Jump to content

How to make the Olympics Smaller


Recommended Posts

In other thread, somebody mentioned they would love to see the games in NZ, even if they had to get rid of some of some less prestegious sports to make the games small.

But would that really make a difference. Is trampoline the problem?

If you wanted to cut the size and scope of the games, what would you cut?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In other thread, somebody mentioned they would love to see the games in NZ, even if they had to get rid of some of some less prestegious sports to make the games small. But would that really make a d

No athletes over 6'. Those extra long beds at the Village cost $5 bazillion!!

Yes rather than building huge new stadiums costs could be kept down by building more temporary structures etc.

In other thread, somebody mentioned they would love to see the games in NZ, even if they had to get rid of some of some less prestegious sports to make the games small.

But would that really make a difference. Is trampoline the problem?

If you wanted to cut the size and scope of the games, what would you cut?

The expectation that cities must build breathtaking new buildings, massive Olympic Parks, and Baron-esque ceremonies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quoted from another thread:

Archery: Nothing

Athletics: Eliminate walks (creates about an additional 180 quotas)

Badminton: Reduce to 32 athletes per singles event (additional 12 quotas)

Basketball: Nothing

Boxing: Increase women's weight classes to 7. Max 16 per = 271 quotas (additional 15 quotas).

Canoeing: Create gender equality + about 30 athletes

Cycling: Reduce mountain biking to 36 men. (Additional 14 quotas). BMX stay the same. Road cycling reduce men's road race to 100 (creating additional 44 quotas). Introduce 2 events in track cycling, using some of the quotas if necessary from the other disciplines.

Diving: Nothing

Equestrian: Replace eventing with another discipline (idk if this will be possible).

Fencing: Nothing

Field hockey: Nothing

Football: Remove 4 teams in men's to bring all teams events to 12 (additional 72 quotas)

Golf: Nothing

Gymnastics: Remove Rhythmic gymnastics (additional 96 quotas created).

Handball: Nothing

Judo: Limit each men's event to a maximum 25 quotas and women's to 20 quotas = a total of 13 additional quotas).

MP: Nothing

Rowing: Drop a men's event in favour of a women's event. Limit each single sculls event to 30 athletes (1 additional quota)

Rugby: Nothing

Sailing: Have gender equality in events, same quota

Shooting: Have equal number of men's and women's events, with out increasing athletes.

Swimming: Have the same program as the World Championship program without increasing total number of athletes.

Synchro: Drop (192 athletes - 52 = 140) Move 52 to add 4 teams in women's water polo.

Table tennis: Remove team events, and have a maximum 100 athletes.

Taekwondo: Nothing

Tennis: Nothing

Triathlon: Introduce mixed relay without additional athletes

Volleyball: Nothing

Water polo: Add 4 women's teams

Weightlifting: Drop one men's weight class

Wrestling: 16 per weight category = 288 + one more weight class per discipline = 336 athletes (8 additional quotas).

-----

Left with more spots and we can add these sports (if desired):

Squash = 64 athletes

Baseball/Softball = 320 quotas

Karate = 120 quotas

And we still would save an additional 150 athletes from 2012, have more gender parity in all sports.

Also what needs to be looked at is reducing of competition schedules. Is it really necessary to have judo run 2 weights per day when 4+ could be possible? By doing that there would be additional available days on the schedule for indoor sports. This would potentially reduce new arenas being built (like in Rio). Also the infield of the velodrome can be used for something during the days its not used for track cycling! Toronto proposed this for 2008 and I don't think no one has ever considered doing this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Football could be cut back to the "fast" variation of seven aside...This would give a better more intense tournament and not effect the full game as the FIFA WC is equal in prestige to the Olympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Football could be cut back to the "fast" variation of seven aside...This would give a better more intense tournament and not effect the full game as the FIFA WC is equal in prestige to the Olympics.

Why do we even have Football in the Olympics? In my opinion it's a waste of infrastructure, money, and time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The expectation that cities must build breathtaking new buildings, massive Olympic Parks, and Baron-esque ceremonies.

Yes rather than building huge new stadiums costs could be kept down by building more temporary structures etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the Olympics can be downscaled IMO. With Football, it wouldn't make much difference excluding or downscaling Football from the Olympics, because it's usually Hosted at Existing Venues. Also, I don't like the idea of 12 Teams. It should either be 8 or 16. 12 makes it awkward, like UEFA Euro with 24 Teams, because you have the Best 2/4 3rd Placed Teams go through. It's better to have the Top 2 going through. The Biggest Sports won't be cut, Football, Athletics, Aquatics (Maybe Synchro, but wouldn't make a difference as the Aquatics Centre would still get Built), Cycling etc.

So yes, I don't believe that the Olympics should/could be downscaled. The way you must look at things is, if a Country the size of Qatar can Host a World Cup in at least 8 Stadiums (Regardless of how corruption gave it to them), then anything is possible. I think if the IOC considers the Olympics being downscaled, these Sports shouldn't be cut and should be core Sports:

Football.

Athletics.

Swimming.

Diving.

Water Polo.

Track Cycling.

Gymnastics.

Badminton.

Boxing.

Wrestling.

There is no point cutting Football, as it's Hosted in Existing Stadiums and it's a Successful Olympic Sport.

There is no point cutting Athletics, because usually the Athletics Events are held at the Ceremonies Venues (Except for Rio 2016, where there are 2 Stadiums).

Aquatics and Track Cycling are a Successful Olympic Sport.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I think Football should be cut is because you have FIFA, it's just more money going to Athletes who receive their moment to shine every four years as well. It honestly makes no sense, other than profit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes rather than building huge new stadiums costs could be kept down by building more temporary structures etc.

Yes I think the era of the central sports zone, thanks to huge cost, could become outdated especially if cities start duplicating facilities.

But then most cities want an iconic structure as a legacy...and as in the cases of London and Sydney, a guarantee of a successful future.

Tokyo simply rebuilding it's already iconic 1964 stadium is an example of reuse...albeit on a grand scale. LAs proposal to refurbish the Memorial Collaseum another example of reuse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IOC should stop some sports to reduce venues. For SoG they could cancel football, Kayak (very expensive to build), Golf, Rugby, Tennis... All these sports excepted kayak have already many major event (Fifa World, IRB World cup, Wimbledon Etc.)

For WoG they should stop to build Bobsleig track and allow to have this event in another country or in another place if the country have already a track,

For example in France, we have 1 track in the French Alps but if France want bid with a Pyrenees City they should have the right to host the bobsleig race in the Alps instead of build another track in Pyrenees. Or another example, Switzerland could host the race for Cracow bid.

It's the same problem with the speed skating... You have already short track, more spectacular and less expensive to build like venue and a better legacy. You can use short track venue for hockey and figure skating or for public after WoG.

Without the necessity to build bobsleig track and Speed Skating stadium you can down the cost for WoG.

And also more temporary venues or you could use some mobile venues for different SoG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But the speed skating oval can be converted to other uses which was seen in 2006 and 2010. I agree with the bobsleigh track. If another one exists within reasonable distance, using it should be considered.

Removing eventing, canoe slalom as well. Both combined offer 6 events but need two expensive venues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember in Athens 2004, I went to a hand-ball match and was empty the whole stadium. The hockey fields were also empty except when Pakistan played.

Reducing places among the athletes would be OK, too. But definitely allowing every single National Olympic Committee be represented. Then cities from smaller and capable countries like Denmark, Malaysia or NZ could bid.

Or develop better strategies to organise the event.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Swimming: 950 athletes, this could be substantially reduced by eliminating wildcard and universality places

Athletics: 2200 athletes, do you really need 2200 athletes for 141 medals? Limit countries to 2 athletes per event like swimming and eliminate wildcard and universality places, easily save another 700 or more athletes.

That alone cuts 10,500 athletes to 9,500 athletes

Just cut table tennis. It just needs to go away. I would also cut eventing, football and modern pentathlon. This eliminates 5 venues, housing and transportation costs for a sizable number of horses, lowers volunteer needs, overlay expenses and logistics planning.

Athletes now down to 8600ish. 5 venues eliminated and I would guess around a quarter of a billion in costs

Now comes some much harder decisions. Wait, who am I kidding cutting synchronized swimming and rythmic gymnastics is an easy call.

Now we are at 8,350 athletes and two more venue overlay reductions.

Now some actual hard choices. Shooting and weightlifting get the ax in my book. Another 600 athletes cut, one venue and one overlay.

So now, we need to think of ways to bring total athletes down an additional 750 places. I would accomplish this by getting rid of complete continental representation, limiting all competition to two athletes per country or less and reducing host spot allocations.

So we've now cut 3,500 athletes, dozens of events, overlays and venues combined and probably a savings of billions.

To off-set the reductions in events, athletes and sessions I would increase events in sports that wouldn't require substantial increases in athlete numbers, like swimming and track cycling.

Edited by faster
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reducing universiality in swimming and athletics would essentially kill some countries chances of competing at the Olympics. Maybe limiting it to one per sport (and one per gender) would be better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a pointless argument. The IOC is a group of stubborn individuals who make illogical decisions. Remeber, these are the guys who voted out wrestling. No chance they listen to any of the ideas listed in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a pointless argument. The IOC is a group of stubborn individuals who make illogical decisions. Remeber, these are the guys who voted out wrestling. No chance they listen to any of the ideas listed in this thread.

Bach is leading the Vision 2020 thing. I am sure that there will some discussion of the suggestions above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, let's punish the athletes so that NZ or Thailand can get their international boner on. They're just a bunch of pawns anyway.

Just like the Olympic Games are a privilege and not a right to be hosted, so should be the ability to compete in the Olympics. Why should Canadian, American, German etc financiers of an Olympic Games have to foot the thousands of dollars per athlete to bring someone from St. Kitts or Guam or the Seychelles to compete for a minute or two?

Reducing universiality in swimming and athletics would essentially kill some countries chances of competing at the Olympics. Maybe limiting it to one per sport (and one per gender) would be better.

I would say that the IOC should require all qualification to be completed 3 months before the beginning of the Games and any country that does not have a male or female athlete qualified could select one to represent. Also notice that these universality countries have like 3 athletes but 20 officials. They really need to get a handle on how many officials/coaches/support staff are allowed to attend.

Edited by faster
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...