http://maritime-connector.com/worlds-largest-ships/
How do you think this compares with a typical land-based Olympic venue? What other challenges make this idea absurd and ridiculous?
Fun story: I was talking to some Shell people a few years back, about the potential troubles with LNG sloshing in process equipment due to waves. I asked them, why not just make the ship big enough that waves don't affect it as much? They looked at me very strangely for a few seconds before explaining just how big it already is.
[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/10...
They already hosted sports events (see the "sport" section of that wikipedia page).
The United States has hosted eight olympics and there are about that many countries that never have. London has hosted it three times, Madrid ever has. And so on. The current method is already distinctly unfair. So I don't see how centralizing it into its own nation, like it once was, makes it worse than now.
Probably because there were three other games--Pythian, Nemean, and Isthmian--that were held at other sites around the Hellenic world? And the "world" was small enough that the sites of each didn't feel inaccessible to (much of) the citizenry of the competing states?
(I find the Olympics generally disappointing and I have no love for them as an event, but a partial view of history doesn't really help anyone.)