One hundred nights from now, the 2010 Winter Olympics will begin in Vancouver, Canada. The city held a low-key celebration to mark the countdown, highlighted by the official handing over of the Olympic village from the city to the Vancouver Olympic Committee.

Interestingly enough, there was much more celebration in New York where NBC kicked-off its Olympic coverage with an event in Rockefeller center attended by numerous Olympic hopefuls. It included ice skating demonstrations, aerial skiers on trampoline and, of course, numerous mentions of the hundreds of hours of coverage on NBC and its family of networks.

Universal Sports, NBC's Olympic cable partner, debuted a prime-time studio show tonight dedicated to the Vancouver Games. It's set to air nightly beginning on Dec. 1.

"The Colbert Report" has become the primary sponsor of the U.S. Speedskating team, after the previous sponsor declared bankruptcy last month. Host Stephen Colbert announced the partnership in Monday's show, alongside American speedskating legend Dan Jansen:

It's partly for show, of course, but this is still a great thing for U.S. Speedskating. The publicity, buzz and money Colbert will generate for the squad can only benefit a team that competes in anonymity for all but two weeks every four years.

The length of the partnership wasn't announced, but you definitely won't be seeing The Colbert Nation logo on uniforms at the Olympics as there are separate sponsorship deals in place for the Games. But expect to see The Colbert Nation emblazoned on the skin-tight uniforms of our nation's speedskaters through at least the first two World Cup events and, possibly, in the national championships at the end of December.

"The Colbert Report" will not be giving any money directly to U.S. Speedskating. Instead, Colbert's viewers (dubbed The Colbert Nation) will be called upon to donate to the team. This method has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Yellow Ribbon Fund, which assists injured service members.

It should be interesting to see how successful this venture is. I'm all for supporting Olympic athletes, but it's not exactly helping out wounded veterans, you know? The Dutch bank that was supposed to sponsor the team (but declared for bankruptcy last month) was slated to pay $300,000 for its sponsorship. If Colbert's viewers can get even one-third of that, it would be an admirable effort. 

The biggest sports story of the weekend didn't involve Brett Favre or LeBron James and it didn't have anything to do with the World Series either. It played out on a 26.2 mile course in the five boroughs of New York City and featured a man who would be recognized less than almost every player on an NFL, MLB or NBA roster. His name is Meb Keflezighi, and on Sunday he became the first American to win the New York Marathon since 1982.

It's a monumental achievement. U.S. runners haven't fared well in marathons in years, so for an American to stun the racing world with a win in New York should have made front-page headlines. So why has Keflezighi's win been largely ignored by the mainstream press?

There seems to be a belief that because Keflezighi was an immigrant to this country that he is somehow less American than those born within the borders. CNBC's Darren Rovell sums up this unfortunate, jingoistic refrain (but he's far from the only one who's written in this way):

... Keflezighi's country of origin is Eritrea, a small country in Africa. He is an American citizen thanks to taking a test and living in our country.

Basically, the argument is that because Keflezighi wasn't born in America, he's not American.

I suppose the fact that Keflezighi immigrated here 29 years ago at the age of 12 doesn't matter. Nor is the fact that he didn't start running competitively until he arrived in the States, went to UCLA and has never worn anything but the red, white and blue at international competitions. The silver medal he won in the Athens marathon for the USA in 2004? That's irrelevant too.

Here's the Keflezighi back story: As detailed in a Sports Illustrated story from 2005, his family immigrated to the U.S. after his father fled the country to avoid being imprisoned for supporting Eritrea's independence. That was in 1986. Meb has lived here since then.

When asked whether his East African genes make him a more successful runner, Keflezighi responded to the question by asking, "if so, then why did I lose to so many Americans in high school and college?"

But why should that even matter? Meb Keflezighi's story is what defines America. It's a textbook example of the American dream: Fleeing war, taking advantage of opportunity in this country and becoming a personal and professional success. The end of Keglezighi's tale may be remarkable, but the beginning is similar to that of millions of Americans past and present. 

Why should the fact that somebody wasn't born in this country make them any less of an American? Was Barack Obama's father not truly American because he was born in Kenya? Anybody want to tell Arnold Schwarzenegger that he's only "technically" a United States citizen? Most Americans reading this will have had an ancestor who immigrated to America at some point (my great-grandfather came in 1914). Were they not really, truly Americans? 

I've purposefully not mentioned the 800-pound gorilla in the room: whether the perceived illegitimacy of Keflezighi has to do with his race. That's a topic for another day and another writer, but let's just say that you wouldn't be wrong to play that card. (Think of it this way: If Keflezighi immigrated from Scotland, would we be having this discussion?)

The irony of it all is that the last man to win the NYC Marathon before Meb Keflezighi wouldn't qualify as being "American" either. Alberto Salazar, who took the crown in 1982, was born in Cuba. 

As part of an effort to help protect Kenya's endangered species, Usain Bolt formally adopted a three-month old cheetah cub today in Nairobi. (What? You thought the world record holder in both the 100 and 200 meters would own a tortoise?)

Bolt bestowed one of his own nicknames upon the cub, naming him "Lightning Bolt". The three-time Olympic gold medalist paid $13,700 to adopt Lightning Bolt and will contribute $3,000 per year so it can live at an animal orphanage in the Kenyan capital. 

Initially (and understandably), Bolt was reluctant to meet a fully grown cheetah, but he seemed comfortable holding his new cub. At one point he even fed Lightning Bolt milk from a bottle.

Fully grown, Lightning Bolt will likely be able to run 65 mph at top speed, about 40 mph faster than his adopted father Usain. One cheetah at a Cincinnati zoo ran the 100 meters in just over six seconds, about 3.5 seconds faster than Bolt's human world record of 9.58. Some scientists with way too much time on their hands have also tried to apply the physics of a cheetah's running style in order to maximize the ability of human runners.

Other popular Yahoo! Sports blog posts:
• Oops: Philly newspaper sells championship merchandise
• NBA star literally swats bat during Halloween game
• Damon's double dash makes World Series history

After watching the short program of defending world figure skating champion Kim Yu-Na at the Trophy Bompard Friday, that connection may not be as far-fetched as you'd think. The South Korean skating sensation, who will be the prohibitive favorite to win gold next February in Vancouver, performed a flawless routine set to a James Bond medley yesterday, earning a near-record 76.08 from the judges. 

For good measure, she mimicked Bond's famous gun pose at the end.

As Philip Hersh points out on the LA Times Olympics blog, Kim's score would have been good for third in the men's competition.

Sloan, the American all-around champion, hit a solid, if not difficult, floor routine. When Bross, who trains at the same gymnasium as Olympic all-around champion Nastia Liukin, took the floor, she knew she needed to nail the routine to win the championship. Her first two passes were good, but on her final pass, she fell forward, placing both hands onto the mat. With that, she only scored a 12.875. That pushed her to second place, opening the door for Sloan to win the world championship. Japan's Koko Tsumuri finished in third place.

An Olympian in Bejing, Sloan's experience showed with her calm demeanor and steadiness. Her win was marked by performances that weren't as high in difficulty as her competitors, but were clean. Bross had more difficulty and a near-perfect balance beam and bars, but the floor exercise mistake was too much to come back from. Tsumuri led through two rotations, but the lack of difficulty on her vault kept her from staying at the top of the leaderboard. 

This 1-2 finish for America comes a year after the U.S. took the gold and silver in the all-around at the Olympics with Liukin and Shawn Johnson. Though there are different people leading the pack, America still dominates women's gymnastics. On the other hand, China, who had been so dominant at the Beijing Olympics, fell behind today, as neither of their athletes placed in the top five.

The messy-haired Uchimura took silver in the All-Around at last year's games after falling twice on the pommel horse. There were no such errors today, as he scored a 16.050 on the vault, a 15.625 on a high-flying floor exercise and sealed his win with a thrilling high bar routine with several high-flying release moves that earned a 14.975.

Great Britain's hometown boy, Daniel Keatings, did not disappoint the London crowd, finishing second on the back of consistent scores. He edged out Russia's Yury Ryazanov who took home the bronze.

As expected, the American men were shut out. Newcomer Tim McNeill was in second place after the qualification round, but was knocked out of contention by a poor high bar score. He finished in seventh place. Last year's Olympic fan favorite, Jonathan Horton, fell on the floor exercise and never recovered. He finished in 17th place.

America's medal chances should improve on Friday when the women compete for the All-Around title. Rebecca Bross is in first place after the qualifiers, with her teammate Bridget Sloan in fifth place. 

The gold medal looks like it belongs in a bowl of potato chips at King Midas's house. So far I've heard people comment that the medals look like gelt, melted 45s or, as I thought, something from a Dali painting.

But before we get too critical, here are a few facts and explanations of how the medals came to get their, uh, interesting form:

-- The medals of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games are circular in shape and based on a large master artwork of an orca whale by Corrine Hunt, a Canadian designer/artist of Komoyue and Tlingit heritage. Each of the medals has a unique hand-cropped section of the abstract art, making every medal one-of-a-kind.

-- They are among the heaviest medals in Olympic, weighing between 500 grams to 576 g depending on the medal.

-- Each feature a different crop of larger contemporary Aboriginal artworks and are undulating rather than flat — both firsts in Games history.  The dramatic form of the Vancouver 2010 medals is inspired by the ocean waves, drifting snow and mountainous landscape found in the Games region and throughout Canada.

They're still ugly. But, as Lisa Diller wrote on the Olympics blog at The Los Angeles Times, no athlete is going to quibble about the strange design of an Olympic medal. However, the traditionalist in me likes a simple round shape, a reliefed, venue-specific design and the Olympic rings.

The Summer Games usually follow this design, opting for a traditional format for every Olympics which usually feature the goddess of victory, Nike, on the front and backs designed by organizers of the host city. The Winter Games have less rigid structures in place for medals, which is how you end up with Vancouver's waviness. At least they're gold, silver and bronze though and not glass medals like Albertville handed out in 1992 or, even worse, the Torino doughnuts.

Other popular Yahoo! Sports stories:
• Who is the most powerful woman in sports?
• Bills fans rent billboard to advertise discontent
• Michael Vick refuses to see his former dogs

On Monday's show, Jon Stewart mocked Obama's "put the Olympics near my house" pitch and then hilariously demonstrated the five stages of Chicago-induced grief as exhibited by the American media. And, because it wouldn't be The Daily Show if Stewart didn't rip on conservatives, he gets in some digs at Republicans near the end of the clip. Feel free to skip the "correspondent" report which runs from the 1:40 to 5:00 mark:

And on The Tonight Show, Conan O'Brien showed an exclusive clip of Rio de Janeiro's presentation video:

David Letterman passed on telling any Olympics jokes Monday night but, for the life of me, I can't figure out why.

Thus, it comes as no surprise that the embattled Streeter announced today that she would not be seeking the permanent position of USOC chief executiveand would effectively resign from her post after the Paralympics next March. This is purely a face-saving move for Streeter, as she had about as much chance of getting the USOC's top spot as I did. It's like somebody quitting their job right before the boss is about to fire them.

Streeter came under fire for her lack of international diplomacy (translation: she didn't suck up to the IOC), poor media skills (she didn't suck up to the press) and her half-million dollar salary. After Chicago's failure to land the Olympics, NBC Sports chairman Dick Ebersol bitterly said that the USOC needed "real leaders"and mocked Streeter's compensation package as out of touch with her experience. (Yeah, because NBC would never give a lot of money to somebody who was in over their heads.)

The criticism was right, but a lot of it feels like scapegoating. Was Streeter a bad acting CEO? Absolutely. She completely needed to go. But is it solely her fault Chicago didn't get the Olympics? Not by a long shot. There were a lot of people at the USOC and Chicago 2016 who could get blame too.

But finger pointing is what people do best in the wake of a debacle and Streeter is the obvious target. She needed to go, but her departure is only the first of many steps the USOC needs to take to reform itself.

Rio de Janeiro was just named host of the 2016 Summer Olympics, so you know what that means: Time to start speculating about which city is the favorite to host the Games of 2020!

Fourth-Place Medal ranks the five most likely host cities for the next, next, next Olympics. Each of the cities has, at some point, been rumored to be considering a bid for 2020.

1) Rome -- Rome 2020 has three things going for it: The IOC will want to get back to Europe after Rio de Janeiro, the Games haven't been in the city since 1960 and there are more Italian members of the IOC than any other country. 

2) Minneapolis -- The story of the USOC/IOC rift is as overblown this week as it was under-blown last week. Yes, it mattered (we had been warning of this since last August), but it wasn't a bid-killer. There were a half-dozen reasons Chicago didn't get the Games and anti-American bias is just one them. The IOC is, was, and always will be Eurocentric. But it was Eurocentric when Atlanta got the 1996 Games and Eurocentric when Salt Lake City hosted in 2002. It's always a hurdle to overcome, but it can be done. And it will be done sooner rather than later. At some point the IOC is going to have to make some political concessions and come back to the United States. Both Minneapolis and Boston are said to be considering bids for 2020. We'd give the edge to Minneapolis since support from citizenry is a major factor in these things (CHICAGO) and we get the sense that Minnesota would rally behind something as unifying as an Olympic bid. (Little-known fact: Minneapolis finished second in the voting for the 1952 Olympics behind Helsinki.)

3) Madrid -- Always the dama de honor, never la novia. 

4) Dubai/Doha -- We're lumping these two cities together (from the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, respectively) because they both have the same pros and cons: The IOC has never gone to the Middle East and, as the Rio vote showed, the organization loves to try things for the first time. More importantly, both of these places are flush with oil money, so funding would be a breeze and the facilities would likely be the greatest the sports world has ever seen. But no amount of money can change the weather, and the 100+ degree average temperatures in these cities in July, August and September make holding outdoor events an impossibility. Yes, they could build climate-controlled domes, but I doubt the IOC would go for that. And what about events that have to be outside like the marathon, rowing, long-distance walking and beach volleyball? 

5) Toronto -- All the benefits of the United States without the need to capitulate to the USOC.

Not on the list: Birmingham (seriously, the mayor wants to make a bid) ...  Tulsa (see: Birmingham) ... Guadalajara (IOC isn't going to Latin America twice in a row) ... St. Petersburg ... Cape Town (this will happen one day, but the fear of back-to-back southern hemisphere Olympics will prevent it from going down in 2020).

"They don't need to have any more Congressional reforms," Dick Ebersol (pictured) said, referring to the hearings that led to USOC reorganization in 2003. "Just get real leaders. You've either got people who were hired by search firms or people who don't care enough to make it their full time jobs."

Instability at the top levels of the USOC has been the norm. Jim Scherr was pushed out as CEO in March, and the current acting CEO, Stephanie Streeter, has been less-than-emphatic in her commitment to the job. Larry Probst, chairman of the board of the USOC, also hasn't shown the world that he is too thrilled with his position.

Probst and Streeter have both avoided working the international sports political scene. Neither one attended an important International Olympic Committee meeting in June. Since they are both perceived as inexperienced, they should not be missing anything that could give them a chance to get to know other players in the international sports world. 

Probst's position is volunteer, but Streeter is paid more than a half million dollars a year. She can't be bothered with going to a meeting that was crucial to Chicago's bid?

"It is my feeling that everything which happened (at the USOC), all the changes of people, the information about salaries which were paid, (it) probably played a certain role and did not give full confidence," IOC member Denis Oswald said when asked for an explanation of how a strong Chicago bid went out in the first round.

If there is any characteristic that is found in every single Olympian -- from curlers to gymnasts to skiers to wrestlers -- it is dedication. Olympians exhibit a near-psychotic dedication to their sport. It's quite a slap in the face to these athletes when the leaders of the USOC can't show the dedication that their job requires. 

As you've surely heard by now, Rio de Janeiro was named the host city of the 2016 Olympics. To cap our week-long coverage of the bids, Fourth-Place Medal looks at 10 things we learned from today's vote in Copenhagen. For an in-depth look at some of the possible reasons Rio beat out Chicago for the Games, read our post from earlier this morning.

1) Rio de Janeiro's win was as decisive as Olympics votes can get. The Brazilian city earned 66 votes in the final round compared to just 32 for runner-up Madrid. That 67.3 percent total is the highest percentage for an elected winner since 1936, when Berlin was the victor over Barcelona. (We're not counting the 1984 Olympics in which Los Angeles basically ran unopposed.)

2) Don't call it an upset. Chicago wasn't the favorite because its bid was any stronger than the other cities, it was the favorite because oddsmakers set the lines that way. Those lines aren't made with the intention of gauging future events but to encourage equivalent wagering. The truth is, there's no way to accurately predict what 94 people will do on a secret ballot.

Oddsmakers said Chicago was the favorite and the media followed suit. But the city's bid was a paper champion, sort of like when a college football team is ranked No. 1 in the preseason based solely on assumptions and guesswork. Chicago wasn't the favorite for any tangible reason. That status was more of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The more that people talked about Chicago being a favorite, the more it fed the belief that the city was the favorite. Chalk it up to good ol' American hubris.

3) Even if the whispers of Asian vote-hoarding are true, it wouldn't have mattered. One IOC member (who is Australian, it should be noted) suggested that Chicago's elimination in the first round was due to Asian members of the IOC casting throwaway votes for Tokyo in an attempt to get the American city off the ballot. Let's say this is true. First of all, so what? Chicago practically invented rigged elections so they should be well acquainted with how votes can be manipulated. More importantly, vote-hoarding wouldn't have mattered. Let's assume that those who didn't vote for Tokyo weren't going to vote for Chicago anyway. That would have sent Tokyo home in the first, but Chicago still would have only received 18 votes in the second.

4) Winning a round of voting is the kiss of death. Madrid led after the first round of voting, which marks the fourth time in the last six Summer Olympic votes that a city which has led at least one round of voting has failed to get the bid.

5) Backers of Chicago and Tokyo moved over to Rio's side. Madrid only earned four more votes in the final (32) than it did in the first round (28), suggesting that the voters who went for Tokyo and Chicago overwhelmingly supported the eventual winning bid.

6) The only thing more overrated than Chicago's chances was the importance of Barack Obama's visit. Leave your politics at the door for this one. This has nothing to do with red state or blue state, democrat or republican. What I'm about to write is purely about IOC politics: The president's visit was always overrated. Every other leader had planned to be in attendance, so Obama would have been conspicuous in his absence. By waiting so long Obama made his trip to Denmark a big story, but that may have had the reverse effect on voters who may have thought the president was trying to big-time the IOC. (And nobody big-times the IOC. Those guys have egos so big they'd make Rahm Emanuel blush.)

As I wrote earlier today, even Barack Obama couldn't sway the anti-American factions of the IOC. (And, to be clear, "anti-American" refers to Olympics politics, not any real hatred of the United States.) There was a huge miscalculation by Obama's people and the USOC in thinking that he had a chance to make a difference in this vote. All the time it was thought that if Obama could change the minds of two or three voters he could deliver Chicago. Nobody ever expected him to switch (or need to switch) 32 votes.

7) President Lula was the most charismatic politician in Copenhagen. An American president stole the show at the bid meetings Friday, but it wasn't the one you'd have thought. Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula de Silva gave a riveting speech today to the IOC, imploring the organization to reverse years of neglect of countries outside the normal Olympics sphere:

"I honestly think it is Brazil's turn. It is South America's bid. This is a continent that has never held the Games. It is time to address this imbalance. It is time to light the Olympic cauldron in a tropical country."

8) It's time to change the Olympic bidding process. Chicago 2016 spent $50 million on its unsuccessful bid; Madrid, $40 million. And, for all that, IOC voting members didn't once visit the city because of the bribery scandal that erupted from the bidding for the 2002 Winter Olympics. There has to be a better way to do this. (Cue the column saying the Olympics should be held at a permanent site, which, the more I think about it, isn't a bad idea.)

9) Chicago is the Second City once again. Chicago got 18 votes in the first round of voting today. In the vote for the 2012 Olympics, New York City earned 19. (And that was in a five-way vote.)

10) Rio 2016 is just 2,499 days away. For two weeks in the summer of 2016, Rio de Janeiro will be at the center of the world's stage. The proposed starting date is August 5 (but that's subject to change), which means it's just under 2,500 days until the Opening Ceremony. It should be one heck of a party.

Rio de Janeiro is going to be an amazing host for the Olympics. They know how to throw a party, so the 2016 Olympics will be a celebration like none other. But as a lifelong Chicagoan, I can't help but feel that the world is missing out by not bringing the party to the Windy City.

As I stood among the thousands gathered at Daley Plaza for the announcement rally, I marveled at the different groups represented there. Black, white, Latino, Asian, young, old, suburban, rural, urban -- we were all there. The protesters I've heard so much about, but haven't actually seen? They were not there. All of that support from an incredibly diverse group of people? The 2016 Olympics won't have that.

Riding the L home, I passed by the DePaul men's soccer team's practice. It's uncanny that no matter the time of year, whenever I walk out my front door, I see some Chicagoan practicing a sport. Whether they are running along the lakefront, going to a Bears game, or playing basketball at a nearby court, Chicagoans are passionate about sports. That undying devotion to all things sports? The 2016 Olympics won't have that.

As I walked home from the L stop, I passed by Thai, Mexican, Italian, German, Greek, Spanish, Indian and American restaurants, all fragrant from their lunchtime offerings. I stood in the shadow of beautifully designed buildings. The food and architecture that Chicago is known for? The 2016 Olympics won't have that.

Though they will be charmed in Rio, the world will miss out by not coming to my city for the Olympic games. Chicago, on the other hand, will be just fine. This is a city that has survived a fire, floods, riots and a century of futility from one of its baseball teams. Nothing, not even losing the Olympics, can break our spirit. 

For the first time in the 120-year history of the Olympics, the Summer Games are headed to South America. In a monumental upset, Rio de Janeiro was named the host city of the 2016 Olympics today after outlasting Madrid in the final round of voting. Chicago, the pre-meeting favorite, was stunningly eliminated on the first ballot.

Rio's bid was boosted by an enthusiastic campaign, support from over 85 percent of citizens of the city, the promise of a Carnival-like party atmosphere and, most importantly, an appeal to the IOC to bring the Olympics to a country that isn't as rich and fully developed as usual Olympics locales like the U.S., England, Spain and Australia. Above all, the IOC is a political entity and going to Brazil was the best politics.

The lure of bringing the first Olympic games to South America and revitalizing Brazil proved to be too attractive to the IOC. Although the circumstances are much different, this vote is reminiscent of when the IOC bucked conventional wisdom and awarded the 2008 Olympics to Beijing. Those Games were thought to usher in a new era of China and served as a platform to reintroduce China to the world.

Chicago had been a considerable favorite, but perhaps too much hope was put in the hands of Barack Obama, who had the unenviable task of reversing decades of anti-American sentiment within the IOC.

Going to Rio was the right move. The Olympics are a global enterprise that have too often been concentrated in Europe and the United States. Going to new places and immersing different cultures in the glory of sport is what this whole Olympic movement was founded upon.

The motives of the IOC might have been impure and perhaps a little self-serving, but that's irrelevant. Rio de Janeiro is a worthy host of the 2016 Olympics. Brazil ao vivo longo!

For more on why Rio bested Chicago, Madrid and Tokyo, read our post from Friday morning in which we predicted how and why Rio de Janeiro would be awarded the Olympics.

Oddsmakers had favored the city since the four bid cities were announced in June 2008 and the announcement that Obama would appear at the IOC vote was thought by many to put Chicago over the top. It was all for naught. Chicago was eliminated on the first ballot, while Madrid and Rio de Janeiro advanced to the final round of voting.

The perception will be that Barack Obama's attempt to play the role of conquering hero was a failure and, to some degree, it was. He didn't accomplish what he set out to do. But the frenzy of his arrival in Copenhagen always obscured the fact that the IOC has constantly shown an anti-American tilt. Obama's fame wasn't enough to overcome that. The president's supposed popularity with the general European public means nothing. He needed to sway the 99 first round voters. They proved to be a hard sell.

For a number of reasons, most having to do with the root of all evil (money), the IOC has held a grudge against America for the better part of the last decade. Because of this, today's vote wasn't a vote against Obama or against Chicago's worthiness to hold the Olympics. It was a vote against the United States.

Ever since the four cities bidding for the 2016 Olympics were announced in June of last year, Chicago has been the overwhelming favorite to be named the host city of the Games of the XXXI Olympiad. The race had tightened in recent months but the announcement that President Obama attended today's vote in Copenhagen (to mixed reviews) has once again shifted the odds heavily in Chicago's favor.

The Second City is a considerable favorite to win today, with a vast majority of bookmakers and Olympic observers fully anticipating a Chicago coronation this afternoon. Despite this, Fourth-Place Medal predicts that Chicago will lose in an upset today to Rio de Janeiro. It would be the first time in the 120-year history of the Olympics that South America would host a Games.

Chicago makes the most sense. As we've recounted in our previews for the past year, it will have been 20 years in between Olympics for the United States, the city has pre-existing infrastructure, its bid has a solid financial plan and, most importantly, the television rights to the Summer Games are up for renegotiation and having an American-based Olympics is sure to push the bidding between NBC and ESPN to unparalleled heights. Coupled with the popularity of Barack Obama abroad, Chicago seems to be a shoo-in. And if the IOC was voting on the safest bet, the American city would win in a landslide.

But the IOC doesn't always play it safe, particularly in recent years. Here are five reasons Rio could pull the upset:

1) Putting Rio on the world stage -- The IOC likes to fancy itself as a catalyst for world change and Rio provides an opportunity to provide such an impact. Members often tout the importance of awarding the 2008 Olympics to Beijing and boast about how this helped legimitize the "new" China to the rest of the world. The hope is that giving the Games to Rio will be revitalize the city, and Rio organizers have played on this "imbalance" claiming that the Olympics shouldn't only go to cities in rich, fully-developed nations. The message that "the Olympics belong to everyone, every continent, all of humanity," may be one that resonates with voters.

2) Anti-American sentiment within the IOC -- Obama's presence at the bid meeting today will make for a nice headline and photo op, but is it enough to reverse years of the American jealousy that permeates through the Eurocentric IOC? (Where 46 of 106 voting members are from European countries?) The Olympic governing body has long coveted the money the United States Olympic Committee gets from its TV deal with NBC. That battle only intensified this summer when the USOC blatantly defied the IOC and went ahead with plans to launch its own television network. They eventually reached a detente, but the resentment lingers. Two years ago baseball and softball were pulled from the Olympic program. It's no coincidence that both sports are associated with the United States. A vote for Rio (or Tokyo or Madrid) might be more of a vote against America than anything.

3) Chicago apathy provide stark contrast to Rio enthusiasm -- As we detailed earlier in the week, citizens of Chicago are sharply divided about the city's bid proposal. There are many passionate supporters, to be sure, but the perception in Copenhagen is that the city is ambivalent about the games. On the other hand, a public holiday was declared in Rio today so citizens could participate in a party that is expected to draw 100,000 to Copacabana beach. Rio is playing up the party atmosphere and flair of its bid. Chicago has Oprah. Which will voters respond to more? Enthusiasm of hundreds of thousands of residents or the enthusiasm of a few, very famous ones?

4) The IOC doesn't like to be told what to do -- Call it stubbornness or resistance to conform, but the IOC has made a habit of bucking popular wisdom. It was all but assured that Athens would get the centennial Games in 1996, but Atlanta won out. Paris was the heavy favorite in 2012 before getting upset by London. And Sochi, Russia figured to be third out of three in the running for the 2014 Winter Olympics yet squeaked by PyeongChang, South Korea to get the bid. The IOC is unpredictable and Rio is the unpredictable choice. Media, especially American media, has all but given the Olympics to Chicago particularly after the president gave his talk today. Might some IOC members resent having their decisions made for them? Or is Obama that transcendent in Europe?

5) It works for American TV -- One of the biggest pluses for Chicago's bid is the fact that American TV rights for 2016 will go up for bid after the Vancouver Olympics. There is expected to be a fierce bidding war between NBC, ESPN and, perhaps, Fox. And while it's true that Chicago is the best-case scenario for American networks, Rio also works since the city's time zone is just one hour ahead of New York. This would allow for the live primetime broadcasts that American networks crave.  

There are just as many reasons why Rio won't get the bid. These include the bid's huge budget, concerns over crime and the little pre-existing athletic infrastructure in the country. That's why Chicago is the oddsmaker's favorite and is expected to get the nod. 

But funny things happen in these IOC meetings, particularly with the round-by-round eliminations that take place. Allegiances tend to shift once the choices narrow. It's not as much about who more people like at the beginning of voting, it's about which city supporters of the eliminated candidates flock to. Three times in the past five Summer Olympics bids, a city that has won early rounds of voting was upset in the final (Athens, 1996; Beijing, 2000; Madrid, 2012).

While nobody seems to think Tokyo or Madrid has much of a shot, there's still the possibility that one of those cities could shoot to the top if one of the favorite (Rio, in particular) is more everybody's second-favorite choice rather than their first favorite.

But, still, this is Chicago's race to lose. The decision the voting IOC members will have to make is whether to go with Chicago's momentum, practicality and stars or whether the opportunity for change in Rio de Janeiro potentially caused by the Games is enough to outweigh any possible problems. 

We think it will be the latter. While both would be fine choices, and it's hard to pick against Chicago's political machine, we think that the potential to impact chage will be too hard for the IOC to pass up and that we'll see Rio de Janeiro in 2016.

Fourth-Place Medal's Maggie Hendricks will be at Chicago's rally to hear the IOC announce which city will host the 2016 Summer Olympics. Follow the day's activities on our live blog, and stick with Fourth-Place Medal throughout the day. 

With the announcement of the site of the 2016 Olympics set for Friday afternoon, there are many questions about the process that will lead to the naming of the host city. Before we get to our own comprehensive preview Friday morning, Fourth-Place Medal provides some answers to frequently asked questions about the Olympic bid meeting in Copenhagen:

When will the host city be announced?

Voting is scheduled to take place between 11:10 and 11:40 a.m. ET, with the press conference announcing the winner set for 12:30 p.m. ET. Expect to hear a winner sometime a little before 1 p.m. ET. (It should be noted that these votes often take longer than expected, so don't be surprised if there is a delay.)

Which cities are bidding?

The four bid cities are Chicago, Madrid, Rio de Janeiro and Tokyo. (Click on the link for Fourth-Place Medal's brief preview for each bid city.)

Who's the favorite?

Oddsmakers have set Chicago as the favorite, with Rio de Janeiro trailing slightly. Madrid and Tokyo are given much longer odds to win, which suggests that this will be a two-horse race between Chicago and Rio.

How does the vote work?

IOC members vote by secret ballot until one city receives a majority; the city receiving the fewest votes is eliminated after each round. The maximum number of rounds is three.

The IOC has 106 members. The president, Jacques Rogge, doesn't vote. Members from a country with a bid city in the race are ineligible to vote as long as their candidate is still in contention. That means 99 members are eligible to vote in the first round; more in subsequent rounds. In the event of a tie vote in the early rounds, a runoff is held between the two cities. If there is a tie in the final round, Rogge can vote or ask the IOC executive board to break the deadlock.

Where can I watch?

Our good friends at universalsports.com will be providing live, free streaming coverage of the bid announcement and each city's presentation. Click here to watch coverage of the bid announcement starting at 10 a.m. (three hours ahead of the announcement). To watch the presentations for each city and to see a great recap of events thus far, click here.

What is President Obama's role?

By the time you're reading this, Barack Obama has likely left Copenhagen. The president will speak at Chicago's presentation (at 2:50 a.m. ET) and then work the room afterward with a press conference, trying to sway votes to Chicago. (His wife has already been in Copenhagen having one-on-one meetings with high-ranking IOC officials.) After that, Obama and the First Lady will meet with the Danish Prime Minister and will then depart Copenhagen at 6:55 a.m. ET. The first couple will be in the air when the announcement is made.

Information from the Associated Press was used in this post.

The odds haven't changed much in the 13 months we've been handicapping the race to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. (Check out our previous editions here and here.) It's still Chicago, Rio and everyone else. With the IOC's vote on Friday, Fourth-Place Medal will take an in-depth look this week at each of the four bid cities. We've already looked at Chicago, Madrid and Rio de Janeiro. We wrap-up our previews today with Tokyo. Be sure to check back tomorrow morning for our final prediction ahead of the 12:30 p.m. ET announcement.

Pros: Japan hasn't hosted a Summer Olympics since 1964 ... Tokyo's budget is low and its best protected against overruns ... bid promises a "compact, efficient" Games -- every event but shooting is within a six mile radius of city center ... the 1998 Winter Olympics in Nagano were a great success.

Cons: Will IOC want to go back to Asia eight years after Beijing? ... Tokyo has slightly more public support than Chicago, but the ones who are backing the bid are much less fervent.

Biggest plus: Money, money, money. It's all about the green and Tokyo is flush with it.

Biggest minus: It's very hard to imagine the IOC going to Asia twice in a decade. 

Famous schmoozers: Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama

Twitter-length summary: Tokyo's bid has the least buzz among any of the four candidates. Tomorrow, that should translate into the least votes.

The odds haven't changed much in the 13 months we've been handicapping the race to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. (Check out our previous editions here and here.) It's still Chicago, Rio and everyone else. With the IOC's vote on Friday, Fourth-Place Medal will take an in-depth look this week at each of the four bid cities before presenting our final prediction at the end of the week, hours before the announcement. On Monday we tackled Chicago. Yesterday, Madrid. Today we look at the co-favorite, Rio de Janeiro.

Pros: Olympics have never been held in South America ... IOC fancies itself as a catalyst for change, and Rio provides best opportunity to reinvent a city ... passionate support from its citizenry ... time zone is only one hour ahead of New York, which will be beneficial to IOC in upcoming U.S. television negotiations ... Richard Daley.

Cons: The proposed $14.4 billion budget is more than double that of any other bid city ... crime ... little pre-existing infrastructure ... 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi are already a question mark ... the recent cancellation of a World Cup swimming event ... city also hosting 2014 World Cup.

Biggest plus: Going to Rio de Janeiro makes a statement, and the IOC is fond of sending such messages (think Beijing). The passion behind the bid and the opportunity to bring the world stage to Brazil is the greatest thing Rio's bid has going for it.

Biggest minus: Rio doesn't have a huge problem, it just has lots of medium ones. The worst case scenario for the city is that IOC members become hung up on all the things that could go wrong.

Famous schmoozers: Pele, President Luis Inacio Lula de Silva, Ronaldo.

Twitter-length summary: Affecting change is what the IOC loves best. Whether they love it enough to take a risk on Rio will be the decisive factor in Friday's vote.

Of the four cities bidding for the Games, Chicago has the lowest amount of public support by a wide margin. According to recent polling, less than 50 percent of the city's residents support the city's proposal to host the Olympics. With the bid set to be announced in two days, the tepid enthusiasm from many of the city's residents threatens to derail the prospects of a Windy City Olympics.

From The Today Show:

Those who don't support the bid cite financial concerns, corruption and transportation problems as the main reasons. It's the familiar refrain: "Why spend billions on games when schools need funding/roads need fixing/hospitals need money?" 

The "bread, not circuses" opposition is nothing new. No Olympic bid ever receives full public support, but the lack of collective enthusiasm in Chicago is deeply troubling for organizers of the bid for two reasons.

First, the opposition has been steadily increasing over the past few months. A February poll by the Chicago Tribune found 2-1 support for the Games. Now, less than half of the city is in favor of the bid (47 percent support vs. 45 percent against). There's been speculation that the drop is due to Mayor Richard Daley's April announcement that the city would take full financial support for the Games.

In contrast, support for Atlanta's bid stood at 80 percent before the Games and never dipped below that number in the six year lead-up to the Olympics. (When the Games ended, over 95 percent of the city expressed support.)

More importantly, Chicago's divide stands in sharp contrast to the overwhelming support the Games are getting in the city's main competition, Rio de Janiero. Polls in that city say that the Olympic bid is backed by more than 85 percent of citizens (some polls have it as high as 90 percent). 

Bid officials aren't allowed to badmouth other cities publicly (Chicago mayor Richard Daley has come under some fire in Rio for doing just that), but you can bet that organizers from the Brazil will be whispering these poll results as often as Chicagoans will be discussing the cancellation of a World Cup swimming event in the country.

In a vote that could be swayed by one or two IOC members, every little thing counts. For Chicago, the lack of widespread enthusiasm could be the difference between hosting the Games or not.

Other popular stories across the Yahoo! network:
• Forbes releases list of richest Americans
• Baby-sitting comes under attack in Michigan
• Driving while distracted a national epidemic

The odds haven't changed much in the 13 months we've been handicapping the race to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. (Check out our previous editions here and here.) With the IOC's vote on Friday, Fourth-Place Medal will take an in-depth look this week at each of the four bid cities before presenting our final prediction at the end of the week, hours before the announcement. Yesterday we tackled Chicago. Today, Madrid.

Pros: All venues, except one, would be within six miles of city center ... has most public support of any bid ... bid in 2012 and finished third in the voting ... the last president of the IOC, Juan Antonio Samaranch, hailed from Spain ... Barcelona Games in 1992 were considered a massive success.

Cons: Proximity to London ... only 24 years since Spain hosted a Summer Games ... concerns of crime/violence in certain parts of the city .... lame logo that looks like a pre-school Thanksgiving project.

Biggest plus: The IOC loves itself some Europe and the Barcelona Games were generally thought to be one of the best Olympics in modern history.

Biggest minus: Of all pluses and minuses we'll list for each of the four bid cities, Madrid's minus is by far the biggest. The fact that the 2012 Games are in London, a city on the same continent and just 785 miles away, makes the IOC going to Madrid almost unthinkable.

Famous schmoozers: King Juan Carlos, Queen Sofia, Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Usain Bolt, Cristiano Ronaldo

Twitter-length summary: The proximity to London makes the Madrid bid a huge longshot. If Spain gets the Olympics, it'd be like the Miracle on Ice times 50.

Odds: 5-1 (that's a lot longer than it sounds)

“There are no financial resources. They cannot find any funding. They say they cannot do it,” Cornel Marculescu, the executive director of swimming governing body FINA, told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

Rio de Janeiro is said to be neck and neck with Chicago, followed by Madrid and Tokyo, in the race to win the 2016 Olympics. At this point in the bid process, candidate cities are pulling out all the stops to prove their city's worthiness. This sort of slip-up can cast quite the pall on the Rio bid.

One of the main things that the IOC looks at in selecting a host city is the success a candidate city has had in hosting previous international sporting events. Having hosted the Pan-American Games -- a North and South American version of the Olympics -- Rio had an edge in this category. But shutting down an event that is just a month away for lack of money could prove a body blow for Rio's bid.

The chief of FINA claims that this shouldn't affect Rio's chances for the Olympics:

“I only know about my own sport, and there will be no World Cup in Rio for the next four years,” he said. “The Olympic Games is a different budget. Rio’s proposals for aquatics venues are very good.”

Right. Marculescu wisely says that he only knows his own sport, sidestepping the question. It wouldn't look good for the head of the governing body of one of the Olympics' showcase sports to come out and say, "What are they thinking?!?"

Canceling the swim events in Rio plays in contrast to a Chicago bid that is downright jubilant. The city's delegation, chock full of Olympians, left O'Hare International Airport amid a good luck party, and arrived to the cheers of Danes wearing Chicago Bears colors.

The city also has added two of its most well-known residents to the delegation. Oprah Winfrey signed on last week, and reversing an earlier decision, Pres. Obama will now travel to Copenhagen for Chicago's presentation.

Will all this be enough for the Windy City, or will Rio still win out? Can Tokyo or Madrid pull the upset? Keep checking with Fourth-Place Medal as we follow the bid. FPM will have full coverage on Friday, when the announcement is made in Copenhagen. 

The odds haven't changed much in the 13 months we've been handicapping the race to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. (Check out our previous editions here and here.) With the IOC's vote on Friday, Fourth-Place Medal will take an in-depth look this week at each of the four bid cities before presenting our final prediction at the end of the week, hours before the announcement. First up, Chicago.

Pros: Will have been 20 years in between Summer Olympics in United States/North America ... Obama is said to have improved America's image in Europe (where a majority of IOC voters are from) and will be attending the vote ... American television rights are up for bid in 2016, going to Chicago would spark massive bidding war between NBC and ESPN.

Cons: Anti-American bias still prevalent in the IOC ... would be third American Olympics in 32 years ... tepid support in Chicago, with only 47 percent of residents stating that they want the Games to come to the city (versus 45 percent against) ... bid is heavily reliant on public transit.

Biggest plus: Looming United States TV rights negotiations are bound to appeal to the greed of IOC members. (It's always about money.)

Biggest minus: Many members think the USOC takes an unfair cut of those dollars, which may help breed even more resentment of the United States than already exists in the notoriously Eurocentric organization. (See parenthetical above.)

Famous schmoozers: Barack and Michelle Obama, Oprah Winfrey, Michael Jordan, Richard Daley

Twitter-length summary: A vote for Chicago is a vote for the United States, which may be the bid's biggest (and only) problem. Still, CHI is one of favorites.

Odds: 8/11

The most famous Chicagoan in the world will be lending his full support for the city's Olympic bid after all. In a last-minute reversal, Barack Obama reportedly will attend the IOC's bid meeting on Friday to give a boost to his adopted city's pursuit of the 2016 Olympics.

Obama had said for weeks that he would not make the trip to Denmark, citing his pursuit of health care reform as the main reason. His wife, Michelle, was supposed to go in his stead. But this morning on The Today Show, Savannah Guthrie reported that aides close to the president said said he will make the trek to Copenhagen to attend the meeting on Friday in an attempt to win support for Chicago'spursuit of the Games.

Each of the four bid cities will make a 70-minute presentation to IOC members who will vote on the site later that day. Obama's presence at the meeting is thought to have the potential to sway a few votes.

This late announcement is a great bit of showmanship for Obama and the Chicago bid. One one hand, Obama is merely keeping up with the Joneses. All the other leaders of potential host countries had long ago announced their plans to attend the meeting. But the flair with which Obama announced his intentions -- generating rampant speculation about his travel plans, making headlines this morning by announcing his decision to go -- is a major publicity coup for Chicago's bid.

It's a deft political maneuver made at the perfect time. Because Chicago is considered one of the favorites to land the Games, Obama's decision could sway the one or two votes necessary to push the Olympics in the city's favor. All it may take is one voter, changing his or her mind on Friday because they were pleased to see the president. 

Politically though there is still the possibility of political backfire. What if Obama makes the trip and Chicago still loses out to Rio de Janeiro or Madrid? And what if people in the city or country don't want the Games to come back to America. Does this provide more ammunition for critics?

Critics never need ammunition, they have plenty of it as is. Supporting the Olympics is about as politically neutral as it gets. Red state or blue state, people love the Games and, in general, Chicago getting the '16 Olympics would be a popular move. Now, with Barack Obama attending the IOC's vote, the chances of the Games coming back to the United States are better than ever.

London organizers admit as much. They know that they won't have the money, time or unbridled access to 20,000 people like those in China did. But, as the chief executive of the London Games said, "that's the beauty of contrast."

And that contrast may be beautiful indeed. Reports out of London say that Blur frontman and Gorillaz co-founder Damon Albarn is on a short list to be named the artistic director of the 2012 opening ceremony. Another name mentioned is that of Stephen Daldry, the British director who helmed The Reader. That's a win-win in my opinion, as we'll either get songs like this or copious shots of Kate Winslet naked in a bathtub.

Albarn and his Gorillaz partner Jamie Hewlitt put together the title sequence to British network's Olympics coverage:

Why, Oprah Winfrey, of course.

Winfrey, who tapes the show at the heart of her empire in Chicago, will head to Copenhagen as part of the Chicago 2016 delegation. She will try to sway the votes of the IOC as they decide between Chicago, Rio de Janeiro, Tokyo and Madrid for the host city of the 2016 Summer Olympics.

"I love and believe in Chicago, and I think it would be the perfect Host City for the 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games," said Winfrey.

With every bid city looking to gain any edge they can, Chicago will have the advantage of a woman who can make an unknown author a best seller or can give an unknown doctor a television show. Winfrey's popularity doesn't stop in the U.S., as her show is syndicated overseas, as well. 

She is part of a team that will include first lady Michelle Obama and 26 former Olympians. That group includes Nadia Comaneci, Bart Conner, Bob Ctvrtlik, Gary Hall, Jr., Michael Johnson, Jackie Joyner-Kersee, Nastia Liukin, Edwin Moses and Kerri Walsh. 

This isn't the first time Oprah has shown support for the Olympic movement. After the 2008 Olympics, she hosted a show for the American Olympians in Chicago's Millennium Park.

Brazil's president is headed to Copenhagen, where the vote will take place, and is touting the beautiful beaches of Rio. Japan's Prime Minister plans on attending the vote on behalf of Tokyo, as does King Juan Carlos of Spain who will back Madrid's bid.

And for Chicago, Pres. Obama is sending a letter.

Wait, what? A letter? That is how the president is supporting a bid for the Olympics from not just his home country, but his hometown? If Chicago wins the bid, the Olympic Stadium will be a stones throw from his home near the University of Chicago. The Obamas, who recently hosted a "Support the Bid" bash on the lawn of the White house, could walk to the games.

The President is sending an emissary: his wife. Hopefully, Michelle Obama will be able to charm the room as first ladies like Jacqueline Kennedy have done in the past. She was well-received during the president's summer tour of Europe and Africa. If that good will carries over, Chicago will still be in the running.

In addition to Mrs. Obama, the Chicago delegation will feature the city's schlubby but charming mayor, Richard Daley. Though he has a classic Chicago accent, and is rough around the edges, Mayor Daley has an ability to persuade like few others.

But Pres. Obama could have been Chicago's ace in the hole. In previous Olympic city bids, both Russian president Boris Yeltsin and British prime minister Tony Blair played a key role in securing the games for their countries. Pres. Obama is quite popular internationally, and his presence might have awed the IOC into checking the box next to "Chicago" on their ballot.

Two years after breaking off from the squad in a dispute over money, parties, vans and access, Miller will be rejoining the team in time for the 2010 season. This includes, of course, the upcoming Olympic Games in Vancouver.

It's a curious decision for both sides. The coaches and members of the U.S. ski team can't be pleased to see Miller and his circus return. He's considered the antithesis of a team player and a guy who quits any time the odds get long. What is the benefit of adding a potential chemistry killer to a team that has thrived without him?

As for Miller, he doesn't need to be a member of the ski team to make the Olympic squad, so why would he go back?

The answer, as it usually does, probably has to do with money. More about this story will emerge in the coming days, but it's safe to say that there are some zeroes involved in this deal (and we're not talking about Miller's medal count from the '06 Games).

Speaking of the Olympics, it was just six months ago that Miller was unsure about whether he'd even be competing in them. He told HBO's Real Sports:

Right now, I feel like [skiing in Vancouver] would be a terrible decision. ... The least that I'll deal with is the whole thing from '06 again. You're set up for misery. It's just that there's no point.

A gold medal is going to mean nothing to me. Less than nothing, actually. It devalues so much that I've already done and adds nothing."

What Miller actually meant is that he didn't think he wanted to deal with the pressure of another Olympics and greatly feared that another medal shutout would besmirch his legacy as the greatest American skier of all-time (which he is). Something has evidently changed his mind.

She was scheduled to compete in the 4,000 meters at the national cross country championships in Pretoria. Semenya's coach, Michael Seme, says his runner "isn't feeling well".

Yesterday, unsubstantiated reports from Australia and England said that Semenya's tests showed that she has no womb or ovaries and produces testosterone levels three times higher than a normal woman. The IAAF thinly denies the reports. (The organization's spokesman says he hasn't "seen" the results, which doesn't mean he hasn't "heard" the results. Nor has the IAAF come out and said that the reports are false.)

The Today Show aired a report on the Semenya situation this morning:

It's another chapter in an unfortunate story. It's easy to get caught up in the sensationalized aspects of Semenya's tale, but let's not forget that she's still just a teenager who is now the centerpiece of an embarrassing worldwide scandal. No matter how things progressed to this point (and we'll get to that later), Semenya is a victim in this story.

But let's operate under assumption that the tests were accurate and that Semenya has intersex conditions. If so, then there are three main questions that will need to be answered soon:

1) Will Semenya be stripped of her gold medal? 

Probably. It's hard to imagine that the IAAF would allow Semenya to keep the gold after what these tests reveal. The rules explicitly state that a "gender verification" situation has to be approved and overseen by medical authorities. Semenya didn't do this. Fair or not, a rule is a rule.

2) Will Semenya ever be allowed to run again?

Reading the IAAF rules, it would appear that Semenya would be allowed to run if her condition was treated. Whether or not she would want to is anyone's guess. But there's also a chance she could be banned from running based on the answer to the next question.

3) Who knew about this and when did they know?

We haven't gotten this far down the road yet, but the next logical step in the progression of this sordid affair is whether there was a coverup involved. Regardless of whether the intentions of Semenya and her handlers were nefarious, they had to know of her ambiguous gender. Not having ovaries isn't something that goes unnoticed.  If they did, then at what point did this turn from an unfortunate medical situation into outright deception?

If Semenya was an innocent running without knowledge of her condition, then there's not much the IAAF could do other than strip her medal and advise her on how to regain eligibility. But if it can be determined that she knew she was running illegally (which would be tough to prove, but I'm starting to get the feeling that people knew -- how else would other coaches have known to order gender tests?) then there could be heavy sanctions down the road.

These questions will be discussed in the coming weeks and will be the center of attention when the IAAF officially releases its findings in November. If you thought the tale of Caster Semenya was strange before, it's just getting started. 

Other stories resonating on the Yahoo! network:
• Scandal: Bank exec threw parties in $12 million foreclosed mansion
• World’s oldest person dies in Los Angeles
• Maura Tierney drops out of TV show to fight cancer

First, one of her South African coaches quit the team in shame for not telling Semenya that she was being subjected to gender tests. (Semenya had thought she was taking a doping test.) Then, Semenya appeared on the cover of South Africa's You magazine with a complete makeover designed to silence critics who insist she is a man.

For the shoot Semenya sported a less ambiguous hair style, a designer black dress, jewelry, makeup and nail polish. Despite what you think about the whole situation, it's safe to say that this is the first time that Semenya has truly looked like an 18-year old woman.

She says she likes the look too. Semenya told the BBC:

"I'd like to dress up more often and wear dresses but I never get the chance.

I am who I am and I'm proud of myself."

Let's hope this is what she wants though.

Nothing Semenya has done in the past month has suggested that she likes to wear dresses, get manicures and let down her hair. After the controversy broke, she kept her cornrows, wore baggy clothes and pounded her chest in victory like a college football cornerback. When she returned to her hometown, she was dressed the same way. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. That seemed to be Semenya's natural inclination. This feels forced.

Hopefully I'm wrong. But if Semenya was pressured to do this to silence her critics, then this is a sad story rather than one of retribution. The opinions of a few jealous coaches shouldn't have an effect on how an 18-year old carries herself. If Semenya wants to wear dresses then she should. But if she wants to run around in track suits, what's the problem with that?

The coach who resigned wasn't Semenya's personal coach, but a middle distance supervisor on the South African team who was ashamed that Semenya was kept in the dark about the growing controversy. Wilfred Daniels said he was told the issue was supposed to stay private.

Other popular stories across the Yahoo! network:
• True or false: Is it OK to wear white after Labor Day?
• George Clooney goes public with his new girlfriend
• 10 things you should never do in the office

Chicago's plan was called, in more than one place, ambitious but achievable. The Windy City's biggest problem was that at the time of the IOC's visit, there was no financial back-up for the Games. However, at an IOC meeting in June, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said that the city would provide financial backing. Chicago's two other potential problems are the reliance on temporary venues and transportation problems. 

Tokyo's biggest issue is that its people don't support the bid, and the Olympics do not like to go to a place that they are not wanted. Only 56 percent of the citizens of Tokyo want the games, the lowest amount of support among the bid cities. The IOC is also concerned about the size of the space allotted for the Olympic Village, and the lack of existing venues. Tokyo would need to build 17 venues for the Games. Tokyo's biggest strength is that it already has $3.7 billion banked as reserve money for the Games.

There was no surprise in Rio's weakness which is safety. As the IOC so delicately worded it, "public safety would pose a challenge" in Rio. Considering that the U.S. State department says that "crime in Brazil has reached very high levels," the IOC may be underplaying that card. The IOC is also concerned that there will not be enough hotel rooms in time for the Games, though Rio does enjoy the highest amount of local support, at 85 percent.

Madrid's biggest problem is that it hasn't made it very clear to the IOC just who is doing what. From the IOC:

However, the Candidature File and supporting documentation, as well as the administrative structure proposed for a Madrid 2016 Games, did not demonstrate a full understanding of the need for clear delineation of roles and responsibilities, including ï¬nancial, between different stakeholders to ensure efï¬cient and timely transition to the OCOG, or of the management of operations required to implement the Games vision, concept and plans. 

Ouch. The IOC is also concerned about Spain's compliance with anti-doping measures, and the construction of some of the venues.

The next step in the process is the actual election of the host city after an IOC meeting in early October, with the announcement of the bid coming on October 2, one month from today. 

A four-time gold medalist subdued and helped capture a teenage intruder at her home in Australia. It's a pretty impressive story before you consider that the would-be victim won the first of those gold medals in 1956.

Dawn Fraser, who won eight Olympic medals for Australia from 1956 through 1964, was at home in Australia when a man grabbed her by the front gate. Bad idea.

"This guy came out of the gate and grabbed me and I grabbed him by the ear and I kicked him in the groin.

So he had to let me go. He threatened my life and I got really annoyed about that and just grabbed him by the ear and the hair."

Grabbing an ear and kicking a groin? That sounds like a scene from a Three Stooges movie. It's bad enough to be a burglar. It's bad enough to be a bad burgler. But to be a bad burglar that gets caught after being kicked in the groin by a 71-year old? Ouch, on multiple levels.

Fraser's attitude doesn't seem to have changed from her swimming days. She was always considered cocky (especially when she broke the Australian record in the 100m freestyle and told reporters that she wasn't impressed with her time) and once smacked a teammate with a pillow during an argument at a team meeting.

While Fraser said she was "annoyed" with the intruder, she couldn't be too angry, since she has dabbled in some intruding herself. At the 1964 Tokyo Games, Fraser went on a middle-of-the-night raid to steal a flag from the entrance to the Emperor's palace. She was caught and arrested, but was released soon after and given the flag anyway.

Thanks to David Wallechinsky's The Complete Book of the Olympics for research assistance. 

Popular stories across the Yahoo! network:
• Boaters miraculously rescued after Coast Guard gives up
• Report: DJ AM’s tragic death not a suicide
• Former first daughter Jenna Bush lands high-profile job

Before a meet in Zurich, Switzerland, Bolt told reporters that he would like to try the long jump, an event at which both Owens and Lewis won Olympic golds.

"I think I would be a really good long jumper.

I've messed around with the long jump since I've been at school and I'm definitely going to give it a try."

Like a great comedic actor trying his hand at drama, going to the long jump is the next logical step for Bolt. He's already ascended to the peak of sprinting at age 23. With no true rivals in either the 100m or 200m and no higher honors than world and Olympic golds, the only thing to keep Bolt motivated is the thought of lowering his own world records. That's far from mundane, but the dream of going 9.51 in the 100m isn't exactly the stuff from which training montages are made.

Bolt needs a new challenge and the long jump is a lot better idea than the NFL. By taking on a new event, Bolt could add to his legend while maintaining his status as the world's fastest man. Going to play football would mean having to leave sprinting. Training in the long jump keeps Bolt where he belongs, on the track.

But how would he do in a new event? No less an authority than world record holder Mike Powell thinks Bolt could jump nine meters. Powell's mark, set at the 1991 world championships, is 8.95 meters.

That's tremendous praise. But even though I'm through doubting Usain Bolt, two factors make me hesitate to proclaim him the second-coming of Bob Beamon. First, I'm no physics major, but is Bolt possibly too big to be great at the long jump? His speed would get him to the board faster than anyone in history, but once in the air Bolt's stature could work against him. He's three inches taller than Carl Lewis and at least 30 pounds heavier than both Beamon and Powell were when they made their jumps.

More importantly, all of those men had competed in the long jumpyears before becoming world-class in the event. Bolt is just a beginner. His raw talent is undeniable, but the learning curve would be long.

The London Olympics start in 1,065 days. That should be long enough.

Other popular Yahoo! Sports blog posts:
• Vick makes long-awaited debut
• USC announces shocker with starting QB
• 10 worst NBA free-agent signings this decade

Caster Semenya, the 18-year old women's 800m world champion whose gender has been called into question in recent days, reportedly wanted to boycott her medal ceremony in protest, but was eventually convinced by the president of Athletics South Africa (ASA) to accept her gold medal. She is said to have regretted her decision.

It's another sad chapter in an increasingly uncomfortable story.

On Wednesday, Semenya dominated the field in the 800m in Berlin amid whispers that she was actually a man. She has undergone complicated gender testing (this article in London's Daily Mail newspaper explains why it's so difficult), the results of which won't be known for weeks.

Semenya grew up a tomboy but was said to have rarely encountered questions as to her gender and never on such a widespread level. Leonard Cheune, the president of ASA said today of Semenya:

"She told me: 'No one has ever said I was not a girl, but here I am not. I am not a boy. Why did you bring me here? You should have left me in my village at home.'"

Let's operate under the assumption that the rumors are false and that Semenya is what she says she is: a woman. This then becomes one of the meanest stories in recent memory, right? The rumor, borne of jealousy and masculine features, will shadow Semenya for life. The scars may never heal.

Behind the accusations, canards and snickers is a very real 18-year old girl. The fact that she's really fast doesn't mean she doesn't have feelings. I mean, it's easy to throw stones from half a world away, but imagine going into your local high school, picking out an androgynous-looking senior walking into the girls bathroom and calling her a man. Now picture the entire world doing that.

What has Semenya done to deserve this, other than drop massive amounts of time in her events? (And, as I wrote on Wednesday, don't large drops in time tend to indicate steroids rather than the presence of a Y chromosome? Is it routine for 18-year old men to drop lots of time? This vexes me.) 

I want to believe Semenya because being wrong in this situation would have ramifications beyond sports. It's one thing to speculate that Usain Bolt is doping. It's another to say that a girl is actually a boy.

This whole story stinks. Semenya should be on top of the world right now, but instead she's hiding out and having to defend herself against the most insulting of accusations. It's too late to go back, but if there was ever a time to give someone the benefit of the doubt, wouldn't Semenya deserve it right now?

No matter whether she accepted it or not, that gold medal is tainted. And no gender test is going to change that sad fact. 

That's simply fantastic.

Kennedy's famous Cold War quote delivered near the Berlin Wall was "Ich bin ein Berliner" which meant "I am a citizen of Berlin." Bolt's shirt refers to Berlino, the official mascot of the IAAF World Championships in Athletics. Translated, Bolt's shirt says "I am a Berlino". It's not quite Kennedy, but this may do wonders for athlete-mascot relations for years to come. 

Berlino has been quite chummy with the athletes at the championships. He can be seen celebrating with most of the victors after their events and even gave a piggyback ride to Jamaica's Melanie Walker after her win in the 400m hurdles. (It ended abruptly after Berlino ran directly into a truck carrying hurdles.)

Bolt and the mascot staged a mock race after Bolt's dominating victory in the 200m, with Berlino pulling out a narrow victory. It's the only race Bolt has lost in a long while.

In the past 15 months, Usain Bolt has won three Olympic golds, a world championship and set four world records. But tonight may been his most impressive feat yet.

The Jamaican sprint star shattered his own world record in the 200m at the world track and field championships in Berlin, running a scintillating 19.19 and besting the second place finisher by over six-tenths of a second. His old record, set in Beijing, was 19.30.

Few people (including myself) thought Bolt had a realistic chance of setting a world record tonight, as his run in Beijing was widely considered a "perfect race". Coupled with the fact that Bolt's turns have been less than stellar this season, and it was assumed he'd win the race with ease, but just off his Beijing pace.

Instead, Bolt burst out of the blocks, had a five-meter lead at the midway point and then accelerated down the stretch for yet another dominating victory.

For the first time since he came onto the international scene last year, Bolt looked fatigued at the finish. Usually he barely breaks a sweat during his races, but today he was huffing and puffing during the final 15 meters. So much for the criticism that he was too lackadaisical at the end of his races.

After the race, Bolt collapsed in joy on the track, took a victory lap with the Jamaican flag, staged a race with the championship's mascot and had his hand kissed by a cameraman.

When told that he has now won five consecutive international titles and set a world record in each of those races, Usain Bolt shook his head in disbelief, almost as if he didn't believe it. Join the club.

Other Popular Yahoo! Sports Posts:
• Gender controversy for track gold medalist
• Bizarre brawl is nothing new for NFL franchise
• Accusations that Shaq stole show idea

Exactly one year in Beijing, Usain Bolt broke Michael Johnson's once-untouchable record in the 200m, lowering the mark .02 seconds from 19.32 to 19.30. Earlier that morning, we debated whether Bolt would be able to run such a time, eventually predicting that he would.

With the fastest man ever set to run in the 200m final at the world track championships in Berlin at 2:35 p.m. ET (watch live on the internet at universalsports.com), we thought it was time for another prediction. But this time we're not so optimistic.

Of the three major races Bolt has run in his life (Olympic 100m, Olympic 200m, World Champs 100m) only one of those races has been close to perfect -- the 200m in Beijing. Bolt's 100m in the Olympics is well-known for his chest-thumping at the 90m mark, but even his 100m on Sunday in Berlin wasn't flawless. He looked around for Tyson Gay at the 85m mark and broke his stride even while running through the line.

His 200m at the Olympics, however, was basically 19 seconds of perfection. He made up the stagger almost immediately, ran the turn with ease and accelerated in the final meters. It won't be nearly as easy to best that time.

That's not to say he won't, though. Bolt's 9.58 was staggering. Given that time, it wouldn't be a surprise if he went a 19.25 tonight in Berlin. But don't expect another world record shattering like we saw on Sunday.

The favorite in the women's 800m at the world track championships will run under suspicion that she's actually a man.

After bursting onto the scene with the world's fastest time three weeks ago at a junior meet, South Africa's Caster Semenya, 18, has been dogged by gender-swapping accusations. She will undergo complex gender testing (it's not as easy as you'd think) after her race tonight, but the results won't be available for a few weeks. Semenya had the fastest qualifying time of the eight competitors. 

South African officials have acknowledged the controversy, but are standing by Semenya. Molatelo Malehopo, general manager of Athletics South Africa, told UK's Daily Mail:

"She is a female. We are completely sure about that and we wouldn't have entered her into the female competition if we had any doubts.

We have not been absent-minded, we are very sure of her gender. We are aware of the claims that have been made but our aim at the moment is to prepare Caster for the race this evening."

It's nothing new for a great female athlete to be accused of being a man. Babe Didrikson, perhaps the greatest sportswoman of all-time, was constantly being hounded by such slurs. And it's also not unheard of for a man to compete as a woman. 

But despite the breathless reports from British and Australian newspapers, there doesn't seem to be any concrete evidence that Semenya is actually a man other than the fact that she runs really fast, has a defined physique and doesn't have the most feminine of features. 

It's interesting that the speculation immediately turned to gender rather than steroids, as the latter would be a more logical way to cheat. Normally when athletes lower their personal bests by wide margins, the talk immediately turns toward doping. Not in this case.

And if Semenya was actually a man, wouldn't he/she try to do more to look like a woman? I mean, I've seen Tootsie. Dustin Hoffman didn't go into that TV studio with a buzz cut and form-fitting pants. He put on a dress, teased the hair and wore nail polish and makeup. He sold it. If Semenya was trying to switch genders, wouldn't there be some more effort to glam it up?

The whole thing is pretty insulting and I feel bad for the 18-year old that is getting dragged through this. Maybe she's a he. If that's proven, then I'll be first in line to criticize. But right now there's nothing to suggest that there's anything nefarious going on other than the jealous whispers of competitors.

Update: If there were whispers before, they'll likely turn to shouts now. Caster Semenya thoroughly dominated the field in the 800m final tonight in Berlin, hitting the tape a full 25 meters ahead of the field.

While the other runners were laboring in the backstretch, Semenya looked like she was out for a Sunday jog. Her 1:55.46 was the fastest winning time at the world championships since 1993.

And not that this means anything either way, but when Semenya raised her arms in triumph after the race it was clear that she doesn't shave her armpits. To go back to the Tootsie comparison, if Semenya is actually a man, she/he isn't trying very hard to mask it.

The IAAF insists that the gender testing of Semenya is a "medical issue" not one of foul play. 

Elsewhere on the Yahoo! Sports Blogs:
• Five amazing quotes from Brett Favre's news conference
• How Jarvis Varnado became the nation's best walk-on
• Not watching Tiger? You're the only one

Last August in the 100-meter final at the Olympics, Usain Bolt shattered a world record in the event even though he began thumping his chest in celebration at the 90-meter mark. Bolt explained by saying he didn't care about the time, just the gold medal. Still, people wondered: "How fast can he go if he runs through the tape?" We found out tonight in Berlin.

The Jamaican sprinter shattered his own world mark in the 100 this evening, running a blistering 9.58 at the IAAF World Track Championships. That was .11 seconds faster than his time from Beijing and right in line with what some physicists had predicted Bolt could run if he kept racing for the entire 100 meters. The time is stunning. It's a full two-tenths faster than Ben Johnson ran in his steroid-fueled "victory" at the 1988 Olympics.

Bolt went so fast that his much-anticipated showdown with Tyson Gay (who withdrew from the 100 in Beijing due to injury) seemed anti-climatic. That Gay broke the American record in the race despite losing by a few strides demonstrates the greatness of Bolt's run.

The world mark was set in the same stadium in which Jesse Owens won five gold medals at the 1936 Olympics. Nothing in track will ever top that moment, but Usain Bolt's sprint tonight came close.

In case you've forgotten about Campbell, he became the breakout star at last year's NFL draft after getting drafted in the seventh round by the Detroit Lions. He played college football at West Point and became the first graduate of the military academy to be drafted in over a decade. On the second day of the NFL draft he earned a standing ovation from the crowd at Radio City Music Hall, was interviewed on ESPN and spoke to his new coach, Rod Marinelli, via videoconference.

Campbell was set to take advantage of a new Department of Defense policy that would have allowed soldiers to play professional sports in lieu of the military service they owed. But on the eve of training camp, the rule was rescinded and Campbell was ordered to return to military service.

Now Campbell is back working toward another sporting goal, the 2010 Winter Olympics.

The burly linebacker received an unexpected call one year ago from a USA bobsled assistant asking him to tryo. Campbell was completely unfamiliar with the sport (he compared himself to those guys from Cool Runnings), but took up an offer to have some practice runs at Lake Placid in November. He told USA Today it was "the most intense thing" he's ever done.

In case you're wondering why Campbell is allowed to bobsled but not play football, it has to do with professional status. If Campbell played in the NFL he'd be considered a pro. In bobsledding, he's an amateur. (Yes, it sounds like a tomato/tomaahto situation to us too.)

There are a number of steps Campbell would have to go through in order to qualify, beginning with the U.S. push championship qualifiers next week. He's a long shot, but has already defied the odds once in his sporting career. Who's to say he can't do it again?

Elsewhere on the Yahoo! Sports Blogs:
• Crabtree's adviser: We'll sit out and re-enter 2010 draft
• B.J. Penn accuses former opponent Georges St. Pierre of steroid use
• Four Chinese Muslims go from Guantánamo to golf course

Sign up now for Fantasy Football '09 -- now with free live scoring!

An unlikely group of young women have taken to the wrestling mat with dreams of making it to the Olympics. Like all wrestlers, these women go through grueling practices, get bloody noses and appreciate the challenge of winning a wrestling match.

Unlike other wrestlers, these women wrestle in Iraq. The New York Times tells a fascinating tale of women in Diwaniya, a city south of Baghdad. Women in their late teens and early 20s practice in a gymnasium, only after the men have cleared out.

Iraq is not the only Arab country or mostly Islamic country to sponsor wrestling for women -- Egypt and Morocco both fielded teams for the Olympics, while Kazakhstan and Kyrgystan both competed in the 2009 Asian wrestling championships -- but they are facing backlash in Diwaniya.

Iraq’s wrestling federation endorsed the team, but an official from that body refused to come to Diwaniya for the competition in June, fearing he would be killed, according to Mr. Hamdani.

In May angry tribal leaders petitioned the provincial council to ban the team after a television station showed one of the wrestlers practicing with her coach ... Many are taunted and cursed whenever they venture to the market. They are ostracized at school and constantly hectored by their teachers.

Mrs. Kadhim, who has five daughters on the team, was recently advised by relatives to leave Diwaniya and received threatening messages on her cellphone. 

Iraqi wrestling, like all Iraqi Olympic sports, is still suffering from being ruled by the tyrannical son of Saddam Hussein, Uday. For nearly 20 years, Uday instilled fear in his athletes. They were tortured for losing contests, whipped, dragged over pavement, and hit with electrical prods. Some athletes were thought to be murdered.

Though Uday has been dead since 2003 -- killed in a U.S. raid -- his legacy remains. Before he took over, Iraq had as many as 47 athletes compete in the Olympics. In 2008, only four competed. Athletes were justifiably afraid of the consequences for losing.

Women's wrestling could provide a shot in the arm for Iraqi sports. The young women wrestling in Diwaniya are clearly determined and excited to wrestle, considering that they haven't quit despite death threats. After they started their club, three other teams followed suit.

Though the women don't have the support of traditional clerics, they do have supporters of some locals, calling the female grapplers a "sign of evolution and freedom." Not all religious leaders have a problem with women's wrestling, as long as the women are properly covered.

With women's wrestling growing at an exponential rate, it could be the perfect sport for these young ladies. After all, wrestling requires toughness, and who could deny that these young women are tough? 

Elsewhere on the Yahoo! Sports Blogs:
• Charles Rogers was extremely devoted to weed
• J.R. Smith shuts down Twitter account amid controversy
• Fielder charges Dodgers clubhouse door, stopped by security

Fourth-Place Medal occasionally looks at the impact of the swimsuits in a feature called "Suit Yourself". In a world championship recap, we look at 10 suit-based absurdities:

1) The meet saw 43 world records fall, 14 more than the previous record for most world records set in a meet. That took place at the 1976 Montreal games when the East Germans sent a men's, "women's" team and chemistry team to the Olympics.

2) Since the introduction of the Speedo LZR in early 2008, more than 170 world records have been set.

3) Last August, the winning time at the Olympics in the women's 100m backstroke was 58.96. That would have been good for fourth place in Rome.

4) In the women's 200m butterfly in Beijing, Jessicah Schipper earned a bronze medal in a time of 2:06.26. The last last place finisher in the 200m butterfly finals in Rome touched the wall in 2:06.11.

5) The women's 200 backstroke record remained unchanged from 1991 until 2008. Since then, it has been lowered four times.

6) The men's 100 freestyle record has been set more times in the past 17 months (seven) than had been in the previous 24 years (six).

7) Three different women broke the world record in the 50m backstroke.

8) Australia's Christian Sprenger broke the world mark in the semifinals of the men's 200m breaststroke and then failed to place in the finals. In Beijing, Sprenger finished 26th overall in the event.

9) Sarah Sjostrom of Sweden won the women's 100m butterfly and set a world record, improving her time a full three seconds from her swim in Beijing (where she finished 27th).

10) Paul Biedermann.

American swimmer Ryan Lochte, along with his diamond-encrusted "grillz", gives the bite-test to his 400m individual medley gold medal at the swimming world championships in Rome.

ROME - At the Foro Itlalico pool, site of the 2009 swimming world championships, Tyler McGill trudged down the long blue carpet runway toward the horde of media.

"I didn't see Phelps," McGill started before the first question was fired.

There was an awkward pause. No one watched McGill's 100m butterfly final. All eyes were transfixed on the epic battle between Michael Phelps and Milorad Cavic.

McGill shifted his weight from one foot to the other. "It was an honor to be in the butterfly final that broke the 50-second barrier," said McGill, who shook his head as if there was nothing left to say. "Phelps is great."

McGill, the other American in the 100 fly final, went a 51.42, and has hovered in the 51.0-second range since the U.S. trials for worlds.

I used to swim. I won an Olympic gold medal in the 200-meter butterfly at the 1992 Games. I know: McGill is great.

"He understands the situation," said a reporter from a major publication, referring to McGill. "We're here for Phelps. NBC is only here because of Phelps."

I nodded. "It's the Michael Phelps show," I said, agreeing, but I admit I felt slightly awkward saying it. I felt uneasy.

Inside the tight clique of the swimming community, we're all incredibly thankful for Phelps. Whether you're a world-class swimmer on the cusp of medal contention, a governing body striving to increase registration, or a swimwear manufacturer fighting for market share, you can't deny the "Phelps Effect." Mr. Swimming has been a boon for business. Inside the swimming clique we're giddy.

But tension is tempering our hopes for the future. We're in a race against time to elevate the sport's visibility beyond our one truly global star.

Phelps plans to compete until the 2012 Olympics, but we can all hear the clock ticking.

While the white-hot spotlight has been on Phelps, a few stars have managed to peek outside his shadow: Aaron Peirsol, Natalie Coughlin and Ryan Lochte, to name a few. With 24 Olympic medals between them and London on their schedule, we have the firepower to grow the sport, and, perhaps, make it more mainstream.

But for others, those out of medal contention or still developing, grabbing any attention from Michael Phelps just got even harder.

The reason for that is the other star of the 2009 world championships, the star that has arguably gotten as much media attention as Phelps, although it has become taboo to talk favorably about this "star" during worlds: the hi-tech polyurethane swimsuit.

On the eve of the world championships, FINA banned them from competition in 2010.

Phelps is fine with the ban. "I'm ready to get back to swimming," he said in a postrace press conference after losing to unheralded Paul Biedermann in the 200m freestyle. "The sport's not about swimming anymore."

Most swimwear manufactures aren't necessarily on the same page.

Quietly, out of the spotlight, they've been grumbling. Most are in favor of the hi-tech suits - and their high price-point, which drives revenue. These dollars drive swimwear contracts, and it's clear these contracts will be cut, or significantly reduced, for athletes just out of the medal hunt.

Will the fallout of the 2010 FINA ban on hi-tech suits result in little or no swimwear endorsement dollars for athletes like Tyler McGill?

I've heard the manufacturers' grumblings, and they worry me. Athletes depend on these sponsorship dollars to live on and to pay for training expenses.

Phelps won't feel that pain, nor will most major stars within the community, but Tyler McGill will be graduating from college next year, as will David Walters and Ricky Berens and others like them. They are our new stars, and I worry for these athletes. While we should be wondering, "Who will rival Michael Phelps?" instead I wonder how many young swimmers of today will have the chance to try.

Follow Gold Medal Mel on the web. 

The great ones do their best work when the odds are stacked against them. And the odds were certainly stacked against Michael Phelps today in a 100-meter butterfly rematch with Milorad Cavic at the World Swimming Championships.

Phelps was more fatigued, had spent less time training, isn't a butterfly specialist and, most importantly, was wearing a vastly inferior suit. None of it mattered. Michael Phelps stormed from behind in the final 25 meters to nip Cavic again at the wall, winning his fourth gold at the championships and defending his title as the world's fastest butterflier. It wasn't as thrilling as the race in Beijing, but it was still pretty darn exciting.

Cavic had spent weeks talking up this race, telling anyone who would listen that he actually beat Phelps in Beijing and that the 14-time Olympic gold medalist was beatable. He made a fuss about the swimsuits, even though he was the one wearing the polyurethane-based one that has been a part of more than 30 world records so far at this meet.

Phelps, on the other hand, left his talking for the pool. While clearly miffed at having to wear the Speedo LZR, Phelps stayed silent (even if his coach, Bob Bowman, didn't) until he touched the wall first and defiantly popped out the Speedo logo. He won with relative ease after touching behind Cavic (as expected) at the first 50 and celebrated as much as he did after any of his Olympic victories. 

To his credit, Cavic handled the loss with class. He flashed a simple smile after touching in the second-fastest 100m butterfly time ever, almost as if to say, "I should have known better."

Nothing Phelps can do in the pool will ever top his eight golds from Beijing, but the victory today comes remarkably close. Against a rested rival who had spent the last 352 days preparing for those 50 seconds and was wearing a soon-to-be-illegal suit, Phelps showed again why he is the greatest Olympic athlete who ever lived.

There had been speculation that the 29-year old Kwan would return to the ice after a four year layoff in an attempt to win the Olympic gold that has eluded her throughout her storied career. A career in public service took precedence. 

Kwan has served as a public diplomacy envoy for the State Department in recent years and hopes that her graduate degree will help her advance in that field. She will begin classes at Tufts University in September.

Four years ago, Kwan earned a controversial medical bye to the Games in Torino but was forced to withdraw after a groin injury sidelined her during her first day of practice. She hasn't competed on an international scale since then, so an attempt at gold was a longshot, at best.

That Kwan can still make headlines for not skating shows how much of a mark she left in the sporting community during her historic career. Kwan's nine U.S. Figure Skating titles were one more than Peggy Fleming and Dorothy Hamill had combined. And it's those nine titles she'll be most remembered for rather than the disappointments in Nagano and Salt Lake City, where she won silver and bronze, respectively.

Though the lack of Olympic golds will be a bittersweet footnote in the career of Michelle Kwan, it won't define it. And, judging by her lofty career aspirations, maybe her success on the rink won't either. The lives of far too many athletes end when they leave the playing field. Michelle Kwan's seems to just be beginning.

Ali-Frazier. Magic-Bird. Michael-Milorad?

The greatest rivalry in swimming takes center stage Saturday at the World Championships in Rome, as Michael Phelps and Milorad Cavic meet in a 100-meter butterfly final for the first time since their epic battle in Beijing. In that race, Cavic led Phelps for 99.99 meters before a half-stroke finish from Phelps gave him a stunning, narrow victory and earned him a record-tying seventh gold medal.

Much has changed in the 351 days since that morning in China. Phelps became the most decorated Olympian in history the day after the 100m thriller and was feted the world over for his accomplishments. Five months later, after a picture of him smoking marijuana was circulated across the globe, he was suspended from the sport for three months. Upon his return he broke the world record in the 100m fly (which had been held by American Ian Crocker), but has had his aura of invincibility pierced in this meet after a decisive loss in the 200m freestyle.

Meanwhile, Cavic has been preparing solely for Saturday's rematch, quietly at first, and then quite vocally in recent days. He has stated that he, and not Phelps, won that race in Beijing (argueing that he touched the wall first but that the touch pad didn't trigger) and has spoken of how Phelps is beatable. Then, in one of today's semifinals, Cavic went out and snatched the world record away from Phelps.

And then there are the suits.

High-tech swimsuits have dominated both conversation and the medal podium in Rome. A preposterous 29 world records have fallen, some courtesy of swimmers who didn't even make the semifinals of that event at the Olympics.

Sadly, the suits will once again take center stage tomorrow, as Cavic will be wearing an Arena X-Glide, while Phelps is stuck with the inferior Speedo LZR. Fearing that a potential victory might be tainted, Cavic has tried to goad Phelps into wearing one of the polyurethane-based suits, but to no avail.

"If Mike wants an Arena, he just has to say it," Cavic said. "If he wants a Jaked and they don't want to give it to him free, I'll buy it for him. He has options. I think in the media it's been portrayed that he has no option, he has to swim for (Speedo). It's a complete lie."

For all his bluster, Cavic is speaking the truth.

Wearing the LZR and suffering from its inferiority is almost becoming a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy for Phelps. If he loses, he has an out. It was the suit's fault. If he wears one of those fasts suits and loses? Suddenly the great Michael Phelps is fallible. It's safer to stay with the LZR. He's a hero if he wins and has a built-in excuse if he doesn't. 

But Cavic is simplifying things too much when he says that Phelps has no option. He is beholden to Speedo and if they say he can't switch suits, he's stuck. This isn't about loyalty, it's about business.

Of course, if Speedo was smart, they'd let Phelps wear the Arena suit for this race. Because what's worse for the company? Having its star athlete compete in another suit (one which will be banned five months from tomorrow) or having its star athlete lose a race because he was wearing a Speedo suit?

Isn't this a no-brainer? The minor-PR hit Speedo will take if they allowed Phelps to change for a race will be nothing compared to the hit the company will take perception-wise if swimmers think the product is second-class. Heck, it might even benefit Speedo, sort of like when the Macy's Santa tells everyone to go to Gimbel's in the classic film Miracle on the 34th Street.

In the end, though, Phelps will likely stay in the LZR and lose because of it. As we saw in Beijing, Cavic is every bit as good in the 100m fly as Phelps. The suit will make him a little bit better. He wins the rematch, unless Phelps has another miracle in him.

The king may have been dethroned, but only for 24 hours. After a controversial loss to Paul Biedermann in yesterday's 200-meter freestyle, Michael Phelps regained his familiar spot atop the podium today at the World Swimming Championships in Rome, with a decisive victory in his signature event, the 200-meter butterfly.

Phelps broke his own world record in the win, eclipsing the mark he set at the Beijing Olympics by a half-second. Much like yesterday's result when Phelps lost to the upstart Biedermann (and his Arena X-Glide bathing suit), today's was fully expected. Even a buoyant, propelling suit isn't enough to beat Phelps in the 200 fly.

It was in this event that Phelps first emerged on the world scene, earning a bid to the 2000 Athens Olympics in the event as a 15-year old. Since the 2003 World Championships, Phelps has not lost the 200 fly in any major event. That streak continued in Rome, as he went wire-to-wire and won with ease, more than seven-tenths of a second ahead of the silver medalist.

If Phelps was out to prove something with that swim (and how could he not have been after the events of yesterday), he succeeded. He showed that he's still in peak form and that, even with a waist-high Speedo LZR, can still lap the field in certain events.

Whether or not the world record proves Phelps is better than he was in Beijing (as was suggested on TV) is up for debate. At the Olympics, the 200 fly came in the middle of the program. Because Phelps was such an overwhelming favorite (he went off at -5000 to win), he appeared to take the race fairly easy.

What isn't up for debate is that Michael Phelps is still the best swimmer in the world. The four-year winning streak may have been snapped yesterday, but maybe a new one began today.

For the first time in four years, Michael Phelps touched the wall second at a major international competition. And it was his swimsuit that did him in.

German Paul Biedermann won the 200-meter freeestyle today at the World Swimming Championships in Rome, finishing more than a second ahead of the 14-time gold medalist. It was Phelps' first loss in a big meet since July 2005, when he finished behind Ian Crocker in the 100-meter butterfly at worlds. (You can watch a replay of the race at universalsports.com.)

As we wrote earlier today, Phelps seemed resigned to the loss earlier this week after Biedermann stunned the swimming world by breaking Ian Thorpe's once-untouchable world record in the 400-meter free. With his Arena X-Glide suit, Bidermann has sliced seconds off his times in a sport where dropping tenths is considered a major achievement.

To say Biedermann came out of nowhere would be hyperbole, but his emergence at these championships was certainly unexpected. After finishing fifth in the 200 at the Olympics and not qualifying for the finals in the 400, Biedermann is now a double world champion. And he isn't shy about attributing much of his success to the Arena X-Glide suit that he says improves his time by two seconds.

Phelps was wearing the once-revolutionary Speedo LZR, which has now been far surpassed by the buoyancy and stability of the new polyurethane-based Arena and Jaked suits. FINA has banned those suits from competition starting next year, a necessary move, but one that comes too late to stop the world record binge in Rome.

Because the suit will be widely credited for Biedermann's victory, the loss isn't crushing for Phelps. His worldwide reputation is based on Olympics, not world championships. Earning a silver is a bitter pill to swallow, but maybe a beneficial one for the greatest swimming champion of all-time. At least he's not in danger of getting complacent.

Plus, with the playing field leveled next year in terms of suit technology, Phelps will once again become the favorite in this race. No disrespect to Biedermann, but it's not a stretch to say that if everyone swam in those old-school Mark Spitz briefs, Michael Phelps' win streak would still be alive. 

Update: After the race, Phelps made his strongest statement yet about the suit controversy. When asked by NBC's Andrea Kremer about his "inferior suit," Phelps declined to take a direct shot at Biedermann but said, "I will say that next year swimming will be swimming again. You're going to have to do all the work and there's not going to be a suit that does it for you."

Event: 200-meter freestyle, 2009 World Swimming Championships

When: 12:02 p.m. ET

Possible spoilers: Paul Biedermann, Speedo

Analysis: Michael Phelps hasn't lost a race in a major competition since he was bested by Ian Crocker at the 2005 World Championships. Since then he's swum in 18 events and won them all. That streak is in serious jeopardy of ending this evening in Rome.

Imagine if Usain Bolt had to run in flip-flops or if Alex Ovechkin had to skate in goalie pads. That's what it will be like today for Phelps as he takes to the block in his Speedo LZR, the once-revolutionary suit that has since been far surpassed by models from Arena and Jaked, among others. Due to contractual obligations with Speedo, Phelps has to wear the LZR at the worlds, while his opponents (like the German Biedermann) can wear faster, polyurethane-based suits that can improve times by as much as two seconds. 

Biedermann is basically bringing a gun to a knife fight. If he bests Phelps, it won't be because of ability, it will be because of the research and development team at Arena. 

Last year in Beijing, Biedermann finished fifth in this race, more than three seconds behind Phelps. Now, he's a world record holder in the 400 and the top seed in a race Phelps has dominated for the last half-decade. Has he improved? Sure. But, as even he acknowledges, the suit has played a vital role in that improvement.

It would be foolish to ever count out Michael Phelps. He was supposed to lose his last two 100-meter butterfly races at the '07 Worlds and '08 Olympics, but he pulled out miracles to win. He earned eight gold medals when such a feat should have been impossible. The 200m freestyle final tonight in Rome is yet another obstacle.

The difference this time is that Phelps seems to resigned to losing. His quotes about the suits have a defeatist tinge to them, almost as if the 14-time gold medalist is preparing himself for a loss. That's what we're predicting too.

Even if you're not a swimming fan but for one week out of every four years, you may want to tune in to NBC Universal at noon ET today (or online at this link) to watch what should be a thrilling race. You may see the dethroning of the most decorated athlete in Olympic history. Or you may he see one his greatest triumphs. 

During this week's World Championships, Fourth-Place Medal will occasionally look at the impact of the swimsuits in a feature called "Suit Yourself". To begin, we look at the new world mark in the 400 freestyle.

One of the most hallowed world records in men's swimming, Ian Thorpe's mark in the 400-meter freestyle, was broken by Paul Biedermann yesterday at the World Swimming Championships. Biedermann lowered the 2002 record by .01 seconds after a blistering final 50 meters.

One year ago, the German swimmer failed to qualify for the Olympic finals in the event. Now, with a new suit that has helped him go 7-1/2 seconds faster than he did 11 months ago, Biedermann dropped the record that many thought would never be broken. 

How did he do it? By being a great swimmer and by having a revolutionary swimsuit, the Arena Powerskin R-Evolution. Before, Biedermann was an excellent swimmer. Now, he's the guy who stole has helped him turn from a great swimmer into one who has just bested the Thorpedo's unassailable mark.

Don't believe me? Just ask Biedermann himself. When asked about whether he'd have broken the world record without the polyurethane-based suit, he said:

"On the one hand, I want to say, yes it was only me. But on the other hand, I have to say, yes, it was also the suit. It was not only the suit, but it is a really big help. I feel no shame to swim (wearing) it, I feel proud to swim in it, but on the one hand, what (time) would you swim without the suit?

I think the suit is problematic. I think the suits make us swim really fast. I honestly think it was worth about two seconds in this race. I really, really hope next year we can go back to the normal one, because it's important for the sport. I think the suits destroy a little bit of the real sport. It's not any more about technique; it's not any more about good starts or turns; it is just, put this thing on and feel really, really fast in the water.

I really believe all the new suits should be banned."

Aaron Peirsol hadn't lost the 100-meter backstroke at a major competition in eight years. This time around, he didn't even qualify for the finals.

In the most stunning result so far at the World Swimming Championships, the man who some call the greatest backstroker in history failed to qualify for the 100 back final after finishing with the 9th best time among two semifinal heats. Peirsol finished in a 53.22, one-tenth out of the final and 1.28 seconds slower than the world record time he set earlier this month.

Peirsol said he "completely misjudged" where he was in the race, suggesting that his 9th place finish was more the result of strategy rather than ability. And, indeed, he did seem to lay back a little too much in the final 25 meters (where he usually thrives).

But Peirsol is good enough to compensate for a poorly-executed swim. Even a poor race should get him into the finals. So what happened? As has been the case for the last 12 months, it all comes back to the swimsuit.

It's not so much that Peirsol's swimsuit caused him to go slower (although he was only one of the three semifinalists to not wear an over-the-shoulder suit), but that other competitors have improved so much because of their polyurethane-based suit that they've been able to play catch-up, despite not having as much speed.

FINA thankfully banned those suits starting in 2010, but they're having a last hurrah at worlds and, in turn, making a mockery of swimming. (Check back to Fourth-Place Medal later today for more about the impact of the suits at the world championships.)

Before her post-race interview with Peirsol, NBC's Andrea Kramer could be overhear asking the five-time gold medalist whether he wanted to talk about his suit. Ever cool, even in defeat, Peirsol declined.

It's déjà vu all over again. Nearly a year after stunning the heavily-favored French in the 4x100-meter freestyle relay at the Beijing Olympics, Michael Phelps and his American teammates earned the top spot on the podium in that relay on the opening night of the swimming world championships in Rome.

Phelps, Ryan Lochte, Matt Grevers and Nathan Adrian won gold for the U.S., as Adrian's blistering anchor leg helped topple the French and Russian teams. Remarkably, the  French squad (that included Beijing goat Alain Bernard) finished in third behind Russia, a monumental collapse for the premiere sprinters in the world.

Coming into the race, France boasted four of the top six sprint freestylers in the world, all of whom had broken 48 seconds in the event this year. Conversely, the Americans didn't have a single sprinter who had gone under that time. And, to make the situation even more daunting, the hero from Beijing, Jason Lezak, isn't competing in Rome. (He opted to represent the United States at the Maccabai Games in Israel.)

But that didn't stop the Americans from defending their Olympic crown. After Phelps touched in third to open the race, Lochte and Grevers made up ground on the Russians before Adrian swam a scorching 46.61 to touch the wall in first. 

It was last July that Bernard made headlines for saying that his French relay would "smash" the Americans in Beijing, only to eventually lose in one of the most thrilling races in Olympic history when Lezak made his stunning comeback in the final 25 meters. This time around, Bernad wasn't so talkative. He and his French teammates were so disappointed with their bronze medal finish that they blew off the post-race press conference.

Surprisingly, FINA also voted to restrict the length of suits for men (to immediately above the knee) and women (shoulder to knee).

It's a thrilling resolution to swimming traditionalists who have lamented the suits' role in rewriting the record books. The sport had become overshadowed by the advances in suits, with each major competition providing a new platform for manufacturers to debut their space-age designs. The arms race threatened to take over the sport, making a mockery of world records and causing races to be less about the swimmer and more about the swimsuit.

It was especially crucial to ban the suits now, when they were still in their relative infancy. With every month that passed, FINA would have had a tougher time banning a suit that would have, over time, become as normal as a cap and goggles. The momentum behind sticking with the suits was building and it would have been tough to stop had it progressed much further. Now, FINA is able to re-take control of its sport. It's like if baseball had starting testing for steroids in 1998.

Next week's world championships will be the final major competition in which the suits will be worn. Some of the world records that will be set could stand for years, but that's a necessary evil. (FINA chose to keep all world records set with the suits.) At some point, those records will fall. Remember, Ben Johnson's steroid-aided 9.79 in the 1988 Olympics seemed like it'd never be beat, but Usain Bolt went a full tenth-of-a-second faster in 2008.

This decision trickles down to junior swimmers and it is, arguably, bigger news on that level. Too often in the past two years races on a local level were decided by whose parents could afford to buy a LZR. Those suits didn't make bad swimmers good, but they did make good swimmers great.

The governing bodies of lower-profile sports like swimming, golf and tennis feel beholden to the companies that make apparel and supplies because, most often, those are the companies that are sponsoring events and paying for advertisements. It's an inherent conflict of interest for the USGA to make decisions on whether a golf ball is fit for play, when the golf ball makers are the ones pumping money into the sport. Tennis and golf, in particular, have been transformed by advances in racquet and club technology, respectively. There are some rules in place to restrict technology, but nothing that has approached the scale of FINA's ban.

For FINA to stand up to suit-makers, after many poured millions into development of the high-tech garments, is a bold, decisive move that saves the sport and brings attention back to where it should be: in the pool.

To do nothing that can either annoy or offend the sensibilities of others, sums up the principal rules for conduct under all circumstances-whether staying at home or traveling. -- Emily Post, 'Etiquette', 1922

Asafa Powell needs to brush up on his travel manners. While in England for this weekend's London Grand Prix, the Jamaican sprinter and former world record holder, espoused his theory about the lack of 100-meter success by British sprinters:

"I've said over the years that British sprinters are very lazy and don't really want to practise. Maybe it's comfort. In Jamaica, you have to work harder for what you want."

Linford Christie -- you know, the guy who has actually won an Olympic gold in the 100m -- might beg to differ.

Powell was asked by a BBC reporter about the state of British sprinting and, in particular, 23-year old Simeon Williamson, who has trained in Jamaica over the past few months. He said that Williamson could achieve much more if he had a better work ethic, before speaking generally about the entire population of British sprinters.

The first statement was fair, if a little harsh. The follow-up is irresponsible of a number of levels, none of which are worth addressing here because if you don't know why, me writing about it isn't going to convince you.

In a slightly less controversial statement, Powell said that because Usain Bolt isn't Superman, he's beatable. No word on whether Powell thinks Batman is a slacker.

Phelps smashed Crocker's world record at the U.S. Swimming Nationals in Indianapolis, lowering the mark by .18 seconds. After relatively disappointing swims in two earlier wins, Phelps swam perhaps the best sprint of his career on Thursday:

(My Spanish has always been dicey -- just ask my freshman year GPA -- but even with my limited understanding I can tell that that's one of the worst calls I've ever heard to any sporting event. They're talking about reaction times off the block when the field is turning at the 50-meter mark. That guy must be like the Tony Siragusa of the Spanish-speaking world.)

It'd be foolish to read too much into one meet but, judging by Phelps' results in Indy, could it be that his new concentration towards sprinting has come at the expense of his dominance in the longer events? Phelps owned the 200-meter butterfly and 400-meter individual medley for most of his career, but he has dropped the latter from program and looked beatable in the former. It's something to look out for at the World Championships later this month in Rome.