The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

There should be two permanent locations for the Summer and Winter Olympics

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
olympics has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/22/2017 Category: Sports
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 836 times Debate No: 102142
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




The Olympic Games have long been held in rotating cities around the world. I believe that there should be two permanent locations, one for the summer and one for the winter. There are many advantages to this decision: cities will not be physically destroyed by the construction of the buildings, socially collapsed because of dislocation of its citizens, nor economically destroyed by the colossal cost of 19 billion dollars (1) that go into the financial aspect of building the housing and the actual stadiums. Twice, Greece has offered to dedicate a permanent residence of 1,250 acres to the Olympics (2), the Summer Olympics could once again return to its home country after over 800 years. The Winter Olympics could be held in a more snowy country such as Norway or Sweden (these are just examples, I am not suggesting that one of these be the actual residence). The Olympics could still be hosted by one country while actually being held in another. The chosen country for each Olympics would be the one to perform the Olympic opening ceremony and pay at least for some of the facilities. This would allow third-world countries that could never possibly hold the Olympics in their own country to host it. These two facilities could provide many jobs both while being used and while not in use. Since they will be used again, they'll need to be kept in shape all year round. They could be used as year-round sporting arenas, where players can come to practice. So to me, it is clear that we need to have two permanent residences for the Summer and Winter Olympics.



The Olympics are about creating international fellowship and for a country to show itself off. A permanent location for the Games is a terrible idea.

1. The one country (or two, if Winter/Summer are in different countries) are automatically at an advantage. The athletes can train full time at the competition venues. For this example I will use Vancouver, Canada for the Winter Olympics. For example, take bobsledding. It is difficult for an ice track to be changed, so Canadian bobsledders can train, memorize the turns, and will dominate at the Games. Yes, some sports are essentially the same everywhere (wrestling in summer and hockey in winter), but there are more that differ (anything cross country, boating, cycling, equestrian, skiing, sliding sports, snowboarding).

2. If the Olympics are restrained to one city, the Games will eventually get boring. Not just for the athletes, but viewers as well. Athletes will see the same city every 4 years. Part of the Olympics is about spreading fellowship and exploring new places. The athletes should be able to see the world. For example, take Abbey Weitzeil. She's an American Olympic swimmer from my hometown. At the Rio Games, she was having the time of her life seeing everything (check her Instagram). Precious experiences like these are part of the Games, traveling across the world to compete with the best. If the permanent locations are started, viewers won't marvel at the beauty of the world. They'll marvel the beauty of Paris, or London, or Beijing, or Sydney or wherever else the Games are held for one or two Olympic cycles. Viewers will quickly see everything there is to see about a city, and will eventually get bored.

I will continue with these points next round, good luck to my opponent! I'm not trying to attack anyone just debate around :)

Weitzeil's Instagram
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Sonofcharl 3 years ago

Your opening statement is grammatically incorrect.

You are actually proposing that each event should have two permanent locations.
Posted by Sonofcharl 3 years ago
Rotating cities. LOL.

My apologies.

But this expression did make me laugh.
Posted by Jammie 3 years ago
I won't accept, because the debate seems boring to me, but the reason they move it around a lot is so that no one country always has it there, so there cannot be 'home pride'and bias.
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.