[Newsbot]

Filibuster Cartoons
Title: Game Over for Vancouver (click to view)
Date: March 1, 2010

Canada famously invested a ton of money and effort into making the Vancouver Olympics the country's "best ever," and now, with the games officially concluded, the prolonged analysis of our success in achieving that goal begins.

Most Canadians consider the men's gold medal in hockey the most important prize of all, so that's a huge check in the scorecard (the women's gold too, though to a much lesser extent). We also won impressive gold-medal victories in curling, figure skating, speed skating, and skiing.

The games brought an unprecedented amount of intention attention on Vancouver and Canada, most of it positive, and the influx of foreign visitors was predictably lucrative for the city's local merchants (with their $8 hot dogs). The abundance of over-the-top, drunken patriotism that filled the streets has also been warmly praised by much of the Canadian commentariat, who view it as an inspiring manifestation of optimistic 21st Century national pride.

The only real sticking point amid all the positive spin is the uncomfortable fact that Canada did not win the most medals, placing third overall (26), behind the USA (37) and Germany (30).

OR DID WE? Even though the overall medal count has been the traditional way to determine Olympic success, there's now a growing counter-consensus that argues the country that wins the most golds is the true winner. And by that standard Canada is indeed number one, with 14 to Germany's 10 and America's 9. So in a way, it's a double-blessing. Not only does Canada still have a way to claim victory, but the way in which we claim victory involves lots of traditional Canadian nit-picking and semantic squabbling!

[Beeej]

I've already run into this idea of 'most gold is the real winner' at my workplace. My coworker said that official olympic rules stipulate that this is that the country with the most golds is considered the overall winner. I have my doubts the he knows this as a fact, but it does raise the point that there is likely some official olympic rule on this point.

Whether or not their is doesn't matter much though. If such a rule supported our idea of being the winner we'd gladly embrace it, if not, it would go largely 'unnoticed' by most of us.

In any case we can (rightly) cling to the pride of having collected the most golds of any nation at any winter olympics. It is a remarkable feat regardless of what accolades and rewards come with it on paper.

[martin14]

300 million people = 37 medals

82 million = 30 medals

30 million = 26 medals


do the math

and both Hockey Gold
and most golds by any country in any Winter Olympics




not bad any way you slice it

[bootlegga]

Beeej wrote:

I've already run into this idea of 'most gold is the real winner' at my workplace. My coworker said that official olympic rules stipulate that this is that the country with the most golds is considered the overall winner. I have my doubts the he knows this as a fact, but it does raise the point that there is likely some official olympic rule on this point.

Whether or not their is doesn't matter much though. If such a rule supported our idea of being the winner we'd gladly embrace it, if not, it would go largely 'unnoticed' by most of us.

In any case we can (rightly) cling to the pride of having collected the most golds of any nation at any winter olympics. It is a remarkable feat regardless of what accolades and rewards come with it on paper.

That is how the IOC scores the standings, by gold medals, not by the total number of medals (I think that is a more North American thing).

Quote:

The medal table is based on information provided by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and is consistent with IOC convention in its published medal tables. By default, the table is ordered by the number of gold medals the athletes from a nation have won (in this context, a nation is an entity represented by a National Olympic Committee). The number of silver medals is taken into consideration next and then the number of bronze medals. If nations are still tied, equal ranking is given and they are listed alphabetically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Winte ... edal_table

[Beej]

I think total medal count is a terrible way to decide which country is in first. I'd rather they had a scoring system like 3 for gold, 2 for silver, 1 for bronze, or something like that.

[Canadaka]

WE WIN TEH OLYMPICS!

All the media organizations use total medal count, but according to IOC via Wikipedia:

Quote:

The medal table is based on information provided by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and is consistent with IOC convention in its published medal tables. By default, the table is ordered by the number of gold medals the athletes from a nation have won (in this context, a nation is an entity represented by a National Olympic Committee). The number of silver medals is taken into consideration next and then the number of bronze medals. If nations are still tied, equal ranking is given and they are listed alphabetically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Winte ... edal_table

* edit, damn bootlegga beet me to it!

[ShepherdsDog]

Well the party's over, but now the bill comes due. This will be extremely sobering.

[Canadaka]

ShepherdsDog wrote:

Well the party's over, but now the bill comes due. This will be extremely sobering.

I don't think so, I think the games will make a profit or close to it. Of course it all depends on what you factor in and i'm sure everyone will have a different formula. There are many unknown and long lasting factors, many that can't be assigned a dollar value.

The 3 most expensive things were the Canada line, sea to sky highway and athletes village. All 3 would have been done anyway, maybe just at a slower pace.
And i'm confident Vancouver will get back all the money and more from the loan it made for the athletes village.

Its not like we are friggin Sochi, building everything from scratch and having no need for it afterwards. We needed a mass transit line to the airport and richmond, the sea to sky highway BADLY needed to be redone. There is demand and population to support venues like the richmond oval which will be tured into a rec centre.

[ShepherdsDog]

I'm sure the proponents of the Montreal Games thought the same thing. We're not going to know the final costs for quite a while, if the actual figures are really ever revealed.

[Brenda]

Canadaka wrote:

ShepherdsDog wrote:

Well the party's over, but now the bill comes due. This will be extremely sobering.

I don't think so, I think the games will make a profit or close to it. Of course it all depends on what you factor in and i'm sure everyone will have a different formula. There are many unknown and long lasting factors, many that can't be assigned a dollar value.

The 3 most expensive things were the Canada line, sea to sky highway and athletes village. All 3 would have been done anyway, maybe just at a slower pace.
And i'm confident Vancouver will get back all the money and more from the loan it made for the athletes village.

Its not like we are friggin Sochi, building everything from scratch and having no need for it afterwards. We needed a mass transit line to the airport and richmond, the sea to sky highway BADLY needed to be redone. There is demand and population to support venues like the richmond oval which will be tured into a rec centre.

Thats nice that Vancouver will get it back, but I am not in Vancouver, yet I pay taxes.

[Tricks]

Brenda wrote:

Canadaka wrote:

ShepherdsDog wrote:

Well the party's over, but now the bill comes due. This will be extremely sobering.

I don't think so, I think the games will make a profit or close to it. Of course it all depends on what you factor in and i'm sure everyone will have a different formula. There are many unknown and long lasting factors, many that can't be assigned a dollar value.

The 3 most expensive things were the Canada line, sea to sky highway and athletes village. All 3 would have been done anyway, maybe just at a slower pace.
And i'm confident Vancouver will get back all the money and more from the loan it made for the athletes village.

Its not like we are friggin Sochi, building everything from scratch and having no need for it afterwards. We needed a mass transit line to the airport and richmond, the sea to sky highway BADLY needed to be redone. There is demand and population to support venues like the richmond oval which will be tured into a rec centre.

Thats nice that Vancouver will get it back, but I am not in Vancouver, yet I pay taxes.

Tourism will help the entire country ultimately.

[Brenda]

I don't agree with that. Tourism to the lower mainland will stay in the lower mainland. The money that built the olympic village (and when sold the money that will be generated from that) will not be spent on social housing here.
The money that renovated the skytrain will not come here to create jobs. The taxes paid to get the Sea to Sky Highway done will not find its way to the potholes here.

[Canadaka]

Brenda wrote:

Canadaka wrote:

ShepherdsDog wrote:

Well the party's over, but now the bill comes due. This will be extremely sobering.

I don't think so, I think the games will make a profit or close to it. Of course it all depends on what you factor in and i'm sure everyone will have a different formula. There are many unknown and long lasting factors, many that can't be assigned a dollar value.

The 3 most expensive things were the Canada line, sea to sky highway and athletes village. All 3 would have been done anyway, maybe just at a slower pace.
And i'm confident Vancouver will get back all the money and more from the loan it made for the athletes village.

Its not like we are friggin Sochi, building everything from scratch and having no need for it afterwards. We needed a mass transit line to the airport and richmond, the sea to sky highway BADLY needed to be redone. There is demand and population to support venues like the richmond oval which will be tured into a rec centre.

Thats nice that Vancouver will get it back, but I am not in Vancouver, yet I pay taxes.

it was only the city of Vancouver and its tax payers that made the loan for the athletes village, so why would you get it back.

Canada learnt its lessons from Montreal and Calgary was a success and so will Vancouver. Montreal had the cost of that huge expensive stadium, we don't.

[Brenda]

You believe that yourself? That only the Vancouverites paid? I sure as hell don't.

[Freakinoldguy]

Here's some sobering facts that they don't want you to know:

Some numbers from past Games:

MONTREAL, 1976: Debt: >1 billion (globe and mail; abcnews.com)
LAKE PLACID, 1980: Debt: $11 million
CALGARY, 1988: Debt: $910 million
BARCELONA, 1992: Debt: US$1.4 billion
SYDNEY, 2000: Games billed as self-financing by politicians were a $2.3-billion loss (Auditor General New South Wales Report on Sydney (2000) Olympics)
EXPO ’86: Debt: $311 million (paid by provincial lottery)

Oh year and the debt for Athens basically bankrupt the Greek government. But somehow they'll spin the numbers and alot of gullible people in BC, especially the lower mainland, will be going around bragging that the 2010 games made money.

The whole province is paying for everything, but the Athelete village, so trying to say that we shouldn't get anything back for our output is bullshit. Oh yeah and don't forget we still get to pay for the new roof on BC place stadium, you know the stadium that benefits the whole province.