Forum menu
In a [s]country[/s] [b]city[/b] with an abundance of easily accessible mountains it is a travesty having that course.
London having so many mountains... It isn't the UK Olympics.
Looks more techy than most XC courses and well done on the report mboy!
Who is paying for the Olympics.. Just going to google it.
I like the look of the switchbacks cut into what is essentially a sloping field.
[img] 
[/img]
It it were a trail centre it would be a bit shite, but it's not a trail centre it a race course.
That section gives a good overview for the telly, stick a camera on a gantry and you'll be able to cover a large area of the course in a single shot getting an excellent overview of the race situation and It's got room for thousands of spectators, who come race day will be making a lot of noise.
I reckon it will be pretty good.
Actually I'd love to see motorised cameras on overhead cables able to follow riders as the go up the climb.
[url= http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23511548-how-much-whos-paying-and-the-key-players.do ]Whos Paying[/url]
Ok. Looks like its the UK rather than London paying for it.. Please stop any further comments saying its London's Olympics..
Contributors
[b]Central government - £5.975bn
National Lottery - £2.175bn[/b]
Greater London Authority - £925m
London Development Agency - £250m
Total - £9.325bn
Whether it reflects what the average forumite sees as mtbing is irrelevant. If the Olympics reflected the typical sporting activities typical of wider society you'd see wife-beating, bottle fighting or mixed (bottle/ glass/pool cue/ fighting) disciplines replacing boxing and martial arts, and various configurations of wheezing, impotent 45 year old men stumbling after a ball on a bit of astroturf for an hour followed by a few watered-down lagers.
I reckon that as an Olympic xc race course it looks like it will do the job (with all the constraints applied to this kind of event) pretty well. Whether having an Olympic xc race course is of any great concern is another matter, as is the value of the Olympics themselves.
London Olympics mean it's centred on London.
Get used to it.
Please stop any further comments saying its London's Olympics..
No, because it [b]is[/b] the London Olympics.
For Atlanta 1996 Colorado would've been a better venue for the XC race, but it wasn't the USA Olympics. I doubt the state of Georgia paid for the Olympics in full though.
I'm sure Lord Coe will be very interested in your points. You should write to him, expressing why the sport with the lowest predicted spectator figures (I worked on the transport supporting the Olympics, 0.5% of spectators across the Games are expected at the XC), should actually be held hundreds of miles from the host city, to please a load of people who know nothing about XC racing. 🙄
In fact, the Alps would've been better, why not just go there? Could do a flat TT course around Amsterday too, and I'm sure there's a decent arena for weightlifting in Spain.
I am not making a comment about the XC course. Who cares where it is. Not my money anyway.
Just in general if the UK is paying the Olympics why should London get all the Glory/investment/contracts. The comments of "shut it is the London Olympics so there" seem a bit of a rubbish argument/bullying??
Just in general if the UK is paying the Olympics why should London get all the Glory/investment/contracts.
Cos it's meant to be a local festival of sport, where all the events are close together. Otherwise why bother?
I'm sure Manchester, Birmingham etc were free to make a bid, and they'd have had UK support if they'd won.
Just in general if the UK is paying the Olympics why should London get all the Glory/investment/contracts. The comments of "shut it is the London Olympics so there" seem a bit of a rubbish argument/bullying??
Jesus 🙄
Countries cannot and have never been able to bid to be hosts Olympic Games. The bid was for a London games, not Birmingham, Not Edinburgh, end of. Get used to it. How it is funded is up to the powers that be, but staging an Olympic Games is considered valuable to the country the host city is in. No city could fund a games by itself these days.
Most of the Olympic sites are being built in areas to provide a lasting legacy to the population around that area.
The UK is paying for it so why can't I be annoyed. The benefit of the Olympics was meant to be for the whole country. Almost all of the contracts and benefit has gone to the South East which is the last place in the UK that needs extra money. Even if there are pockets of poverty the Olympics will not make much difference to them anyway.
The UK is a very small country.
[i]The UK is a very small country. [/i]
In which case the Olympics in the SE will surely benefit all of it?
You can't complain that it's all in the SE then say it's a very small country, that's a self-defeating point. If it's that small then it's easy for everyone to get down there and watch/support it.
❓
Which bit of London winning the bid are you having a problem with exactly?
manchester commonwealth games! was it only manchester that payed for that? 🙄
:yawn:
GEDA you are welcome to your opinion, its wrong tho, its been discussed by people with far more influence than you and the conclusions have already been reached
dont let that stop you from arguing that the rest of history is wrong tho, but dont be surprised if people just walk away from you shaking their heads.
GEDA - stop stirring the flatlanders. They've made a mountain out of a molehill, let them enjoy it.
😆
[url= http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1021275_mps_angry_over_london_bias ]http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1021275_mps_angry_over_london_bias[/url]
[url= http://www.manchesterconfidential.co.uk/News/General/London-Olympics-will-cost-Manchester-dear_388.asp ]http://www.manchesterconfidential.co.uk/News/General/London-Olympics-will-cost-Manchester-dear_388.asp[/url]
[url= http://www.bdonline.co.uk/news/uk/protests-brewing-over-olympic-bias-towards-the-south/5006733.article ]http://www.bdonline.co.uk/news/uk/protests-brewing-over-olympic-bias-towards-the-south/5006733.article[/url]
[url= http://www.the2012londonolympics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8609 ]http://www.the2012londonolympics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8609[/url]
I am sure the London Olympics will be great, but the rest of the UK that actually paid for it, will lose out while London which hardly needed anymore money poured into it will yet again reap and is reaping most of the benefits.
I've been looking at the new Olympic course with a sense of Deja Vue, I knew I'd seen it somewhere before, and Bam!!! - I remembered:-
[url= 
]Deja Vue[/url]
GEDA
To be fair, this thread is neither the time nor the place to be arguing the validity of who is paying for the Olympics... 4 or 5 years ago maybe, getting your local MP to lobby against the then Government!
As it is, you're wasting your breath... The OP started this thread to discuss the merits of the course. Being one of very few that have ridden it, I can tell you that as an XC race course and venue, it should do the job well. It has also come in under budget, and they completed it on time, so hats off to all involved in making it happen!
Moaning about the location is about as pointless as asking "what tyres for" on this forum... The decisions were made loooooong ago, but what I can tell you is that working with what they had, the course builders have done a pretty respectable job. It's tough, it makes you think a lot, you can't relax at all on it, and in no way does it reward your efforts. Pretty much the opposite of our favourite trail centres, but perhaps exactly what an Olympic XC course should be?
MPs are London centric, waste of time. Sorry I stand corrected. Tony Blair supported Newcastle while he was PM, he must have been a Geordie in disguise.
Least I can have a moan on here. Nobody seems to have really told me why the rest of the UK should pay for London's Olympics.
mboy - how come you were allowed to ride it? I'd be keen to give it a go (not at any pace, just for sh*ts and giggles) - guess its out of the question?
GEDA - Member
MPs are London centric, waste of time. Sorry I stand corrected. Tony Blair supported Newcastle while he was PM, he must have been a Geordie in disguise.
Least I can have a moan on here. Nobody seems to have really told me why the rest of the UK should pay for London's Olympics.
pastcaring - Member
manchester commonwealth games! was it only manchester that payed for that?
imo the whole thing is a complete waste of money, but thats another thread...
Least I can have a moan on here.
Do you really need to do that to make yourself feel better?
Nobody seems to have really told me why the rest of the UK should pay for London's Olympics.
And I doubt there's no real answer that would explain it suitably! But if we're on the subject of what our taxes get used for, I don't have any Children, so why the hell should my money go towards funding state education? I rent, so why the hell should I contribute towards Social Housing development?
Arguments all wasted on deaf ears... So no point in even mentioning them, cos nothing is going to change!
mboy - how come you were allowed to ride it? I'd be keen to give it a go (not at any pace, just for sh*ts and giggles) - guess its out of the question?
[url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/2011/03/riding-the-olympic-course/ ]This[/url] and [url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/essex-riders-anyone-free-tomorrow-to-check-out-the-olympic-course ]this[/url] should answer your first question... As for the second one, it's very much out of bounds to the general public at the moment, and is likely to stay that way until after the Olympics, and even then its future is still uncertain.
You pay for other peoples children as they are going to pay for your pension. You pay for social housing as a more equal society is probably happier, more stable and more prosperous. Not quite the same is it? UK pays for jolly for the rich Cockneys.
rich cockneys? You've never seen Stratford have you?
Not sure if GEDA is deliberately being obtuse or genuinely believes what they're saying.
If nothing else, he/she [i]is[/i] keeping this thread animated.
Perhaps the Olympics are like the Royal Family: they both seem madly expensive to run, but overall bring more money/investment into the country than the UK spends on them.
UK pays for jolly for the rich Cockneys.
UK pays for jolly for Manchurians
you seem to be ignoring the fact that the hole country payed for the common wealth games?
, but overall bring more money/investment into the country than the UK spends on them.
i thought most of the olympic games run at a loss?
and if the government hadn't spent the money on the olympics, they would of spent it on expenses! 
Yeah, there are NO deprived or poor areas in London. No siree, not at all.
Streets are paved with gold.
Never said anything about the Commonwealth games. Point is about spending money where money is needed in the UK.
Never said anything about the Commonwealth games. Point is about spending money where money is needed in the UK.
What? Like in East London?
I doubt those who currently live in this area will be able to after the games. Especially when the new housing schemes and facilities have been put in. The cost of land/rent an overall living will rise therefore pricing out the lower paid in society but that doesn't matter at least there will be a couple of lovely new standiums and facilities for the rich to play in. Both Sydney and Athens had issues with up keep of the smaller venues after their games I can't help but think London will to.
I doubt it will make any money either in the long run.
As for the track it still looks like a field with some gravel in but at least it should be good for the TV as no one from the North could afford to get there!
If the spectator numbers were predicted to be low why bother putting it in London at all? O'wait it's the London games funded by the rest of the country, I get it now.
A friend was once asked by an American girl, how far away is London from England? she wasn't very bright but it did say something to me about the clear geographical divides we have.
Eh easy easy some of us up norf own land and we can afford to go to that Londinium town twice a year 8) The course is still shite what ever way you put it.
On the paying one - The whole of the UK including Scotland is paying for the London olympics, Scotland alone pays for the Glasgow commonwealth games.
The course is still shite what ever way you put it
Why do you think that?
On the paying one - The whole of the UK including Scotland is paying for the London olympics, Scotland alone pays for the Glasgow commonwealth games
The Olympics are a teensy bit bigger than the Commonwealth Games, though. As in they actually make the papers outside the UK.
Glasgow are hosting the Commonwealth Games? 😉
TandemJeremy - Member
On the paying one - The whole of the UK including Scotland is paying for the London olympics, Scotland alone pays for the Glasgow commonwealth games.
where does scotland get it's money from? 😯
pastcaring - Member
...where does scotland get it's money from?
We're bleeding the English dry.
Contact your local MP and demand that Scotland goes independent now.
Please.
🙂
Since the people living in the east end live right next door to one of the richest parts of the world I doubt that a few sports facilities and transport links are really going to help them out in any way. Training, education, opportunities and culture/ethics probably have more to do with their situation.
Surely this topic would be a lot better if we were laughing at XCers coming up short on the gap jump and having a seatpost where the sun doesn't shine.
Rather than a tedious Scotland vs England vs the North vs the South bore fest.
Training, education, opportunities and culture/ethics probably have more to do with their situation.
(trolling setting off)
yes, a far better use of 10 billion. imho
Surely this topic would be a lot better if we were laughing at XCers coming up short on the gap jump and having a seatpost where the sun doesn't shine.
Probably as most people on here would not do the gaps or drops with 6 inches of travel and full face and body armour so if some skinny XC racer can do it with their saddle up their arse fair play to them.
Least I can have a moan on here. Nobody seems to have really told me why the rest of the UK should pay for London's Olympics
And as a southerner why should I have to pay for the huge investment in biking facilities which have been built in the north of England and Scotland? I see the bottomless pit of investment which is Glentress has another £850k to build a cycle path to it's trails, whilst the only FC trail centre in Kent has to have a whip round from it's club members to get a few grand to get the trails ridable this year.
I know this is a separate argument to the Olympics, but with the HUGE investment in riding facilities in the parts of the country which already have the best facilities, why begrudge us in the SE the little investment we get. Especially when arguably we currently have the worst facilities?
Fed up with the northerner/Scottish chip on the shoulder about investment when broadly speaking the further away you get from London the more is spent per head of population.
Oh and for the parts of the world who don't speak English as a first language it's usually All Terrain Biking, NOT Mountain biking. Hence you can have XC races in places like the Netherlands without the pedants getting upset about the lack of mountains.
And now I've done something I said I was never going to do - get involved in a stupid argument on this forum!