Now I don't normally watch the olympics because I beleive it is a crock of crap.  The athletes are all doped up in some way and the money blitz that occurs at these things is retarded.  I'm sure the money could be spent MUCH more productively.   Now that I got that rant out of the way, I find myself shaking my head about the women's hockey issue.  In a nutshell, because Canada's women's team beat the snot out of all competitors and now there is talk that perhaps something should be done.  Whether it is removing women's hockey from the olympics or what I don't know.  One thing I do know is, nobody says this when the americans destroy all comers in the track and field events and that is MANY events while women's hockey is just ONE!  This is another reason I hate the olympics, the arbitrati-ness of it all smacks of double standards!

Of interest though is the olympics behind the olympics, I heard reports that the olympics in Austrailia ran out of condoms because the athletes were screwing like mad.  

Seriously?  They're going to change the rules or something because of the complete domination of Canadian Women in Hockey?  That's stupid.  It's not like our women have always been unbeatable.  Just recent years.  So what if they're that good?  Maybe the next generation won't be.

The bigger issue that they (the Olympic committees) are concerned with is the fact that Canada has a pool of around 10,000-20,000 athletes to pull their team from while countries who want to make a go of it have in some cases barely enough to create a team let alone CHOOSE their players from.
But I agree with Hawkeye in that the US dominates practically everything in the summer games so what is the issue with letting Canada dominate in this arena until other countries are able to support sustainable teams for women's hockey.  I get the arguement - if there is one country who dominates SO much, it doscourages other countries from even supporting atheletes in that field altogether, but until they can iron out these inequities all over, they should not focus in on one area only.

  I disagree, if one country dominates so much that probably increases the drive of the other countries to pick up their game.  Canada however does not put the money out like the U.S., Austrailia or other countries.  Now before you say, but you don't care about the olympics, that's true, but I was just pointing out a fact.

I do care about the Olympics and I agree that Cdns don't pump the same commitment into supporting their athletes like other countries.. something I just learned this week was that the US pays every gold winner $30,000, and that is a small amount compared to some of the other countries.

I don't agree that having a massive domination will make other countries have more drive to improve.  That might be true of perhaps the US, but for countires like Italy who didn't even have a women's hockey team until they were given the freeby entry being the host country, it makes the people who support the Oylmpics think twice about using their limited funding to support athletes who are apt to have a hope at being competitive and just withdraw all support from the team who got trounced because there was just no way to compete.

I'm glad martin is gone.  I mean, he ate the olympic money's, spent it on sponsership scandal.  I still hate the olypics though.

Wow, what happened to you man.. did the Olympics beat you up as a kid?  Steal your lunch?  Win and gloat at track and field in every category you were in just to spite you?
Is that why you were so mean to your little brother?  Oh no wait that is due to the fact that it was deviously fun AND he deserved it on soooo many levels... my bad.

  The olympics used to be solely about sport.  But then it eroded by allowing professionals in, which formerly it was amateurs only.  Then every other olympics is in the states, talk about spreading the wealth.  It has become increasingly only about money and about jingoistic ferver.  Then, because it has became tainted by money athletes turn to steroids and other performance enhancing drugs.  Olympics has became just as much about drug busts and dope testing as it is about sports.  Tell me that's good?

What's good about the Olmpics? The unificiation it brings to many countries.  The various opportunities it provides to athletes (sure some are financial, some are meeting other people and travelling, and for some it is about living the dream to compete with others who share a similar passion and drive)... I could list a plethora of good that comes from the Olmpics...
Easily as much as there is bad because I can't deny the allegations you've thrown down.. and there are many more there I'm sure too.  Hell when I'm busy suckling at the teat of cynicism, I whole-heartedly agree with everything you said.  But rather than focus on all the worst points, I TRY to take away some of the good.
For every ONE athlete who is there for the wrong reasons there are plenty more who are there for the right reasons.. you can't allow - or more correctly shouldn't allow (because you CAN do whatever you want) - a couple bad apples ruin the whole barrel.
I mean if the whole world were to follow in your example of utter cynical reasoning we (the entire world) would be far worse off than we already are.

  I think the money could be spent more productively than on this kind of thing where they blow oodles of cash on 1200 different kinds of drug tests.  Now before you say, most athletes don't do drugs, my reply is so what, Silken "Big Teeth" Lauman got nailed because she took cold medicine!  The olympics has become more political as the years went on, and I don't forsee that changing. In fact it'll get worse!

Yes it will get worse because more and more will continue to abuse things.
But it is like saying we should not have a welfare system because people abuse that.  And they do.. a LOT of people do.. but I would rather have a system in place to help those genuinely who need the help even if it means that the system will be abused.

Same thing with the Olympics, if you take the HEART of what it is meant to do, unite the world and bring people together through the shared experiences of competition, thereby building better international awareness all around, it IS a good thing.  Yes there will be those who abuse the system and much like with welfare a system of checks and balances will need to be put in place, but that shouldn't take EVERYTHING away from the true intent behind the whole thing.

I read recently that with the whole global villiage growing as it has and competitors in the Olympics playing for countries that are not necessarily their home country, the way they (the author) envisioned the future of the Olympics was no one would be playing for their country (which brings national prides into the games and thereby actually detracts from the true intent which is creating unity and whatnot yadda yadda yadda).. within the next couple decades they felt it would be Team IBM and Team RBC and Team Hewlet Packard etc.. the current sponsors would vie for competitors to help them make a living rather than having national boarders create the teams.. that way China doesn't show up with only 3 medals at the end, 3 Chinese athletes wind up having won medals but 2 for Team Diddleycraft and 1 for Team McDonalds... interesting concept, wonder how that will pan out?

(and for reference it was an articel I read on MSN.ca last week, not some freakin car magazine ya bastard-assed bastard-asses)

  Comparing the olympics, which is a purely superfluous affair, to welfare, a needed government program, is stretching it.  

  As far as uniting the world yeah, we really unite africa with the world in the winter olympics don't we.  There are far better ways to bring international awareness to the forefront.  2 weeks in italy is vacation not an international symposium for the poor.

  As for the Team IBM.  Well that really would be great eh, playing for companies!  Really that would be no different, you're just replacing USA with Microsoft.  Is that an improvement?

I didn't say it was an improvement, I said it would be interesting if that's the way things went... I think it could take away some of the national pride invovled in the Olympics but honestly if it weren't for the pride in seeing Canada do so well, my interest in the Olympics would wane big time.  I have no affiliation to IBM or Hewlett Packard.. not enough for me to care about their team at any rate.

As for the Olmpics being a 2 week vacation in Italy, obviously you have never seen the structured life most atheletes who compete at the Olympic level go through.  Neither have I except in all the reports the media creates.  If by working so hard they achieve the status of Olympian and get to enjoy their time over in another country, I say good for them.  But I still think that it is an opportunity to improve relations and spread some good will on an international scale.
No it is not resovling the wrongs of the world single-handedly, but it is the right kind of gesture towards bringing people and cultures together.  That may be an idealistic view but try to see the forest for the trees and not for all the animal mess!

I nthe future, any time I think I am too cynical I'm just going to compare myself to you are Hawkeye and it will make me feel much better

As I recall, the Olympics were invented to provide a break for warring countries, so that rather than killing each other, they could compete in the olympics and get back to warring later.  That's why it's always been country vs country.  But I think the author of Shabadu's car mag article has it right, in twenty years or so I believe it may become company sponsor vs company sponsor.

  In all fairness, Shabadu, I just asked the question whether the company sponsor route would be an improvement.  No where did I lay claim you said it would be.

  As far as me being cynical, well, with regard to the olympics I am.  The Ben johnson affair really soured me on the olympics.  And the fact that Carl Lewis was given the gold medal and he later admitted that most of the time he was on drugs just further exacerbated that feeling.  People raise the olympics up to this glorious, momentous event that happens every four years (2 years actually) and it's not.  I don't see people saying I feel closer to people from (insert country here) because of the olympics.  Like I said 2 weeks of comeraderie will not make lasting relations!  I spent 2 years living in japan and that is the kind of time required to have a lasting connection with another country.  I feel honoured and privellaged to have had that oppertunity.
  
  The company sponsership thing, well we are already there.

We are already there with the company sponsors and I think it will slowly move away from a national pride thing.. sadly though because that is one of the biggest pieces of the pie for me.. seeing our athletes.. whether they do well or not, although I DO like when they do well.

And as my previous message said I don't think the Olympics are some cure-all for all the world's woes, but it opens up channels on an ongoing basis.  

Clearly there is a big difference in how we see things and simply restating them over and over accomplishes little or nothing, so screw it, I declare war on Hawkeyeville.. as long as Diddly-town is willing to continue to provide the much needed tech support to Shabaduberg we will hold our forces from infiltrating his territory during the war... you satisfied Hawkeye?  You brought this on yourself and your fellow country-men!

  I thought we were having a pretty good debate, and, having re-read the entire thread, I don't think we repeated ourselves.

  I am however, still waiting for that list of good that you said you could come up with.

  I don't think we're at the point of the Microsoft Relay Team (for example) yet.  We still have the facade of associating competitors with countries.  I was referring to true corporate teams... no national boundaries.
  Think of the marketing!  Whomever wins gold gets a 30 second commercial!  

  Oh, and Diddly-town doesn't help anyone without some kind of gain.  Frankly, in a war, the smart bet is on Hawkeyeville.  

I don't think we're anywhere close to having corporate teams in the olympics.  Why?  Because, I don't believe there would be anywhere near the support for the teams like in there is for national teams.  So, in that I agree with Shabadu.

Wow.. this is a monumental moment.. Hawkeye agrees with me.. mess.. I'm gonna have to pull a Stronach (or however you spell her name) and switch sides!

Seriously though, simply through DEBATING the Olympics we have forged a new alliance between Hawkeyeville and Shabaduberg, so just imagine what the REAL Olympics do for REAL nations!

Either way, the list I said I could come up with will be printed in Automag Daily next week - be sure to read it, the list will be in size 3 font but take 17* pages, so trust me when I say it IS a long long list


* Please note that at least 16 1/2 pages are legalese to help cover Shabadu's a** in the 10 or less reasons he managed to come up with in the short time he alloted to think about this proposition.