Facebook PixelDiscontinue the Olympic games, yet keep competing at already existing stadia or venues
Create newCreate new

Discontinue the Olympic games, yet keep competing at already existing stadia or venues

Image credit: k8cheung from Pixabay

Shireesh Apte
Shireesh Apte May 22, 2022
Please leave the feedback on this idea

Is it original or innovative?


Is it feasible?


Is it targeting an unsolved problem?


Is it concisely described?

Bounty for the best solution

Provide a bounty for the best solution

Bounties attract serious brainpower to the challenge.

Currency *
Who gets the Bounty *
The Olympic games are a waste of money. The (often newly built) grand stadiums, and venues have zero return on investment (ROI) once the games are over. The burden is especially hard on poor and developing countries where the money could be better spent on much-needed social and poverty alleviating programs. I propose that the Olympic games be discontinued. Instead, I propose that any existing facilities (stadia, venue) already built in any country be accredited (just as academic institutions are accredited) for their ability to accurately measure the "highest", "strongest" and "fastest".
Such a policy will allow a person in Sao Paolo, Brazil to run a 100 m event tomorrow. He/She could procure an appointment at any accredited stadium in the country, and run/swim/jump/throw.... on the prescribed day. Accredited Judges in that Country could time/judge the event.
In this scenario, the title of Olympic champion can be overturned as soon as someone "beats" that record in any accredited stadium/venue at any time. There would still be Olympic champions; just not the ROI bereft grand and exhorbitantly costly venues/ceremonies associated with them. The dollars thus saved are better spent on schools, hospitals, the environment, healthcare.
Creative contributions

Olympic redesign

jnikola Jun 11, 2022
I agree that the Olympics are not profitable, but I don't think they are ever meant to be. From their beginnings (the ancient Olympics), they had a sacral note and were held in the honor of Zeus. Proof of this was a rule that no wars were happening at the times of games, to make all the sportsman travels safe (Olympic truce). Politicians would announce new political alliances, and important changes and prove their dominance through sports. Also, in ancient times, the Games were always held only in Olympia. In modern times, the sacral note vanished from the Games, but several new ones were introduced. Along with commercialism and politics, came diversity and unity. Although the Olympics became huge propaganda, they still remain the biggest sports event in human history, gathering athletes of all nations and races in many sports, and promoting the most important values. Let's not forget that, although they are nonprofitable, competing in the Olympics is still a dream of every athlete in the world.

The idea
In that manner, I propose not discontinuation, but an Olympics redesign.
How would it work?
Olympics should help the hosting country to raise its living standard.
I don't know if you heard about the Eurovision, but it's a song competition where each European country (plus some other) compete for the best song. It was never about the money, but about touristic propaganda, politics and fame. It's happening every year and it is actually a non-profit event financed by the fees of each participating broadcaster, contributions from the host broadcaster and the city, sponsorships, ticket sales, merchendise and other. Since the requirements for the event are not big, no additional venues are built.
The same could be done for the Olympics.
  • Games would be held in like they are now - each Games in different country. Country would be chosen according to their application and status - low income countries would have priority. Why we need a central event every four years, and not the always lasting Olympic competition using accredited centers and Judges, is to give some countries a chance to be seen, for people to come there and media to broadcast the current state. It enlights people around a world, teaches them about the situation in the hosting country, and can result in better understanding and empathy = more money.
  • With the digital revolution coming in, requirements for huge stadiums, arenas and other could be reduced and replaced with live broadcasts, first-person cameras, etc. to lower the expenses of the hosting country and introduce novel elements to the Olympics
  • Part of the sports infrastructure would be newly built, while the rest would be refurbished and transported from the old Olympics site
  • The games would be financed through participation and broadcasting fees, sponsorships, ticket sales, merchendise and other (NEW!)
  • The only thing the hosting country should invest in is the promotion of the country and the marketing of the Games.
  • All the money from the participation and broadcast fees, merchandise and etc. (would be more than the money saved) would be given back to the hosting country to pay for sport infrastructure and invested in building hospitals, schools and other infrastructure, instead of stadiums (NEW!)
Participating countries would help the hosting country to develop and benefit from the Games. The Games would become a giant charity event that doubles as a podium for the newest technological advancements, creative ways of tracking, filming or using local infrastructure to do sports, and, at the same time, send messages and acts of hope and unity through sport. What do you think?
Olympics empowering a positive change rather than Olympics discountinuination. Use publicity to earn money to help the host.


Please leave the feedback on this idea
Shireesh Apte
Shireesh Apte2 years ago
Is there any data to suggest that post-Olympic foreign investment in the host country increases ?As regards teaching the world the situation in the host country, the Olympics in Brazil (for example) did not showcase the favelas, the inflation, US sanctions, amazon deforestation....., they showcased tourist traps and stereotypes such as the carnival, Rio's beaches, the giant Christ statue, and Gaucho romanticism. Call me cynical but better understanding and empathy do not lead to more investment, return on capital, high interest rates and an investment friendly Government do.
Please leave the feedback on this idea
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni2 years ago
Just to be sure, you are saying that the athletes could compete at different centers anytime any day? They need not gather in one country at a time to showcase their talent? This seems possible. I would suggest keeping one game at one center only. For example, there should be only one stadium in the world where you run the 100 m race. No other stadium should host this particular event. Similarly, only 1 stadium should host football matches or gymnastics. This is because the weather and other geographical conditions can affect the results. Time taken for a person X to run 100 m at one location may be different for the same person to run to 100 at a different location.
A disadvantage of such a system is that there will be countries that will always benefit from having a "home ground". One sport in one country will inevitably lead that country to promote the growth of that sport. The country will tend to develop more athletes playing that sport. Something to note.


Please leave the feedback on this idea
jnikola2 years ago
Shubhankar Kulkarni I saw that I didn't explain it well, so I updated the text above. I am against competing at different centres anytime any day. I support Games being held in different countries, but with huge financial and regulatory updates.
Please leave the feedback on this idea

Add your creative contribution

0 / 200

Added via the text editor

Sign up or


Guest sign up

* Indicates a required field

By using this platform you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

General comments