Another "Duh"

I had no idea, but apparently one of the factors that backers use to get people on board with a bid to host the Olympics is that it will improve fitness amongst their countrymen and increase participation in sports.

The good folks of England are proving it ain't necessarily so. London's winning bid for the 2014 2012 Olympic Games was supposed to spur people to get out and do more, specifically more in some of the sports involved in the Olympics. By the time those games arrived in 2014 2012, a million more Englishmen and women would be out and about, getting themselves fit. But now, organizers are finding, the rate of increased activity amongst the gentry puts the one-million mark on the calendar not in 2014 2012, but more like 2024.

Our "duh" moment comes in two ways. One, the use of the Olympics as some kind of additional incentive to the usual nagging of people to get out and exercise more just sounds silly. "Hey, mate, put down the pint, get your mug out of the chips and let's go throw a javelin or two, like they're going to do in the Olympics!" The first javelin will be thrown through someone's foot so that the thrower can return to his pint and his fried potatoes in peace.

And as the story notes, the Olympics don't spur that kind of response and, according to statistics, never have. This makes sense too: Maybe little kids see Michael Phelps and get the bug to swim competitively, but grownups not so much. Although I am given to understand by female friends and family that the site of Mr. Phelps' broad-shouldered physique is pleasurable to contemplate, said ladies are not thus moved to don swimsuits themselves and try racing through the water as he did (according to one: "I know where the end of the race is and I can wait for him there.")

I like the Olympics and I like watching athletes from around the world compete in them. I like the stories of the single-minded devotion of folks from out back of beyond who dedicate their lives to gaining one chance at the Olympic stage, to wear their countries' flags in front of the whole world no matter where they may place in their particular event. But the idea that there will be some kind of long-term benefit beyond some beefed-up infrastructure or fond nostalgia gets sillier and sillier every time someone tries to pile another supposed plus on top of the ones that already have been shown not to exist.

(H/T The Sports Economist)

(Edited to correct date of London games, thanks to a note from a reader. I know! Who'd believe I have readers?)