Tokyo 2020 Postponed...

Good luck finding one...there are far better ways to make money. 😀

Difference is I can actually find a craps table....

UK not invited? Because of the virus? That just sounds strange.

Curious where you saw this - I can't find anything related to any news today, or anything about GB not being "invited"...

Just like other sports have done. Mind you this is much larger than say the NBA bubble was, but to me that is a good pattern for the IOC to follow. I suspect the demand for condoms in the athlete's village will be down considerably for these Games from prior Games.


That is a rather sad outlook. As someone who competed for ~30 years (some of those including competing internationally, representing my country), I'm pretty sure this is the view of pundits, rather than athletes. People who compete at a high level all know that to win something, you are simply beating whoever shows on that day. You can't compete against someone who isn't there, whether due to sickness, injury, or a pandemic. If sports were all based on rankings and reputation, there would be no reason to hold the events, so you still have to show up and perform under pressure, regardless of who else is there.

I understand that more than most. I spent a considerable amount of my life trying to get there, above all else.

I know and am friends with Olympians from all over the world, have travelled with them to competitions, spent weeks with them on the road, competed against them numerous times (including gold medalists). My personal coach was the Olympic coach for 5 consecutive Olympics, and now my best friend (and former team mate) is the Olympic coach for Tokyo. I helped set selection criteria for athlete selection to all competitions (including the Olympics) when I was the chair of the high performance committee for Archery Canada, so you can trust me when I say I fully understand the unique nature of this competition.

It is the largest sporting event there is, but what most people don't understand is that for the individual sports, it is often the smallest competition of the year in that sport, with the most limited/manipulated field of competitors. More on this below...


I didn't "read past" these. But if I had, to your point it wouldn't be fair - just like saying the legitimate winner of a competition wasn't really legitimate because someone else wasn't there.


This proves the point - they took the competition for granted, the US choked and paid the price because of it. They are far from a "shoe-in", and if you just look at the number of non-US players in the MBA, this is no longer a sport where only US players are of the caliber required to win the Olympics.

The Olympics "special" nature is very limiting to competition in the first place. Using my own sport an an example, the field is limited to 64 men and 64 women for archery. That is quite a small international competition, and I've been in competitions with 300+ competitors on the men's side alone. Competitions where the number of entries from each country is not limited, where in the Olympics you are limited to just 3 archers per gender per country.

In addition, the International Sport Governing Bodies who set the criteria for entry, will often hold back spots to give to countries that are developing the sport, sort of as an incentive, and these people often perform very poorly in relation to those who have truly earned their way. And the way Olympic spots are earned is another area of manipulation, so for example in most individual sports it is the country (NOC) that the spot is awarded to, not the individual. So for example you could perform well at a world championships, and win a spot at the Olympics for your country, and not actually get to fill that spot. It could be given to someone else depending on how spots are awarded in your country and sport - a lesser athlete could be sent in your place for a number of reasons - I've seen it happen first hand to a friend of mine as I coached him through the Olympic trials in 2008.

On the women's side for archery, if it was really open to the "best" from the world, it would likely be close to 60 Korean women, with a few archers from the rest of the world making up the balance. Winning a spot on the Korean team for women or men is far more difficult than winning the Olympics. So the idea that the Olympics only has the "best" is a complete misunderstanding of how sports work in the Olympic context.

I guess my point is, this is far more nuanced than what you are portraying here...those who understand this don't question that the person who has the gold medal hanging on their neck has earned it without the use of an asterisk (doping issues aside of course)...

Cheers, Al

I'm not sure I agree entirely.

My crystal balls say there certainly will be some short term negative impacts, and for the UK the short term will be worse again due to Brexit impacts coming at the same time, however there is a massive structural shift going on and this is creating a lot of opportunity. The pain will no doubt be felt by a large segment of society but IMHO these are not your typical Speedmaster LE buyers. Correspondingly, the opportunities have been and will continue to be available to a small segment of society. Guess who? Your typical current and future high-end watch/car/jewellery/antiques/artwork buyers.

The role of government will be key - if they decide to specifically tax what the rich buy, though an increase in luxury taxes, duties or something similar, then existing luxury goods may increase in value. If they increase capital gains tax or property taxes, then this could trigger excess supply, but likely not for long as those that are targeted make adjustments.

Most likely governments will have to stimulate their economies and then print lots of new cash to cover that debt - and that will push up the value of commodities, and hence the gold and silver on your wrists. Liquid luxury items are great inflation hedges...