Why I Hate the Olympics
You can keep your Olympic torch and opening ceremonies. The games aren’t for me.
In less than four days, the world’s greatest athletes will parade through London’s Olympic Stadium. Dignitaries and heads of state will watch the pageantry. A torchbearer will carry the Olympic flame into London’s Olympic Stadium.
And I couldn’t care less.
Don’t get me wrong. While I’m not a sports fan, I’m not immune to its appeal. I catch a boxing match or UFC fight whenever I get a chance. Covering this year’s girls basketball championship was among my most enjoyable experiences at Patch. I love a thrilling, come-from-behind victory as much as the next guy.
But the Olympics just tries too damn hard.
Starting Saturday, networks are going to bombard viewers with saccharine stories about athletes and the games. Everyone from the International Olympic Committee to the local Wal-Mart hawking Team USA gear is going to tell you it’s about your country, international brotherhood and mankind.
I don’t buy it for a moment. Here’s why I hate the Olympics.
(Do you think I’m off base? Will you be watching the games? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.)
It has nothing to do with international brotherhood or world peace.
Think back to the greatest Olympic moments. There are moments of individual perfection. There are moments athletes found victory only after overcoming adversity.
But even though much is made of the Olympic truce, you won’t find many moments when sports brought countries together.
In NBC’s list of 30 greatest NBC Olympic moments, there’s not a single one. In Men’s Health’s list of 20, there are only one or two—depending on whether you consider Jesse Owens’ 1936 performance unifying or a prelude to the world war that kicked off three years later.
In fact, some of the most memorable events happened because of—not in spite of—international rivalries. Would the 1980 “Miracle on Ice” have the same resonance without Cold War tensions? Would the 1972 basketball controversy have the same heartache if the Soviet Union and the United States didn’t have nuclear missiles pointed at each other?
Even though the Cold War is over, seemingly every Olympics coughs up some sort of international incident—whether it’s Russian figure skating judges, Chinese gymnasts or even digitized fireworks for the opening ceremonies.
It misallocates resources.
The 2012 Olympics is expected to carry a $14.5 billion price tag, according to Vanity Fair.
Some of that will improve public infrastructure or lure investment into areas that would otherwise be ignored. But much of the money will go toward ephemeral purchases that will disappear once the Olympic flame leaves London—as Vanity Fair detailed:
Members of the Olympic Family must also have at their disposal at least 500 air-conditioned limousines with chauffeurs wearing uniforms and caps. London must set aside, and pay for, 40,000 hotel rooms, including 1,800 four- and five-star rooms for the I.O.C. and its associates, for the entire period of the Games.
Even the investments that are meant to last can be questionable. London spent $150 million on its new Velodrome, where cycling’s track events will take place. While the facility will be handed over to a regional park authority after the games, such specialized structures often have difficulty sustaining themselves.
The investment is especially dubious when weighed against what the host city could’ve accomplished by putting that money toward other uses. What benefits a city more in the long run — a Velodrome or $150 million more toward transportation?
Perhaps the clearest example of the games’ modest benefits—at best—come from presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who headed the Salt Lake Organizing Committee, which planned the 2002 Olympics. Unlike with his experience in the business world, Romney doesn’t claim to have created jobs or helped businesses.
Instead he makes the more-modest claim to have turned around a scandal-plagued, deficit-ridden organization—claims the Washington Post’s Fact Checker backed up last year:
We found no independent reports to verify the IOC’s claims, but we know that Salt Lake City and the state of Utah did not incur massive debt like other host sites such as Athens and Montreal. … Number crunchers can manipulate data to say just about anything, but it seems fairly certain that the SLOC at least broke even on the second-most-expensive Winter Olympics up to that point—the final budget was $1.3 billion.
That’s a far cry from an unmitigated triumph.
It happens too often.
Once upon a time, Olympics were cherished events that occurred once every four years. The very name Olympiad came to mean a four-year period.
Then in 1992, the International Olympic Committee decided to stagger the summer and winter games. While each one still took place every four years, this meant there was an Olympics happening in some form every other year.
The end result is an Olympics cycle that never really ends—and a major case of Olympics fatigue.
The events already have their own international championships.
Quick question: Who’s the better athlete, a sprinter who wins gold in the 2011 championships or someone who wins gold in the exact same race at this year’s Olympics?
The answer is ultimately determined by the time on the race clock—not whether the medal has a few rings on it.
There’s no mixed martial arts event.
The ancient Olympics eventually came to have about seven different events. The modern Olympics includes all but three of those—hoplite races, chariot racing and pankration.
Hoplite racing was a foot race done in full armor (Greek heavy infantry of the time were called hoplites). This and chariot racing aren’t present on any real scale anymore, so I’ll give the games a pass on those.
But pankration is a mix of striking and grappling found today in the somewhat less-brutal sport of mixed martial arts—a fast-growing industry that’s putting the heat on boxing, its combat sports rival.
If the International Olympic Committee is intent on promoting the modern games as the continuation of an ancient tradition—which they’re not—the least it could do is include the ancient event that, aside from boxing, has the most mainstream popularity in the modern world.
After all, when was the last time you saw a poster at your local watering hole advertising an international track-and-field event? I guarantee you there are posters for the next UFC fight at numerous sports bars around the Twin Cities.
It’s all about money.
Dig deep enough beneath the pageantry and symbolism, and you’ll find money greasing the games’ wheels. Pricy training centers give athletes from wealthy nations a sometimes-literal leg up on challengers from poorer countries. Costly research puts athletes in swimsuits like the now-banned Speedo LZR, which was responsible for about 100 new world records in its first year. Corporate sponsorships fund the games—with corporate sponsors Coca-Cola, Lloyds TSB and Samsung preceding the torchbearer on this year’s route to the opening ceremonies.
You gotta pay the money to play the game.
And I have no problem with that. It’s the pretense I don’t like. Say what you will about the Vikings stadium, at least supporters and opponents were upfront about where their priorities were.
When the Super Bowl finally visits Minneapolis, no one will pretend the players on the field are fostering brotherly love. No one will pretend Justin Bieber or whichever Auto-Tuned crooner takes the stage is creating world harmony.
It’s a straight-up financial transaction. We (or advertisers, at least) pay for an entertaining product. The NFL provides that product. Minnesota competes with other cities to host the event so local businesses get a cut of that action.
There’s purity in that commercial candor you won’t find in the Olympics’ smoke and mirrors.
Michael Rose
4:21 pm on Monday, July 23, 2012
Gotta give you credit for taking on the Olympics, and you raise fair points.
However, I ultimately disagree. All of what you say is true, but I simply love competition at its highest form, and the Olympics are generally that.
And what's truly amazing is that somehow, the Olympics gets to me watch sports I typically never watch (like swimming), simply because I know I'm potentially watching history, and I'm certainly watching the best in the world do their thing. I think there's something to be said for that
James Warden
4:26 pm on Monday, July 23, 2012
Well, I almost got you to watch a Brock Lesnar fight with just wings and beer ...
Bruce Rowan
4:24 pm on Monday, July 23, 2012
Yeah, but, where else can you see boxers, swimmers, spearchuckers and equestrians marching together as some sort of teammates (who probably met just before the ceremony)? My gripe is the totally fabricated "Team Standings," or "Medal Count" by country, which is completely unofficial, but sooooo important to somebody. It's not supposed to be about countries, but rather about athletes.
James Warden
4:27 pm on Monday, July 23, 2012
Very good point, Bruce. (And what a great name for javelin!)
Christa Meland
5:59 pm on Monday, July 23, 2012
Excellent points made well (I learned a lot!), and I definitely agree with most of them--particularly the ones arguing that the Olympics isn't really about international unity or promoting world peace, and it doesn't represent the best use of resources. But still, although I certainly don't plan to arrange my schedule around the upcoming games, I do think it's amazing and inspiring to watch the world's best athletes perform spectacular feats. It serves as a good reminder to all of us that while anything might not be possible, both acquired skills and natural talents can lead to great things when paired with hard work and persistence.
Pete
1:21 pm on Tuesday, July 24, 2012
I also hate the whole Olympic hysteria that is going on. From the merchandise to the Olympic interviews, to the fiddling around with transport making it impossible or the normal working Londoner, to the total hype, everything is totally tacky. The designers of hideous Wenlock and Mandeville, and the architects who have designed some of the hideous building do not deserve all the hype they get. There is just so much rubbish about. This is not for the British public, it is only for the rich. Londoners have foot the bill in their council taxes and got nothing back for it except rubbish. This is only for celebrities, the rich. Thank goodness I can escape to the tranquil beauty, peace and genuine kinship of the Lake District. The people who lives miles from it don't know just how lucky they are.
James Warden
2:41 pm on Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Here's a question: When was the last time you liked an Olympic mascot? There are a lot more misses than hits. Check out this link to catch some of the flops: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/history-summer-olympic-mascots-162800984--oly.html
Kristin Kasparova
8:10 pm on Tuesday, July 24, 2012
I agree with everything you said...except I love the Olympics! And I'm sure you can guess a major reason why: history is made at the games. I love their ancient origins in Greece and the fact that we'd have to hold the games for at least another 150 years to surpass the length of the Greek games.. Women were accepted as athletes at the games in 1904, just 8 years after the first modern games were held. The games were cancelled three times, in 1916, 1940 and 1948 due to the World Wars. Jesse Owens winning his race in 1936, beating everyone else including the "superior" Germans. The numerous boycotts, especially during the Cold War, were a definite reflection of the times. Munich's tragedy, where 11 athletes from Israel and 1 German police officer were killed by terrorists. And this year, when a 71 year old athlete from Japan will compete in the equestrian events, and two women athletes from Saudi Arabia will compete for the first time in their nation's history. I am well aware of the negatives of the Olympics, but I continue to look at the positives and hopefully the peaceful history that will be made at the 2012 games. Plus, c'mon, you know you love the schlock they feed us about the athletes on TV! Grab your tissue box and join in the fun!
Michelle Fitzsimmons
3:57 pm on Thursday, July 26, 2012
Great points made. Personally, I am a huge Olympics fan, but I think the presentation of the games has been corrupted by the American media (i.e. NBC). I was in Berlin during the 2008 Olympics and it was a completely different viewing experience. Granted, I couldn't understand what was being said, but gone were the overly-emotional "get to know the athletes" vignettes, the fabricated rivalries and the endless, endless commentary. It was, simply, pure sport, and that is what makes the Olympics so phenomenal. At its core, it's about about super-human athleticism, dedication, focus, courage and the triumph of the spirit. This rang through loud and clear simply by watching the athletes compete, not from what NBC's talking heads were telling me to think and feel.
San Jose Mercury News sports writer Dave Purdy had a great column about how American media is so self-centered (but can they be blamed?) we miss many of the Olympics' most poignant moments. He gives the example of an aging Greek weightlifter placing his shoes on the mat during the Athens Olympics, signifying his retirement from the sport. He won the bronze and received a four minute standing ovation. American audiences saw none of this, but that is one of those stories that elevates sports from the level of pure physicality into a realm of grace.
Elizabeth Voss
4:51 pm on Thursday, July 26, 2012
Agreed, but for me it's not about the Games, but about the stories behind them. I find inspiration in those personal stories and I'll take any inspiration I can get these days!
James Warden
4:58 pm on Thursday, July 26, 2012
Even a curmudgeon like myself can't argue with that.
Carol Bungert
8:29 pm on Friday, July 27, 2012
Curmudgeon was the exact word that came to mi d when I read your article. And yes--lots of good points. But I'd rather watch these athletes show their amazing well-honed skills than our professional sports teams that are all overpaid, overrated, overindulged, and given an insane amount of misplaced adoration.
Emily B
11:50 am on Sunday, July 29, 2012
While I wouldn't say I "hate" the Games, I have to admit, they don't do much for me, and this year, I find myself wanting to stage a mini-boycott. But my reason is not related to anything above.
Actually, my beef with the Olympics leads me to take issue with part of Michelle's comment above. She said "it's about about super-human athleticism, dedication, focus, courage and the triumph of the spirit."
This may be true by and large. Unfortunately, for some female athletes, it is not so. Case in point: Caster Semenya. This amazing runner's "super-human" abilities are completely overshadowed by the fact that the ignorant public and IOC can't get itself together on the fact that women can be just that, "super-human." No, instead, they question her gender, her personhood. They violate her human rights by demanding testosterone testing. They force these "super-human" women to undergo "therapy" to bring them down to the "appropriate level" for women - it is sick. Never would a man be disqualified or questioned for being "too feminine" or "too strong" (a ridiculous sounding notion for the Olympics, right?) If we cared to truly showcase top athleticism, this type of harassment would not stand.
If you would like to read more about Caster Semenya, this is a really great article: www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/26/caster-semenya-and-the-ioc-s-olympics-gender-bender.html
Jonnel Licari
2:23 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
I think you make some very good points about the allocation of resources...and what the true cost of the games are. However, many of your other complaints are also from a purely American standpoint and these aren't the American Olympics. I am an American living in Italy and we get a totally different experience with the Olympics here - largely because the media aren't manipulating the events for maximum viewership (we actually get to see everything in real time whether the games are in London or in China - which sometimes means having to watch them in the middle of the night but that just adds to the excitement!) nor do we have announcers who can do nothing but go on and on about Italian athletes and who know nothing about the other countries participating in the Olympics. The Italian version of the Olympics is not overwhelmed by sponsorship or by merchandising.
And while I think you are right that international tensions can actually add to the drama of the Olympics they are not the only excitement available for Olympic athletes or viewers - Italians don't generally have this same perspective on the world and yet they seem to enjoy the Olympics equally cheering for their national athletes and their accomplishments.
And while the Olympic games clearly have not resulted in world peace (tongue in cheek), I don't think the act coming together and standing side by side in competition can be understated for the message and hopefully understanding that it promotes.
Tom Kouri
8:34 am on Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Good points James, and I don't disagree with most of them. But ultimately, I enjoy watching the Games because it's an opportunity to see outstanding athletes...many I admire more for their determination and commitment than for their athletic accomplishments. Who wouldn't appreciate the 17 year old swimmer who could make millions but chooses to swim with her high school team?