CHENNAI: When the Rio Olympics opened on August 5, 2016, India had their best-ever Games four years ago in London. Expectations were very high. Six medals in 2012, though there was no gold like in the 2008 Games, London had sown new seeds of belief. There was optimism and hope. There was a steady flow of money — both for players as well as sports infrastructure. Corporate participation increased. Non-profit organizations filled gaps left by the sports ministry's support system for elite athletes. In short, when India landed in Rio, the excitement was almost infectious.
As days unfolded, India realised that dreams and reality are two different things. There were no medals until the last four days. Hope gave way to despair. The repetition of losses was getting unbearably monotonous and torturous. Finally, two women — Sakshi Malik on August 18 and a day later, PV Sindhu — won medals, and from six in London, India crashed to just two medals.
The story in delayed Games at Tokyo was much more promising as seven medals were won with Neeraj Chopra winning gold. Three years later in Paris, the number dropped to six without gold. That again is not progress. After spending crores in training and exposure, foreign coaches, nutritionists, physios yet the medals tally do not reflect a healthy trend. This definitely points towards some kind of inadequacy in the system.
Bidding progress
If India are struggling to reach double figures in the Olympics, they have made considerable progress elsewhere — bidding for mega Games.
Not just Commonwealth Games, which India are hosting, 2036 Olympics is also on their radar. During an International Olympic Committee (IOC) Congress in Mumbai, the Prime Minister of India announced it. India have technically submitted the bid through the Indian Olympic Association and have entered the continuous dialogue stage with the IOC this year.
After saying no to hosting the 2026 Commonwealth Games once Victoria pulled out due to escalating prices in 2023 and Malaysia refused to host because of similar reasons, India suddenly had a change of heart. Indian Olympic Association (IOA) president who is also the Commonwealth Games Association (CGA) chief PT Usha submitted the bid in March this year and by November 26, India was chosen as the 2030 hosts. Just for the record, India were the only nation whose name was sent to the general body for assent.
Hosting Games boon or bane?
India did host the Commonwealth Games in 2010 but it led to a huge corruption scandal. Crores were spent in infrastructure development. Two decades later, the main stadium — JN Stadium — has been used more for non-sporting events. Some of the indoor stadiums are under-utilised. Like one expert closely associated with sports right from grassroots development to elite athletes’ programme pointed out that hosting CWG did not help sports to grow beyond the Games. In fact, after the 2010 CWG, the medals in Olympics did increase because of upgrading facilities in Sports Authority of India centres like Patiala and Bengaluru and focus on training. There was a positive impact, but only for a while.
In 2016, there was a sharp decline in India's fortunes at the Olympics and again after seven medals in 2021, India won six in 2024 with three coming in one sport — shooting. An expert was even asking should we even host the CWG or the Olympics?
Recent studies indicated that hosting Games (multi-discipline mega events) hardly makes economic sense. Even employment is of temporary nature under most heads. Just to give an example, Victoria pulled out as hosts after rising costs made hosting Commonwealth Games untenable. According to a Victoria Auditor General’s Office (VAGO) report, “In July 2023 the government decided that the Games no longer represented value for money and withdrew. It said the cost of hosting had increased to more than $6 billion ($6.4 billion or Rs 57,470 crore).” The initial cost was estimated at $2.6 billion. The state did not want to burden the tax-payers.
There was cost escalation in the 2010 Games in Delhi as well. According to a 2011 Comptroller and Auditor General report the government did not have a clear assessment of the estimated coast. The report further says that the IOA bid of May 2003 estimated an all-inclusive cost of just Rs 1200 crore. “By contrast, the overall budget estimate for CWG-2010 for GoI and GNCTD (including MCD, NDMC and other agencies) as of October 2010 was Rs 18,532 crore; this excludes investments by other agencies.”
Interestingly, even when it withdrew from hosting the Games, Victoria spent more than $500 million. “The decisions to bid for, plan and then withdraw from the Games have cost Victoria over $589 million with no discernible benefit. This waste of taxpayer money on an event that will not happen is significant,” says the Victoria report. There were no takers for the CWG 2026 and finally Glasgow agreed to host a truncated Games focusing on fewer sports. The budget estimate is around £114-£150.
For the Olympics, the costs are even more intimidating. “Oxford Olympic Story 2024: Are Cost and Cost Overrun at the Games Coming Down?” study puts Rio on top as the most expensive Games. “The most expensive Summer Games to date were Rio 2016 at $23.6 billion (Rs 2.12 lakh crore) and London 2012 at $16.8 billion (Rs 1.5 lakh crore). Brazil went into an economic spasm and is still recovering. Athens too was a similar story. Though the official Games Report puts the cost of Tokyo at $13.7 billion (Rs 1.2 lakh crore), reports suggest it excluded the city from Tokyo's budget. Perhaps, only Los Angeles in 1984 seemed to be a success story when it was the lone bidder. That led to multiple nations bidding for the Games. Paris figures of $8.7 billion (Rs 78,130 crore) are conservative after IOC adopted their own sustainability measures. That includes encouraging the use of existing venues than creation and even if built has to integrate with the society. The Paris Games was the first step towards it. Yet, the study says even that is higher than the mean cost for the Summer Games of $8.04 billion.
Despite knowing the implications of hosting Games, nations bid. Most of the host cities were from developed countries. There are multiple reasons but one that seems primary is the nation's ambition to show its might on the global stage.
India has already hosted the Asian and Commonwealth Games, so the Olympics would be a natural progression. Some say it is also to show Ahmedabad's legitimacy as a host for multi-discipline events — that's what seems to be the buzz — India are willing to host the CWG. It is considered as a stepping stone to the Olympics, but it is not a guarantee.
CWG is smaller compared to the Olympics. Yet, Ahmedabad will be ending up spending in thousands of crores. Good thing is in CWG, India are dominant in quite a few sports. But for the Olympics, the story is different. India qualify for some 15 disciplines and compete in others on solidarity quota. Their medals tally position in the last Olympics was somewhere in the 70s.
Though some experts believe India should invest in sports development rather than spending on hosting Games until they manage to compete in all Olympic disciplines through qualification and win medals in the double digit. There is a huge difference between hosting a CWG and an Olympics. The CWG is far too small with just about 16-17 sporting events. On the other hand, a city has to gear up for an influx of athletes and spectators for the Olympics. Apart from a robust city infrastructure, it would need some 40,000 available hotel rooms.
Expert's take:
No other athlete has seen Olympic success up close as Beijing Olympic gold medallist Abhinav Bindra. He is associated with sports development in the country and he puts it quite succinctly. “Hosting or bidding for the Games is not, by itself, a guarantee of improved sporting performance or medals, but it can be a powerful accelerator when it is aligned with a country's long-term sporting vision,” he told this daily. He runs Abhinav Bindra Foundation and through programmes like OVEP (Olympic Value Education Programme), High Performance Centres, he stays close to both grassroots and elite sports development programmes.
Gagan Narang, London Olympics medallist, who is closely associated with the grassroots programme with his Gun for Glory, sings from the same hymn sheet. “A Commonwealth Games and an Olympic bid can be transformational for Indian sport not just because of the event, but because it makes the country think in systems,” says Gagan who is also the vice president of the IOA. “It accelerates everything ….sports participation, school and university sport, coaching capacity, sports science, athlete welfare, and high-quality domestic competitions. If we treat the bid cycle as a national mission the benefits start years before the opening ceremony and continue long after the closing ceremony.”
Bindra, who as IOC Athletes Commission vice chair has seen bids up close, gives examples of nations like Great Britain and Australia and how they managed to change their sporting legacy. “In Great Britain, for example, the transformation began with the creation of UK Sport in 1997 and the introduction of National Lottery funding for elite sport,” he says. “This created a stable long term funding model, clearer accountability, and a more professional high performance system. London 2012 then became a focal point that accelerated these reforms, strengthened public engagement with sport, and helped align government, federations and athletes around a shared long term vision.”
“Similarly, Australia's performance around Sydney 2000 reflected decades of investment in coaching, sport science and institutions like the Australian Institute of Sport, with hosting helping to bring national focus and momentum to that journey,” he says.
“In India, we are beginning to see elements of a more structured high performance approach through initiatives such as the Target Olympic Podium Scheme, increased investment in sports science and coaching, and more consistent support for elite athletes. If hosting ambitions are aligned with these reforms, they can help accelerate and deepen this progress.”
“So the value of hosting lies not in the event alone, but in how effectively it is integrated into a broader strategy for athlete development, participation, governance reform and long term institutional strengthening,” he says.
Avoiding white elephant
One major area of concern are the stadiums that have been built for the Games. In a lot of host cities before Paris, including in Sydney, Beijing, the infrastructure was not being utilized as per plan. Even in Rio. According to studies, almost all stadiums in Athens are lying unused. The Bird's Nest in Beijing hardly hosts any event and requires $10 million for its upkeep. It hosted the 2022 Winter Olympics after the 2008 Summer one. Paris has found a novel way where they used all the existing infrastructure and temporary ones for the Games. Delhi too has been a good example of venues turning into white elephants. Studies point out that the problem is with ambition rather than practical utilization either because it has been developed in areas away from the city or places not accessible.
Gagan feels that can be avoided in Ahmedabad. “We can absolutely avoid ‘white elephants’ if legacy is baked into the design from day one,” he says. Paris last year has shown if existing venues can be used, investment in infrastructure can be reduced considerably.
Gagan feels this is possible in India as well. “Build fewer, build smarter multi-sport, modular and community-first venues, with strong operators and year-round programming. Add tenants, academies, leagues, national camps, corporate sport and school competitions so facilities are busy 300 days a year, not just 30,” he says. “When venues are planned as training and community hubs not just as event sites, they become assets that keep producing athletes and healthier citizens for decades.”
Hosting events can cripple the economy. This has led experts divided. While some believe India should improve sporting culture before hosting Games, some feel both can be done simultaneously. “The two can reinforce each other when managed responsibly,” says Bindra. “The foundation must always be sustained investment in athletes, coaches, federations and institutions, and that work has to continue irrespective of whether a country hosts the Games. Hosting can then serve as a catalyst by inspiring young people, increasing participation, and accelerating reforms that are already underway, provided it is approached with financial responsibility, realistic scale and a clear focus on long term value.”
Bindra believes strengthening the base is one essential a country cannot ignore. “This includes integrating sport more meaningfully into education, promoting physical activity for health and well being, and recognising sport as a tool for social development, inclusion and nation building,” he says. “This is how inspiration from major events translates into broader societal impact.”
"Recent experiences such as Tokyo 2020 have also underlined the importance of resilience, flexibility and sustainability, which is why future hosts are increasingly focussed on reuse of venues and responsible delivery, in line with the evolving direction of the Olympic Movement. In India, this means continuing to strengthen high performance systems while also using sport more deliberately as a driver of health, social cohesion and youth development, and ensuring that any hosting ambition supports these goals rather than distracts from them."
Ahmedabad as venue
Gagan has his take on Ahmedabad turning into a sporting destination. "Ahmedabad is already demonstrating that it can host large, complex events with world class logistics," he says. “With strong connectivity, modern infrastructure, and an emerging ecosystem of stadiums, training facilities and hospitality, it has the ingredients to be India’s premier sporting destination for mega events. The next step is consistency, a year round calendar, national championships, international tournaments, leagues, and youth events so the city is not just capable of hosting, but known globally as a sporting capital.”
Bindra says early planning is crucial for holistic development. "Successful hosts such as Barcelona 1992 and London 2012 benefited from early preparation, clear roles and responsibilities between stakeholders, and a strong emphasis on long term legacy," says Bindra. "Facilities and urban development were designed to serve athletes and communities well beyond the event, and delivery structures were professional and transparent.
"The key takeaway is the importance of early planning, clarity of responsibility, transparent processes, and designing infrastructure and programmes for long term use."
India is set to host the CWG in 2030 and if everything goes according to plan, even the Olympics in 2036. Yet, for a country that does not boast of winning medals in double digits at the Olympics, hosting would seem just like a facade. Perhaps, it would be prudent for all stakeholders to introspect and find a way to help India grow as a sporting power before hosting the Olympics. As for CWG, one can hope this time the corruption mess and over-shooting budget will be minimal.