Türkiye’s worst performance in Summer Olympics (in terms of gold metal) since 1980

The Moscow Olympics in 1980 was boycotted. Here is the medal count, compiled by Gemini.

And our opposition leaders were having a good time in Paris, lobbying for an Istanbul Olympics (without government support)

Whether organizing the Olympics is beneficial for a city is complex and multifaceted, with arguments both for and against it. Here are some key points to consider:

Economic Impact

• Costs vs. Benefits: Hosting the Olympics involves significant financial investment, often leading to cost overruns. For example, Tokyo’s 2020 Olympics initially budgeted $7.3 billion but ended up costing around $28 billion[6]. While some cities like Los Angeles in 1984 managed to make a profit by using existing venues and securing private funding, this is not the norm[4].
• Tourism and Employment: The expected boost in tourism and job creation often falls short. For instance, while the London 2012 Olympics aimed to increase tourism, the city actually experienced a decline during the Games[3]. Temporary jobs created often do not benefit the unemployed as anticipated[3].

Infrastructure and Urban Development

• Infrastructure Improvements: Hosting the Olympics can lead to significant infrastructure development, such as improved transportation and urban revitalization. Barcelona’s 1992 Olympics are often cited as a success in this regard, having transformed the city’s waterfront and increased its global profile[2].
• Post-Games Utilization: Many Olympic facilities become “white elephants,” expensive to maintain and with little use after the Games. Examples include the Bird’s Nest Stadium in Beijing and various venues in Athens, which have fallen into disrepair[5].

Social and Cultural Impact

• Displacement and Social Costs: The construction and preparation for the Olympics can lead to the displacement of residents and other social disruptions. In Beijing 2008, an estimated 1.5 million people were evicted to make way for Olympic infrastructure[5].
• Global Profile and Prestige: Hosting the Olympics can enhance a city’s global image and prestige, potentially attracting future investments and tourism. However, this benefit is often intangible and difficult to quantify[1][3].

Conclusion

While hosting the Olympics can offer certain benefits, such as improved infrastructure and increased global visibility, these are often outweighed by the significant financial costs and social challenges. The experience varies widely from city to city, with some achieving long-term gains and others facing ongoing economic burdens. Cities considering hosting the Olympics must carefully weigh these factors and plan strategically to maximize potential benefits while minimizing risks.

Citations:
1. Council on Foreign Relations – Economics of Hosting the Olympic Games
2. Britannica – 7 Ways Hosting the Olympics Impacts a City
3. The Week – Olympics Cost Hosting
4. Global Citizen – Is Hosting the Olympics Really Worth It?
5. ProCon.org – Hosting the Olympic Games: Top 3 Pros and Cons
6. New York Times – Olympics Economics