I wasn't sure if this should go in the open water section or here but it is about swimming.I just read this-bigstory.ap.org/.../ap-investigation-rios-olympic-water-rife-sewage-virus and am worried for our open water swimmers. What a terrible predicament,work for years to go to the Olympics and then get really really sick. This is a black eye on the IOC,who like FINA, is more interested in politics and patronage than athletes.
Wouldn't it be logical to only accept bids from cities that have the infrastructure in place to host an Olympic Games that is safe and does not present health and safety concerns for both athletes and spectators? Awarding an event of this magnitude based upon the forecast or promise of having their ducks in a row by the time athletes begin arriving is ridiculous, if not just plain foolish.
scy,
Of course that makes perfect sense. But why let logic and good sense get in the way of a perfectly good deal full of deceit, fraud, and graft? It's the Olympic way (much like FIFA).
Dan
But they (the IOC) are so pathetic it is funny. A(nother) perfect example is in this morning's newspaper. In a small sidebar article about the 2022 Winter Games being awarded to Beijing...the last sentense reads: "The Chinese capital, which hosted the 2008 Summer Olympics, came in to the vote as the strong favorite, despite its lack of natural snow."
So just great. They picked a city to host the winter games that doesn't get snow. You think there's no skullduggery going on there?
Dan
Un-*&%$@^#-believable! When my husband told me about this after reading about it in USA Today, all I could say is :censor: ! :shakeshead:
:lmao:Actually, I shouldn't be laughing, because it isn't a funny matter; but, you perfectly put into words what I was thinking after reading scyfreestyler's excellent post.
But they (the IOC) are so pathetic it is funny. A(nother) perfect example is in this morning's newspaper. In a small sidebar article about the 2022 Winter Games being awarded to Beijing...the last sentense reads: "The Chinese capital, which hosted the 2008 Summer Olympics, came in to the vote as the strong favorite, despite its lack of natural snow."
So just great. They picked a city to host the winter games that doesn't get snow. You think there's no skullduggery going on there?
Dan
I like the use of the phrase "no significant risk" in Dr. Richard Budgett's comments. What's considered significant?
Hard bar to raise, considering the comment by one researcher that risk of infection is 99%. So would "significant" mean "risk of death is 100 percent?" (Okay, I exaggerate... or do I?)
And here I thought Illinois was the hot bed of $$$$$ buys anything you want in the culture of what is best for corporations and politics!.
Maybe the OW races should be done on a Postal event format. You can swim in your home water and send in the time to see how you will place.
What really irks me is that the IOC doesn't mandate that a city bidding to host the games isn't FIRST required to pass basic standards like water and air quality BEFORE they can even bid to host the games. Once they pass those standards...then they can compete to host the games. But then the IOC, or rather some competent authority, continue monitoring those standards until the games.
But doesn't that make too much sense?
Dan
