As Vancouver 2010 was wrapped up, the global Olympics focus switched from Vancouver to London, where the Games of the XXX Olympiad will take place twenty-nine months from now. And such transitions are always dominated by discussion of what London 2012 can learn from Vancouver 2010, particularly given VANOC’s controversial ‘Own the Podium’ policy. While some would like to see the London organising committee adopt a more diffident, affable, characteristically English approach, emphasising fair play and competition rather than success, Lord Coe does not:
Lord Coe, chairman of the London organising committee and the man whose huge standing among the Olympic hierarchy swung the bid away from the hard favourites Paris, said: “We have to deliver memorable, great games, something that can hopefully combine the forensic organisation of Beijing and the beauty of spirit of Barcelona in 1992, but among the things we have learned here is the vital role of the home athletes.
“Canada’s Own the Podium policy has been criticised but not by me. Pressure is a huge part of the Olympics – it has to be lived with and conquered and this has been achieved here.
“British athletes and their coaches have to be aware of the enormous pressure and they have to deal with effectively. It has to be an integral part of their preparations. It is what competing at the highest level is all about.”
Discussions about Team GB’s medal haul are also inevitable given that Vancouver 2010 was their second consecutive games in which they took home only one medal – both times in the women’s skeleton. So what are the lessons of that paltry return? More money is the obvious answer, but there is legitimate debate over whether it should be aggressively targeted towards a few sports in which we have the best record or spread liberally between a larger number. The gold in skeleton ensures even more funding there, and hence a chance at another gold in Sochi, while the total failures in alpine skiing, nordic skiing and so forth decrease the chances of our making a break-through there.
Of course, the funding is already in place for our summer games sports, and so we already know that there are certain areas – cylcing, rowing, sailing, and parts of track and field. Britain’s infrastructure and home crowd, allied to talented athletes guarantee that we will reach a certain level – probably third or fourth on the medals table. The question, then, for Lord Coe and others, is whether we should stick to that level and conduct ourselves in the best traditions of British sportsmanship, or whether we should aggressively target as high a finish as possible, as the Canadians did. It seems from Lord Coe’s comments as though we will target the latter option.
Personally this leaves me uneasy. It has been claimed in some quarters that the ‘Own the Podium’ policy indirectly led to the death of Nodar Kumaritashvili, and while I wouldn’t anticipate this happening in London it’s clear to me that we should do everything in our powers to prevent this from happening. Moreover, one of the main selling points of London as an Olympic city has been its cosmopolitan, global nature. If the London Olympics descended into grubby partisanship we would lose out on one of the best things about a London games. Similarly, it would go against the best British traditions of fair play.
Olympics are about excellence, not triumph. I want to see Usain Bolt and Michael Phelps win in 2012, not the best of British sprinters and swimmers. So I do hope we don’t go down the Canadian route.
As one games draws to a close, the attentions of the winter sporting world move on to Sochi 2014. And we are now in the midst of that exciting but rather undignified period when sports scramble for inclusion in the next games. After the success of skicross in Vancouver the organisers will be willing to give an exciting new sport a chance. The BBC’s Anna Thompson suggests that slopestyle might well be the big winner:
It seems slopestyle’s inclusion is not just a pipe dream – pardon the pun – as the sport has powerful allies who have seen its popularity rise and realise its importance in engaging the audience – especially the younger generation.
Marcel Looze, snowboard director at the International Ski Federation, told me: “I am definitely pushing slopestyle for Sochi.”
And Christophe Dubi, the International Olympic Committee’s sports director, said: “Slopestyle is an event we will consider adding. This is something we see in every resort across Europe, America and Asia and we could consider it in future.”
Slopestyle is an event where snowboarders traverse a course full of varying jumps and obstacles, and are marked on their stylish execution. So it’s more like moguls or half-pipe, but on a bordercross-type course. It can also be done on skis. Here is footage of slopestyle snowbarding from the 2009 Snowboard Slopestyle Finals:
For all the controversy it might have led engendered, there can be no doubting that on its own terms Canada’s ‘Own the Podium’ strategy was successful. They finished atop the medal table, with fourteen golds. This was the largest golden haul of any nation at ant Winter games, surpassing the thirteen golds won by the USSR in Innsbruck 1976 and by Norway in Salt Lake City 2002. They didn’t get the most medals won of all types – their 26 was fewer than Germany’s 30 or USA’s 37 – but the table is measured first by number of Golds. And so Canada have triumphed.
It all started with Alexandre Bilodeau in the men’s moguls: Canada’s first on home territory and a genuine weight-lifting moment. Freed from the pressure of duck-breaking, Canada’s athletes were free to express themselves. Of the thirteen remaining triumphs, three in particular stood out for me. First Maëlle Ricker in the women’s snowboard cross. Cool, calm and ruthless she managed to rise above the chaos and madness of the games’ most exciting new sport.
Scott Moir and Tessa Virtue performed majestically in the ice dancing, recalling the finest moments of Torvill and Dean. Were it not for Kim Yu-Na they would have been the figure dancing sensation of the games, but the South Korean’s displays were so beautiful that she has captured the imaginations of the skating world more than anyone else of this generation. But that is to take nothing away from Moir and Virtue.
And then the one the Canadians wanted the most – men’s ice hockey. The team looked as if the pressure of expectation was too much for them in the group stage: they needed a shoot-out to beat Switzerland and lost 5-3 to the USA. This forced them into the indignity of a play-off for a quarter-final spot, in which they dispatched Germany 8-2. Facing the much-fancied Russians in the quarters, they looked set for an embarrassing exit. But a heroic 7-3 win gave them the momentum they needed and with the crowd on their side they dispatched Slovakia 3-2 in the semis. Then the final against the US – the biggest game in hockey. They went 2-0 up but were taken to overtime by a USA side that didn’t know when they were beaten. And who better than Sidney Crosby, ‘The Next One’, to come up with that golden goal to win it for them.
In Nova Scotia there might have been some mild disappointment that the native son Crosby had had little part in an apparently relentless surge to the gold medal with goals from Jonathan Toews and Corey Perry.
As it was though Crosby was merely biding his historic time.
Ryan Kesler brought the Americans back into the game in the second period and then it was mostly attrition. The forechecking of both sides became furious and there were moments when the tension came close to the point of explosion.
Thank you for putting the exclamation point on Canada’s record 14 gold medals won here, unequalled by any nation, host or otherwise, in the history of the Winter Olympics.
Thank you for not taking a shift off, even when you were frustrated at every turn by an American body or stick in your way, all day long. Thank you for following that puck into the corner in overtime after you were sandwiched trying to split the U.S. defence, and thank you for heading for the hole when you left the puck with Jarome Iginla and two American defencemen stuck in the corner.
Crosby is to Canadian hockey what an amalgam of Beckham and Rooney would be for English football; the biggest star in Canadian sport, yet one who had been largely anonymous during the latter stages of the tournament.
Yet what a time to discover a date with destiny. As Canada swept forward seven minutes and 40 seconds into overtime, the man wearing the same 87 shirt as most of the 19,000 crowd, took a second to control the puck and another to whip it past the splendid US goaltender Ryan Miller.
Cue utter hysteria. This replaces Paul Henderson’s winning goal in the 1972 ‘Summit Series’ against the Soviets as the single grandest moment in Canadian sport, its Geoff Hurst moment.
The collective psyche was on full display inside Canada Hockey Place, bathed mostly in red-clad fans who cheered wildly for the home team, never more than when the gold medals were placed around the necks of the players, particularly Crosby, the 22-year-old superstar who solidified his status as the latest Canadian hockey legend.
It was seen on the painted, tear-streaked faces of fans as they spilled into the streets from bars and homes, desperate to share the experience. Cars quickly carried reveling reinforcements from the far-flung suburbs. Even the police, anxious about how the celebrations would end as the day turned to night, zipped up Pender Street with their horns blaring, a driver’s fist pumping out the window.
A golden goal by Sidney Crosby, the golden boy of Canadian hockey, seven minutes into overtime secured a famous victory in the sport so entwined with the nation’s identity. It was a wonderful strike, a moment for the generations and a fitting end to a very Canadian Olympics. Joy was unconfined and, if the tumult within the Canada Hockey Palace is anything to go by, it is destined to last a very, very long time.
One of the triumphs of the organisation of the Winter Olympics was the scheduling of the biggest event – the final of the men’s ice hockey – on the last evening of the games. As the pinnacle of the most popular spectator sport included in the winter games this was always going to be climactic. But no-one expected that it would be quite as momentous as it was. Pitting the host nation against their fiercest rivals, a re-match of a group stage game that the USA won 5-3, it was as perfect a gold medal match-up as anyone could have guessed. (Can anyone doubt, now, that USA-Canada has replaced USA-Russia as the most fiercely-contested rivalry in ice hockey?)
Everywhere you looked there were sub-plots. Not merely the USA/Canada rivalry, which is about so much more than simply bragging rights on the ice rink. The games had been dominated by Canada’s controversial ‘Own the Podium’ strategy, a naked attempt to win more medal than the Americans and to rub their faces in it – a reversal of what they perceived to be years of American gamesmanship and triumphalism. This rivalry was only stoked by the US’s surprise win in the group stage. But the Canadians had momentum on the side, thanks to a transformative 7-3 quarter final win over the much-fancied Russia. Having beaten Slovakia 3-2 in the semi final they had a partisan home crowd on their side going into this clash.
And it started so well for them: they went 1-0 ahead through Jonathan Toews sneaking in behind a static US defence and shotting home from a narrow angle. A smart move in the second period ended with Corey Perry doubling Canada’s advantage.
But worries people have about the mental strength of this Canadian side looked to be confirmed as they failed to kill off the US but rather let them back into the game. Ryan Kesler kept the game alive, the Vancouver Canuck scoring on his home rink, as the US laid siege in their hunt for an equaliser.
It looked as if Canada would hold out and take gold, but with just 24.4 seconds left on the clock Zach Parise snuck in between two Canadians and tied the game at 2-2. It was as dramatic a moment as the games had seen thus far, and stunned the Canadians on and off the rink. The tie was sent to overtime, with the gold medal going to the team that scored the next goal.
It was tense, nervous and captivating, and ultimately it was Canada’s. Sidney Crosby, the 22 year old in whom so much Canadian hope is invested, exchanged passes with Jarome Iginla and scored. Gold for the home nation, in the most dramatic Olympics ice hockey moment since the Miracle on Ice. See it all here.
There’s a half-baked and slightly silly scandal brewing today: the IOC reaction to an impromptu on-rink celebration of the Gold-winning Canadian women’s hockey team yesterday.
Having beaten fierce rivals USA 2-0 in the final, the gold medal winners relaxed on the rink with a few cans of beer. It was a nice sight, a show of relief and fulfillment after years of preparation and weeks of competition. See photos here. But because one of the players was too young to be legally drinking, and because it blurred the line between athlete and human which is so important to the Olympics’ self-image, IOC Executive Director Gilbert Felli spoke out against it:
“It is not what we want to see,” he told the Associated Press. “I don’t think it’s a good promotion of sport values. If they celebrate in the changing room, that’s one thing, but not in public. We will investigate what happened.”
It’s hard to disagree with The Times’ blogger Rick Broadbent:
The drink debate smacks of the same small-mindedness that governs much of the greatest show on earth. The 18-year-old aside, does it really matter if some of the players had a post-match drink and people saw them doing it? A Canadian hockey official said the team would strive to uphold Olympic values in the future and that he hoped nobody had been offended. Given half of the witnesses will have been drinking throughout – yes you can buy beer down there – I find that unlikely.
I hope nothing comes of any investigation. Indeed, what is there to investigate? They were drinking. Full stop. A team, who have toiled for each other, won Olympic gold and come to the end of a journey celebrated in a way that many other non-Olympic sports encourage – football, rugby, golf, Formula One etc.
The IOC needs to get things in perspective and give these woman a break. And a Bacardi chaser.
The last few years have seen a major trend of data-based analyses of sports, attempting to break free from the shackles of ‘conventional wisdom’ which dominate how people understand sport. This trend largely sprung out of Michael Lewis’ masterpiece Moneyball which described how the Oakland As tried to revolutionise their methods based on new understandings.
I found an article based on such statistical methods, looking at the age of gold medal winners across the history of the Winter Olympics, as divided by event. It finds that while for most sports there is no real trend, both luge and alpine skiing have seen the age of gold medal winners steadily increase over time – a trend it puts down to developments in technology:
Luge depends heavily on technology, particularly the track and the sled. As we’ve already seen at the Vancouver Olympics, the track’s design has come under fire for pushing speeds too high, possibly contributing to the death of Georgian luger Nodar Kumaritashvili. Could the technology be giving an edge to older lugers? Better sleds might make control easier, and thus give wily veterans more opportunity to make up for their diminished athleticism with experience. But, the trend could also be illusory. While the age of men and women winners has increased since the late 1980s, it could just be random variability that may disappear over the next few Olympics. The average age of singles luge medalists in 2010 has declined: 28 for men and 24 for women.
With the exit of David Murdoch’s men’s curlers, Team GB’s medal quest looks to have come to an end. The result? One gold, but no silvers or bronzes. The target at the start of the games was three medals, with colour unspecified. So this has inevitably led to a debate regarding the relative value of different medals. Is one gold preferable to, say, three bronzes? This is naturally the spin from the BOA, as Lawrence Donegan reports:
UK Sport, which provides the financial backing for elite athletes in this country, had publicly set a target of three medals, while privately there were realistic hopes of as many as six medals. Andy Hunt, the chief executive of the British Olympic Association, said: “We set out to do better than we did in Turin, and Amy’s success has checked off that objective. We would have liked more medals, obviously, but this has been a good outcome.”
Hunt cited a list of other “achievements” by member of the 53-strong British team, including eight personal bests and seven top-10 finishes (two of which came in the men’s and women’s curling, where only 10 teams were entered). “We had also given the opportunity to some athletes to be at their first Games in sports such as ski-cross and other freestyle sports, what you could call developmental sports. Hopefully, that will pay dividends in future, both for the athletes themselves and from the point of view of inspiring others.”
Of course, it goes without saying that we would rather have made up the three medal target with extra medals to go alongside Amy Williams’ gold. A bronze for the men’s curling, and maybe one for Chemmy Alcott too would have been a perfect combination. But that’s not what we’ve got. So the question is: was this a successful haul, or not? It’s tough – but I’d say yes.
Amy Williams’ heroics in the skeleton were so exciting, so memorable that they provided a moment of national celebration which more than outweighed any accumulation of respectable bronze and silver performances. Ultimately, the Olympics are about moments of excellence and glory, and that’s what Williams provided. It was one of the great British sporting moments of the last five years – on a par with the Ashes wins of 2005 and 2009 – and means that Vancouver 2010 will survive in the national sporting consciousness in a way that a bronze-laden games would not.
Going into the women’s figure skating free skate there was understandable attention on Joannie Rochette, who showed remarkable moral fortitude to compete just days after the sudden death of her mother. Rochette came a very commendable third on the short program, and the same finish on the free skate won her the Bronze medal.
Gold, though, was won by Kim Yu-Na of South Korea, who also triumphed at last year’s World Championships. Her total score of 150.06 on the free skate was a world record, as was her overall score of 228.56. Our favourite figure skating blog, Required Elements, described her performance as ‘absolutely a dream, with an effortless skate that exuded artistry without even trying.’ Her is the liveblog of Kim’s performance:
Yu-Na Kim (South Korea, Music: Concerto in F by Gershwin): OMG OMG OMG. here she is, looking gorgeous as usual. SO NERVOUS. Triple lutz/triple toe. These are great. Triple flip – ——–YESSSSS. Double axel, double toe, tano something. Nice spins here. Pretty Kim faces. Spiral…not the smoothest, but I will ignore now. Spread eagle into double axel triple toe – SOO GOOD. I wish I was there to see her do these jumps. Triple salchow, perfect. Triple lutz, a little stiff on the landing but still clean. Now just to sell it, the footwork and dancing. Double axel. Sit spin, good position, nice changes. Final spin, great. Amazing. Now she’s emotional. She just won, there is no need for the scores. She was a little tight in some jumps but she still did them CLEAN, because she is just sooo good. she is like…not even trying out there. Just so perfectly fits the music and the program. I can’t even describe it. AND THERE IS A RECORD. Wow. 150.06 for the free, 228.56 for the total.
Britain’s greatest sports writer, Simon Barnes, has written in The Timescriticising Canada’s controversial ‘Own the Podium’ policy, designed to maximise their medal haul at the cost of some popularity. He says that the weight of expectation is often too much to bear for host nation competitors:
The pressure of expectation on home athletes at any Olympic Games is colossal: ask Cathy Freeman, ask Konstantinos Kenteris and Katerina Thanou, ask Liu Xiang. Canada’s campaign simply added to the pressure. Hardly surprising that so many of them choked.
Mellisa Hollingsworth had a shocker in the skeleton, Charles Hamelin struggled in short-track, Manuel Osborne-Paradis blew his chances in the alpine skiing, Chris Del Bosco failed in ski cross. There have been successes, but not enough to put Canada on top. Ashleigh McIvor was stunning in the women’s ski cross and the ice-dance pair, Tessa Virtue and Scott Moir, put together a skate of real beauty. The women bobbers were brilliant. No one with sporting blood could resent these gold medals: just reward for sumptuous performances.
But Own The Podium, a campaign put together with C$117 million (about £72 million) from federal, provincial, territorial and corporate money, has been a failure in terms of medals. In short, it got what it deserved. It deserved to fail because it was conceived in bad sportsmanship and simple envy.
It’s a compelling point and a fascinating article. James Lawton, one of the few writers who can match Barnes for insight and clarity, has an article today saying that the success of the women’s ice hockey – who won gold yesterday – and the men’s hockey – who are starting to find some momentum after a poor start – might just fulfill the expectations brought about by the campaign:
In all this Canadian euphoria there is also the prospect of redemption, at least to some degree, in the controversial “Own the Podium” policy. The bobsled triumph brought Canada level with the United States and Germany on the mark of seven gold medals – and with a considerable power to add more. Whether this ultimately justifies the pressure brought to bear on so many individual athletes, and the expectations created across the country, is a philosophical argument that in the current atmosphere can plainly wait.
Loading ...