2024 Paris Olympics General (non-Basketball/Track & Field) Discussion Thread

[Shock Defeat]

I have read that the beach volleyball will be at Santa Monica Pier.

I hope they put some events in The Forum...at least the womens basketball final.

LA is going to be really spread out. There’s going to be events at the coliseum, Malibu, down to Dana point. The Olympic planners for LA have done quite a bit of media. If you are interested they have been on many, many podcasts the past 4+ years. This is going to be the biggest Olympics ever

are they gonna have events in the Intuit dome? It's the best sports arena in town. Ballmer didn't pay billions for it to not be used durung the biggest sporting event in the world.

[LordCovington33]

And the award for sucking the joy out of this thread by writing more than one million words goes to …

[azcatz11]

I hope they put some events in The Forum...at least the womens basketball final.

LA is going to be really spread out. There’s going to be events at the coliseum, Malibu, down to Dana point. The Olympic planners for LA have done quite a bit of media. If you are interested they have been on many, many podcasts the past 4+ years. This is going to be the biggest Olympics ever

are they gonna have events in the Intuit dome? It's the best sports arena in town. Ballmer didn't pay billions for it to not be used durung the biggest sporting event in the world.

Honestly not sure. I would assume they have to be doing stuff at the new Clippers arena though

[LordCovington33]

I hope they put some events in The Forum...at least the womens basketball final.

LA is going to be really spread out. There’s going to be events at the coliseum, Malibu, down to Dana point. The Olympic planners for LA have done quite a bit of media. If you are interested they have been on many, many podcasts the past 4+ years. This is going to be the biggest Olympics ever

are they gonna have events in the Intuit dome? It's the best sports arena in town. Ballmer didn't pay billions for it to not be used durung the biggest sporting event in the world.

Induit will be the home of Olympic basketball

[Nuntius]

Hooven is NOT an opinion. You saying so doesn't make it so. This is such blatanly blind science denial it's almost worrisome. And you repeating no scientific consensus exists with zero proof to back it up is, too.

Both boxers failed two XX tests. IK had high T. Hiding behind well we haven't seen the results of the tests therefore they're phenotypically female having failed said tests is inaccurate.

All those scientists previously mentioned, the coaches of boxers who faced IK and LYT who called for tests to be done to begin with, former Olympians and athletes are calling for clarity with the boxers, for sex tests. So is the likely upcoming IOC president, Seb Coe.

We'll how the boxers test come 2028 sex tests. My money is on neither participating by then.

At least future XX athletes will hopefully be able to be better assured that they're competing in a fair and safe boundary.

Let's examine Hooven's tweet, shall we?

She says the following at some point:

I've been asked if men with the DSD 5-ARD (in which ppl cannot convert testosterone into the more potent androgen DHT) experience the typical benefits of male puberty, that would give them an advantage in strength and speed relative to women. This is relevant to questions about whether male athletes with 5-ARD should be allowed to compete in the female category. This is an excellent question, because it could be the case that DHT is necessary for the development and maintenance of male-typical muscle, lean body mass and strength. If that were the case, then people with 5-ARD might not have a typical male advantage, because the lack of DHT would perhaps lead to a more feminine pattern of fat, lean body mass and strength. I've wondered about this myself and have looked into the evidence.

So, what's the evidence she looked into? She tells us right away:

Perhaps the top researcher in this area, Shalendar Bhasin, who is scrupulous in his methods, has examined this very question. The answer appears to be: no, testosterone does not need to be converted to DHT to exert its typical anabolic effects. These findings are reported in his 2012 study, "Effect of Testosterone Supplementation With and Without a Dual 5α-Reductase Inhibitor on Fat-Free Mass in Men With Suppressed Testosterone Production, A Randomized Controlled Trial." (It is linked to below—and since it's paywalled, I've included the graphs that show comparisons between the placebo and DHT— inhibited conditions, with no difference on the various outcomes.)

For more detail, the investigators wanted to examine the effects of suppressing DHT on muscle mass, strength, and sexual function. This important because one of the treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia and male-pattern baldness is to suppress DHT, but clinicians have been concerned about effects on other outcomes that affect health and quality of life. Participants (healthy men, 18 to 50, with normal T levels) had their T blocked, and were given graded doses of T, along with either placebo or a drug that blocked the conversion of T to DHT. So both groups had T, but only one, the placebo group, also had DHT. After 20 weeks of treatment, changes in lean body mass, muscle, and strength were assessed. There were no significant difference between the placebo and DHT-blocked groups in these outcomes.

See the problem here? See the sleight of hand that Hooven pulls here? She is trying to use the findings of a research conducted on non-intersex people as evidence for her position on intersex people. The focus of the research conducted by Shalendar Bhasin (whose research and findings I have no reason to dispute) and the focus of Hooven's tweets are two entirely different groups of people with different external and internal physiology and yet you wouldn't that from Hooven's tweets. She's obfuscating that fact and pretending that the two groups are the same and therefore what was evidenced to be the case for the focus group in Bhasin's research should be the case for the athletes that Hooven is talking about as well.

That sleight of hand isn't science. That sleight of hand is the abuse of science by a professor who was recently fired from her position and has opted to wade into the current culture war debates (she even published a long anti-DEI piece earlier in the year to explain why "she left Harvard"). You keep pretending that the political biases of your sources are either non-existent or irrelevant to the topic but they absolutely aren't. Keep burying your head in the sand, though.

[Nuntius]

LA is going to be really spread out. There’s going to be events at the coliseum, Malibu, down to Dana point. The Olympic planners for LA have done quite a bit of media. If you are interested they have been on many, many podcasts the past 4+ years. This is going to be the biggest Olympics ever

are they gonna have events in the Intuit dome? It's the best sports arena in town. Ballmer didn't pay billions for it to not be used durung the biggest sporting event in the world.

Induit will be the home of Olympic basketball

Really? Not Staples Center? That's interesting.

[LordCovington33]

are they gonna have events in the Intuit dome? It's the best sports arena in town. Ballmer didn't pay billions for it to not be used durung the biggest sporting event in the world.

Induit will be the home of Olympic basketball

Really? Not Staples Center? That's interesting.

Crypto will host the gymnastics

[zimpy27]

I have read that the beach volleyball will be at Santa Monica Pier.

I hope they put some events in The Forum...at least the womens basketball final.

LA is going to be really spread out. There’s going to be events at the coliseum, Malibu, down to Dana point. The Olympic planners for LA have done quite a bit of media. If you are interested they have been on many, many podcasts the past 4+ years. This is going to be the biggest Olympics ever

Surely the new Clippers stadium will get a look in

[Sofia]

And the award for sucking the joy out of this thread by writing more than one million words goes to …

Another gold medal for the USA!

[Black Jack]

are they gonna have events in the Intuit dome? It's the best sports arena in town. Ballmer didn't pay billions for it to not be used durung the biggest sporting event in the world.

Induit will be the home of Olympic basketball

Really? Not Staples Center? That's interesting.

It's a no-brainer. If they went with Staples everyone would be angry, given how fancy the Clippers new home is.

[xb3at band1tx]

Induit makes more sense for bball as it will still have the new finish compared to the old Crypto.

Crypto is directly connected to the LA Convention Center though so I'm sure they will get a ton of use out of it with various sports. That is a lot of space.

[LordCovington33]

Iduit makes more sense for bball as it will still have the new finish compared to the old Crypto.

Crypto is directly connected to the LA Convention Center though so I'm sure they will get a ton of use out of it with various sports. That is a lot of space.

The convention centre will be home to fencing, table tennis, TKD and wrestling.

SoFi stadium will hold the swimming. The crowds will be huge for that one. They will reconfigure it with makeshift stands to hold 38,000 people.

[Nuntius]

Induit will be the home of Olympic basketball

Really? Not Staples Center? That's interesting.

It's a no-brainer. If they went with Staples everyone would be angry, given how fancy the Clippers new home is.

Ah, I see. Thanks for the info!

[bledredwine]

Cuba blows my mind. It's impressive how such a small country could have such a renowned coaching culture (boxing) to produce the majority of olympic gold's across nearly all weight divisions. it'd be so cool to travel and take some lessons in Cuba.

[DutchManDanFan]

US won the medal table again.

If you put this in perspective it's not a big achievement. I made this list for the amount of gold (and total) medals per 1 M inhabitants, for countries with at least 2.5 M inhabitants
1. New Zealand: 1.91 (3.83) - 5.2 M
2. Netherlands: 0.85 (1.93) - 17.6 M
3. Georgia: 0.80 (1,88) - 3.7 M
4. Ireland: 0,79 (1.38) - 5.1 M
5. Norway 0.73 (1.46) - 5.5 M
6. Australia 0.68 (2.00) - 26.4 M
7. Hungary 0.58 (1.87) - 10.2 M
8. Croatia 0.50 (1.75) - 4.0 M
9. Serbia 0.42 (0,70) - 7.1 M
10. Sweden 0.38 (1.04) - 10.6 M
---
16. South Corea: 0.25 (0.62) - 51.8 M
17. France: 0.25 (0.99) - 64.8 M
18. Canada: 0.23 (0.70) - 38.8 M
21. UK: 0.21 (0.96) - 67.7 M
22. Italy 0.20 (0.68) - 58.9 M
24. Japan 0.16 (0.36) - 123.3 M
26. Germany 0.14 (0.48) - 83.3 M
27. USA 0.12 (0.37) - 340.0 M
30. Spain 0.11 (0.38) - 47.5 M
42. China 0.03 (0.06) - 1,425.7 M

Maybe I forgot a few countries, but not many. Very small countries with only 1 medal winner should not be included in this list (imo). I could set a bar for a minimum of total medals or different medal winners as well. Most countries with less then 10 M inhabitants fall out the list if I put a bar at 10 medals. Not New Zealand though, which is the clear winner if you look at it this way..

[Mamba81p]

Induit will be the home of Olympic basketball

Really? Not Staples Center? That's interesting.

It's a no-brainer. If they went with Staples everyone would be angry, given how fancy the Clippers new home is.

Also the clippers arena is made for basketball, while crypto is more versatile, because Kings play there too. It makes a huge difference in seating and the overall experience

[DOT]

US won the medal table again.

If you put this in perspective it's not a big achievement. I made this list for the amount of gold (and total) medals per 1 M inhabitants, for countries with at least 2.5 M inhabitants
1. New Zealand: 1.91 (3.83) - 5.2 M
2. Netherlands: 0.85 (1.93) - 17.6 M
3. Georgia: 0.80 (1,88) - 3.7 M
4. Ireland: 0,79 (1.38) - 5.1 M
5. Norway 0.73 (1.46) - 5.5 M
6. Australia 0.68 (2.00) - 26.4 M
7. Hungary 0.58 (1.87) - 10.2 M
8. Croatia 0.50 (1.75) - 4.0 M
9. Serbia 0.42 (0,70) - 7.1 M
10. Sweden 0.38 (1.04) - 10.6 M
---
16. South Corea: 0.25 (0.62) - 51.8 M
17. France: 0.25 (0.99) - 64.8 M
18. Canada: 0.23 (0.70) - 38.8 M
21. UK: 0.21 (0.96) - 67.7 M
22. Italy 0.20 (0.68) - 58.9 M
24. Japan 0.16 (0.36) - 123.3 M
26. Germany 0.14 (0.48) - 83.3 M
27. USA 0.12 (0.37) - 340.0 M
30. Spain 0.11 (0.38) - 47.5 M
42. China 0.03 (0.06) - 1,425.7 M

Maybe I forgot a few countries, but not many. Very small countries with only 1 medal winner should not be included in this list (imo). I could set a bar for a minimum of total medals or different medal winners as well. Most countries with less then 10 M inhabitants fall out the list if I put a bar at 10 medals. Not New Zealand though, which is the clear winner if you look at it this way..

First, this is how losers think lol

Second, seems a bit deceptive if you're counting team medals as just one. For instance, there were 12 members of the basketball team, but your chart here counts them all as just one person which I'm pretty sure they're not

Furthermore, if we were being honest about all this, you would remove redundant medals, so if one person wins 2 medals, that should only count as one because it's just one person

Also, show the percentage of total athletes from the population. New Zealand sent 195 athletes out of their population of 5.2 million, which is about .00375%. Compared to the US with 592 out of 340 million, which is .000174%. New Zealand is sending significantly more people to the Olympics per capita than the US is

In short, suck it, America #1.

Watch on YouTube

[perempe20]

Kobe is no longer with us, but even Shaq would have been so much better than Tom Cruise.

[DutchManDanFan]

US won the medal table again.

If you put this in perspective it's not a big achievement. I made this list for the amount of gold (and total) medals per 1 M inhabitants, for countries with at least 2.5 M inhabitants
1. New Zealand: 1.91 (3.83) - 5.2 M
2. Netherlands: 0.85 (1.93) - 17.6 M
3. Georgia: 0.80 (1,88) - 3.7 M
4. Ireland: 0,79 (1.38) - 5.1 M
5. Norway 0.73 (1.46) - 5.5 M
6. Australia 0.68 (2.00) - 26.4 M
7. Hungary 0.58 (1.87) - 10.2 M
8. Croatia 0.50 (1.75) - 4.0 M
9. Serbia 0.42 (0,70) - 7.1 M
10. Sweden 0.38 (1.04) - 10.6 M
---
16. South Corea: 0.25 (0.62) - 51.8 M
17. France: 0.25 (0.99) - 64.8 M
18. Canada: 0.23 (0.70) - 38.8 M
21. UK: 0.21 (0.96) - 67.7 M
22. Italy 0.20 (0.68) - 58.9 M
24. Japan 0.16 (0.36) - 123.3 M
26. Germany 0.14 (0.48) - 83.3 M
27. USA 0.12 (0.37) - 340.0 M
30. Spain 0.11 (0.38) - 47.5 M
42. China 0.03 (0.06) - 1,425.7 M

Maybe I forgot a few countries, but not many. Very small countries with only 1 medal winner should not be included in this list (imo). I could set a bar for a minimum of total medals or different medal winners as well. Most countries with less then 10 M inhabitants fall out the list if I put a bar at 10 medals. Not New Zealand though, which is the clear winner if you look at it this way..

First, this is how losers think lol

Second, seems a bit deceptive if you're counting team medals as just one. For instance, there were 12 members of the basketball team, but your chart here counts them all as just one person which I'm pretty sure they're not

Furthermore, if we were being honest about all this, you would remove redundant medals, so if one person wins 2 medals, that should only count as one because it's just one person

Also, show the percentage of total athletes from the population. New Zealand sent 195 athletes out of their population of 5.2 million, which is about .00375%. Compared to the US with 592 out of 340 million, which is .000174%. New Zealand is sending significantly more people to the Olympics per capita than the US is

In short, suck it, America #1.

What a sad (not to say stupid) reaction.
1. I'm not from New Zealand.
2. I'm sure in New Zealand they are very happy and proud they finished 11th, just as we are to finish 6th. Absolutely winners.
3. We know we will never finish in 1st or 2nd place. So we don't care about that.
4. We won gold medals in hockey, man and women. I believe with 20 players per team.
5. There are limits for participants per country for all sports. So relatively smaller countries have more participant by definition. But with quantity there's much more chance for quality. That makes the performance of the New Zealand (and Dutch) athletes so special.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

If you put this in perspective it's not a big achievement. I made this list for the amount of gold (and total) medals per 1 M inhabitants, for countries with at least 2.5 M inhabitants
1. New Zealand: 1.91 (3.83) - 5.2 M
2. Netherlands: 0.85 (1.93) - 17.6 M
3. Georgia: 0.80 (1,88) - 3.7 M
4. Ireland: 0,79 (1.38) - 5.1 M
5. Norway 0.73 (1.46) - 5.5 M
6. Australia 0.68 (2.00) - 26.4 M
7. Hungary 0.58 (1.87) - 10.2 M
8. Croatia 0.50 (1.75) - 4.0 M
9. Serbia 0.42 (0,70) - 7.1 M
10. Sweden 0.38 (1.04) - 10.6 M
---
16. South Corea: 0.25 (0.62) - 51.8 M
17. France: 0.25 (0.99) - 64.8 M
18. Canada: 0.23 (0.70) - 38.8 M
21. UK: 0.21 (0.96) - 67.7 M
22. Italy 0.20 (0.68) - 58.9 M
24. Japan 0.16 (0.36) - 123.3 M
26. Germany 0.14 (0.48) - 83.3 M
27. USA 0.12 (0.37) - 340.0 M
30. Spain 0.11 (0.38) - 47.5 M
42. China 0.03 (0.06) - 1,425.7 M

Maybe I forgot a few countries, but not many. Very small countries with only 1 medal winner should not be included in this list (imo). I could set a bar for a minimum of total medals or different medal winners as well. Most countries with less then 10 M inhabitants fall out the list if I put a bar at 10 medals. Not New Zealand though, which is the clear winner if you look at it this way..

First, this is how losers think lol

Second, seems a bit deceptive if you're counting team medals as just one. For instance, there were 12 members of the basketball team, but your chart here counts them all as just one person which I'm pretty sure they're not

Furthermore, if we were being honest about all this, you would remove redundant medals, so if one person wins 2 medals, that should only count as one because it's just one person

Also, show the percentage of total athletes from the population. New Zealand sent 195 athletes out of their population of 5.2 million, which is about .00375%. Compared to the US with 592 out of 340 million, which is .000174%. New Zealand is sending significantly more people to the Olympics per capita than the US is

In short, suck it, America #1.

What a sad (not to say stupid) reaction.
1. I'm not from New Zealand.
2. I'm sure in New Zealand they are very happy and proud they finished 11th, just as we are to finish 6th. Absolutely winners.
3. We know we will never finish in 1st or 2nd place. So we don't care about that.
4. We won gold medals in hockey, man and women. I believe with 20 players per team.
5. There are limits for participants per country for all sports. So relatively smaller countries have more participant by definition. But with quantity there's much more chance for quality. That makes the performance of the New Zealand (and Dutch) athletes so special.

Watch on YouTube

America #1, suck it.