Why Does Canada Participate in the Olympics Anyway

I took this screenshot (CBC website) of the standings yesterday showing Germany in first place with 8 medals, Canada second with 10 medals and Norway in third place with 12 medals.

Yes, that's right, because only being the very best in the world (well best at that particular place at that particular time) counts, the rest are all losers, so it seems.

Why do we rate the Olympics that way. The way we rate Olympic success should relate to what we want to accomplish, and the way we rate Olympics can have far reaching effects on how we fund sports and recreation in this country. We have already seen, at least in the past, funding shifted from less popular sports to sports that we have a better chance of winning Olympic medals in.

But what if we measured Olympic success by a points system that included all top ten finishes (tenth best in the world is pretty damn good by most peoples standards) with 10 points for first and one point for tenth.

We would get a much better picture of the depth and breadth of our elite athletes than just counting those in the top three. It would even give us a better measure of how we are progressing towards more medals in the future. And we could start doing it now retroactively using the records of past Olympics.

But is that even the point. Is it really justified to spend all this money on a “pissing contest” to prove we (well actually our elite athletes) are better than the rest of the world. What public policy goal does that serve.

We can only justify spending all this money on the Olympics if it serves some public benefit beyond giving Canadian another excuse to spend more time watching TV (while waving the flag) for two weeks every two years.

We can only justify spending this money if it benefits Canadians beyond the elite athletes that participate. We have to be able to show that the funding benefits a broad range of Canadians by funding sports and recreation for more than just elite athletes and by actually encouraging more Canadians to get involved in sports and recreation. That way we will see results in fitter and healthier Canadians with more balanced lifestyles and even reduced health care costs.

We won't know that if we measure the wrong things. Ultimately what we want to be able to measure is whether Olympic programs increase the participation of Canadians in sport and recreation ultimately leading to more balanced lifestyles and improving their fitness and health.

Knowing that we had the greatest percentage of citizens participating in sports and recreational activities would make me a lot more prouder than knowing that a small group of elite Canadian athletes were the best in the world. Now that is a goal to strive for.

Curling - WOW

Yes, I've been watching Olympic curling. What a combination of science, art, and athletic control. I could try and explain that but the best way to understand it is to watch international or Brier level competition.

Numbers

Which ranking is more important to you, and which should the government spend more money on improving.

This Number
or
This Number.

Who Is To Blame For The Olympics

So is it all just fun and games and are we all just blind to what is wrong with the Olympics.

I don't think so. I think many people have problems with what the Olympics have become with more emphasis on profit than sport and more emphasis on sponsors than athletes, not to mention the impact on the communities the Olympics are held in, which is more often positive for the wealthy and negative for the poor. On the other hand, many have been sucked into the spectacle that the Olympics have become, a spectacle that is dependent on, and supportive of, corporate money and sponsors. Sponsors money feeds the spectacle and the spectacle feeds corporate profits and somewhere in there is IOC empire building.

But we support the Olympics anyway because we still believe in the ideal, and more importantly because it is the only Olympics that the athletes have.

As for the Olympic sponsors, some seem to be really bizarre.

I do find it ironic that the company that has been exploiting Canadians longer than any other company is an official sponsor, especially since their Canadian Olympic clothing is "Made in China", but they do have the protection of the Fashion Police.

I also find it really strange to watch world class athletes promoting McJunk food and I have to wonder how many IOC or VANOC dinner meetings have been held at the Official Restaurant of the Olympics. And then there are the official Olympic drugs, not to mention official beer and wine suppliers. And what is a sporting event without an official gambling provider.

And I am offended by the fact that the Olympic organizers are forcing Canadians, and visitors, who want to use a credit card at the Olympics (and do not have the right card) to get a new one.

And then there is this.

There have been protests raising serious concerns about the Olympics, although protesting at an international sports/cultural event obviously does not receive the same amount of public acceptance as protesting at international political/economic events. The protests have included some damage to the property of corporate sponsors by masked "protesters". They state their case here.

While I can certainly agree that the minimal physical damage done by these masked "protesters" is nowhere near the damage done to the poor and disadvantaged by the holding of the games I cannot condone it, primarily because it does more harm than good to the cause.

I am one who believes people should stand up for what they believe in and not hide behind masks. I am even uncomfortable with the concept of anonymous blogging, but I can understand the reason for it and it does no harm to anyone. If these "protesters" want to make a point about damage done to the poor by doing damage to the property of those they consider to be causing it, then do it out in the open, surrender to the police, and then argue your case in the courts of law and public opinion.

But what I would suggest, as an alternative to protests that alienate the public, is that in the future the emphasis be put on the People’s Summit aspect of the protests and that the protesters propose to the Olympic organizers that they will not take to the streets in exchange for the Olympic organizers sanctioning and publicizing a People’s Summit that examines all aspects of the Olympics. The media should pledge to give the People’s Summit reasonable coverage, especially the host broadcaster. The People’s Summit should be completely independent, possibly university based, and include full criticism of the Olympics. It should provide for some participation by Olympic organizers, which would allow them to state their case and, more importantly, allow them to be held accountable by the public for their actions.

This will be to both sides advantage - the serious protesters will be better able to make their case and reach the public without a public backlash and they will not be tainted by the actions of so-called anarchists, who will be marginalized and easier for the organizers to deal with.

This is not to say that the problems are not serious enough to justify taking to the streets but that the alternative can be more effective in reaching, rather than alienating, the public.

Of course if Olympic organizers are not prepared to be subjected to public scrutiny and public criticism they can always reject the idea and suffer the consequences of continuing, and probably escalating protests at future Olympics.

In closing, I want to say, as a Canadian, that I am proud of all our Bronze Medal Winners and others in the world can make as many jokes about that as they want. I do not believe that you're a loser if you don't win a gold medal. Indeed, if you've worked hard enough to actually be good enough to participate in the Olympics you're already a Winner and I am proud of all of our Olympic athletes.

Canada's Hockey Legacy

Can they do it. The Toronto Star reports:

The dream of another NHL team in Toronto was unveiled today, though even the pitchmen for the project admit it is a long way from coming true.

The proposal contains some unique features that may be the key to the teams success.

-- Twenty-five percent of the Legacy's annual profits would be divided between charitable foundations and non-profit organizations. Carnegie's Future Aces Foundation for at-risk youth would be the first recipients.
-- About 15,000 seats for every Legacy game would cost no more than $50 apiece.

So how would such a team be financially feasible. Perhaps by appealing to the players love of the game rather than their greed. There may just be enough players in the league, and some of them superstars, who see this as a chance to be part of something special – a team in the best hockey town in the NHL (and the best market) that allows ordinary working hockey fans to watch the games and devotes a substantial portion of profits, not to owners greed, but to charity. For this there may be enough Canadian players willing to play, not for outrageous salaries, but for decent salaries looking for a chance to put a superteam together and keep the Stanley Cup in Canada forever.

Indeed it is a dream. Will they make it come true.

Gatineau Parkway: A Cyclists Dream or A Drivers Nightmare

In an earlier Fifth Column I stated:

A few weeks ago I was driving home from mountain biking along the Gatineau Parkway when I noticed just how little room there was for cyclists and motor vehicles to share the road. If I wanted to pass a cyclist I had to hug the yellow line, a dangerous thing to do if traffic is approaching me and only possible if the oncoming traffic sees the cyclist on my side and moves over to give me room, and impossible if there are motor vehicles and cyclists on both sides of the road. At one point I just had to follow behind the cyclist till it was safe to pass, fortunately he was moving at about 40 km/hr.

This can create very dangerous situations, especially if there are impatient drivers. Drivers should, however, be aware that, although used as such, the parkway is not a commuter route, it is a scenic route for tourists and residents to use to enjoy the park scenery and has a speed limit of 60 km/hr.

In many ways the Gatineau Parkway is a wonderful route for cyclists, scenic, winding and hilly. It could be a world class cycling route and a major tourist attraction and economic benefit to the region, if the safety problem was solved.

The National Capital Commission and The Royal Canadian Mounted Police are also aware of the safety problems and they have announced their solution, according to an article in the Ottawa Citizen which states:

Don't ride your bicycle in double file, in "packs" of more than 15 or speed through stop signs this summer.

The National Capital Commission and police are cracking down on cyclists and motorists in Gatineau Park as part of a share the road campaign prompted by the increasing number of traffic violations in the park each year.
…

RCMP Const. Suzanne Lefort said cyclists who ride in double file or in groups of more than 15 face $95 fines. Cyclists who run through stop signs face $15 fines, plus the loss of three demerit points if they have a driver's licence. Also, cyclists were warned about speeding last year, but this year they will be ticketed.

Drivers who exceed the speed limit by more than 40 km/h could have their vehicles impounded for seven days.

This has led to considerable reaction from the cycling community, including Letters to The Editor from Mike Abraham, Matt Surch, Alex MacKenzie and Avery Burdett.

Matt Surch describes the Gatineau Parkway as a road cyclists haven:

Cycling is a healthy practice with a rich tradition in the Ottawa Valley, home of the country's two oldest bike clubs, dating back to 1882. More than just a sport, cycling affords pleasurable movement through the city and its surroundings.

On any given day, hundreds of cyclists, many in their retirement years, seek the challenge of the hilly Gatineau Parkway to recreate, to live, on the bike. Many users ride the parkway more than once a week, for years.

Some ride alone, others in groups. By riding side-by-side, conversation flows. Other groups with a more competitive bent enjoy the parkway for its promise of training gains and the opportunity to practise road tactics such as drafting, working together as a group.

Yes, road cycling is in fact a team sport; working together to cover ground faster is the magic of cycling.

The parkway is special -- it is a haven for cyclists because it is a parkway; low car speeds are appropriate. Cyclists outnumber any other user group in the summer, including drivers. We feel like the parkway is our oasis in an otherwise hostile cycling environment.

Unfortunately, the NCC does not acknowledge cyclists on the parkway as a recreational user group. Instead, we are being treated just like traffic.

As the last quoted sentence indicates, the NCC does not see it that way, and that is the crux of the matter – should the NCC Parkway be seen as just another commuter road or as a recreational route for cyclists.

Of course the Gatineau Parkway is not just another commuter route. You don't close down a commuter route for a whole season, banning cars, and let a recreational user group use it as their own. But that is what is done with the Gatineau Parkway in the winter for cross country skiers. That does not stop people from using their vehicles to access the ski hills or trails or other recreational facilities. And it certainly contributes to tourism in the National Capital region and the local economy.

The Gatineau Parkway already has the hilly terrain that serious road cyclists love to ride and train on. So why not apply the same logic to the summer season, ban cars from the Gatineau Parkway, and take advantage of an even greater opportunity to turn the National Capital Region into an international destination for cyclists, not to mention providing a wonderful opportunity for local cyclists to develop their skills. It is such opportunities and facilities that produce Olympic Gold Medallists.

I'm Confused About Fighting In Hockey

According to The Code on CBC's The Fifth Estate almost everyone involved in professional hockey from the head of the NHL down believes that fighting is an important and integral part of the game. So why are there rules and penalties against it. And why are the rules and penalties so lax as to be ineffective.

There seems to be something just a little bit hypocritical about having purposefully ineffective rules against something that they claim to be an integral part of the game.