations as to why they're there and why they take the form they do, even if I wish it were otherwise. Not everyone is going to have access or time to find this stuff out but I have an interest so I do, and I spend more of my time posting it here. Maybe I shouldn't fucking bother in future.

Edited by RobH
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Brit I feel immensely proud of what LOCOG have achieved. I probably do look at some of the decisions with rose tinted specs too but, we want these games to be loved and enjoyed around the world. Buildings the worlds over are considered masterpieces but they all have problems. On a day when Jaques Rogge, competitors that have actually been in it and the media heap the Aquatics Centre with praise, then folks come on here and say its bad, rubbish or ****, it puts people on the defensive.

People do seem to critisise London in a way they dont other hosts. People say they have made blunders, again and again saying its a **** logo. People everytime the mascots mentioned comment they scare children, again and again making the same comments. Ive seen Mickey Mouse scare children in Disneyland to be fair. One of the first comments I read about the medals on here was Complete Disaster, when to be fair they are nothing of the sort.

As a LOCOG fan and as a Brit I take a lot of the comments to heart, something Im slowly learning not to do. People have the right to make comments, good or bad, just sometimes it feels relentless, and that LOCOG can do no right. If its a radical design its critisised, if its a safe design, its critisised.

The Olympics should be a celebration, Im learning that this forum although a great place to discuss the games, learn things and speculate are also gonna be a place where people will complain and rant and thats he way it should be. Its just when you are so proud of what your country has achieved it is sometimes hard to read.

Well thats my rant, back to the Aquatics Centre

Edited by daveypodmore
Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think the Aquatics Centre and all venues in general are bland, uninspired, and rather dull. The Aquatics Centre is ugly and not very practical with such a roof structure. There had to be other ways to have a reasonable venue still look good without building the next Water Cube.

As rafa once wrote, don't hire a starchitech and then bastardize the design as a cost-cutting measure and that is what London did. The design is flawed and does not fit for an Aquatics Centre. If it had been a sports hall for gymnastics or handball or something of the sort the roof structure would have worked. But as a venue for diving and swimming it is a dud.

Edited by Faster
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

All I will say is take a look at the Olympic Park we have already built with 1 year to go. This has been an utter transformation of a very neglected part of London and I am definitely not guilty of viewing everything through rose tinted glassses. I have always made myself quite vocal when I disliked something. However, this park is - in my opinion - is going to be the best Olympic Park ever designed. The UK will also have the biggest legacy once the games have finished. For those reasons I am proud of LOCOG and everyone involved in this vast project. This in turn makes me slightly defensive when harsh criticisms are made against London 2012. Beijing had no heart in it's Olympic Park and Greece was truly shambolic in the run up to their games. Perhaps we should consider this when looking at the enviable position that London has put itself in. I will still criticise when I don't agree with a decision but I do think that London has had a particularly unfair ride.

Edited by Lee
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Brit I feel immensely proud of what LOCOG have achieved. I probably do look at some of the decisions with rose tinted specs too but, we want these games to be loved and enjoyed around the world. Buildings the worlds over are considered masterpieces but they all have problems. On a day when Jaques Rogge, competitors that have actually been in it and the media heap the Aquatics Centre with praise, then folks come on here and say its bad, rubbish or ****, it puts people on the defensive.

People do seem to critisise London in a way they dont other hosts. People say they have made blunders, again and again saying its a **** logo. People everytime the mascots mentioned comment they scare children, again and again making the same comments. Ive seen Mickey Mouse scare children in Disneyland to be fair. One of the first comments I read about the medals on here was Complete Disaster, when to be fair they are nothing of the sort.

As a LOCOG fan and as a Brit I take a lot of the comments to heart, something Im slowly learning not to do. People have the right to make comments, good or bad, just sometimes it feels relentless, and that LOCOG can do no right. If its a radical design its critisised, if its a safe design, its critisised.

The Olympics should be a celebration, Im learning that this forum although a great place to discuss the games, learn things and speculate are also gonna be a place where people will complain and rant and thats he way it should be. Its just when you are so proud of what your country has achieved it is sometimes hard to read.

Well thats my rant, back to the Aquatics Centre

Alright, my biggest problem with LOCOG and London 2012 has been design choices, both graphically and venue wise (well the one that is the subject of this thread).

Let me list some positives about London 2012 and LOCOG:

Organization (both pre games time and I have no doubt during games time as well)

Completing the build out on time.

An Olympic Park that is obviously going to be quite beautiful when fully complete (ugly orbit tower notwithstanding, which I believe wasn't LOCOG's fault)

As for looking at things through rose tinted glasses, I guess that's something I just tend not to do. I, as an American, am ashamed of the Atlanta games, and have never hesitated to say so. And let's say San Francisco hosted an Olympic Games in the future (which I'd obviously wish to see), or any other American city. I'd be happy, but if they produced crap for a logo, look, etc, I'd fully heap on the criticism, trust me, I most certainly would.

However, this park is - in my opinion - going to be the best Olympic Park ever designed. The UK will also have the biggest legacy once the games have finished

Now, I would totally agree with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think the Aquatics Centre and all venues in general are bland, uninspired, and rather dull,

I am happy to utterly disagree with your opinion, whilst also finding it rather ridiculous. :D

Onetimeonly - I really do take your point but you know what - hand on heart, here - I absolutely love the London 2012 logo. I was absolutely baffled by the reaction to it. When I look at some of the other logos from previous summer/winter games I am just so elated athte choice that London made. Will never understand why people hate it so, other than that it is too different to anything that has gone before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...