Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://apnews.com/dd51339540d8846881d4f34f85cc4141
Postponed Tokyo Olympics could be downsized and simplified. My question is, why shoehorn it into 2021? Why not wait until 2022, and for the first time since 1992, have the Summer and Winter Games the same year? I don't know about you, but the Olympics have been less meaningful or impressive to me when every other year is an Olympic year. I'd like to see it return to a special global spectacle every four years. Tokyo and Beijing can cohost 2022, Paris and Milan can cohost 2026, Los Angeles (currently scheduled for the 2028 Summer Games) can instead take 2030 with maybe Salt Lake City, Vancouver, or Calgary cohosting the Winter Games that year. And then going forward, both Summer and Winter Games will be held in the same handful of cities with existing infrastructure. This would have the bonus of eliminating the wasteful spending cities currently do to bid for and host the Games.
2022 is already incredibly crowded with Track & Field world championships, European athletic championships, and the Commonwealth Games.
Soccer World Cup 2022 is in November but in 2026 will be back in northern hemisphere summer. No way IOC would try and compete for viewers with that in future years.
Anonymous wrote:https://apnews.com/dd51339540d8846881d4f34f85cc4141
Postponed Tokyo Olympics could be downsized and simplified. My question is, why shoehorn it into 2021? Why not wait until 2022, and for the first time since 1992, have the Summer and Winter Games the same year? I don't know about you, but the Olympics have been less meaningful or impressive to me when every other year is an Olympic year. I'd like to see it return to a special global spectacle every four years. Tokyo and Beijing can cohost 2022, Paris and Milan can cohost 2026, Los Angeles (currently scheduled for the 2028 Summer Games) can instead take 2030 with maybe Salt Lake City, Vancouver, or Calgary cohosting the Winter Games that year. And then going forward, both Summer and Winter Games will be held in the same handful of cities with existing infrastructure. This would have the bonus of eliminating the wasteful spending cities currently do to bid for and host the Games.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that they were separated because many countries couldn't afford the massive expense every four years and spreading out the cost helped the countries better manage the financial aspect of the games. Has that changed?
That doesn't make sense. They were rarely in the same country even when held the same year.
It costs more for the country to have both, versus just one. But I've never heard this theory before. I think they were split because more money can be generated that way. Well, except for the host country!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that they were separated because many countries couldn't afford the massive expense every four years and spreading out the cost helped the countries better manage the financial aspect of the games. Has that changed?
That doesn't make sense. They were rarely in the same country even when held the same year.
Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that they were separated because many countries couldn't afford the massive expense every four years and spreading out the cost helped the countries better manage the financial aspect of the games. Has that changed?
Anonymous wrote:The Winter Games need to be held somewhere with snow -- preferably in winter. Seems like a lot of countries would get the short shrift.
They've never even gone near the Tropic of Cancer.
Anonymous wrote:Have more people started watching the Winter Olympics since they've been separated?
I always watch the winter games but I am the only one I know of who does, including my family.