Now for the winner. It's very interesting.
B&A's John McWade cautions his readers to think for a few moments before commenting or deciding which is the better choice.

I found myself immediately drawn to the first design. It's fresh looking, colorful and has a free and easy swing to it.
But the more I looked at the two logos (and the article has images of the logos in use), the more I began to feel that the IOC made the right choice with the second image. And I realized I was doing something I often caution clients about: getting stuck on the pretty choice.
The prettiest picture isn't always the best logo/brand. And for many reasons.
In this case, the second brand is very modern and may appeal more to the target audience. It works great small, large and in multiple media, including mobile (this ties in with the target market also). It has a global appeal and communicates in any language. It's also very strong and presents a great modern image for Russia.
The second logo also incorporated some other visual elements in the brand (see the
article for more) and may be more appealing to youth -- “a 21st-century brand for a digital generation,” designed to “actively encourage dialog between Russians, nations and winter sports fans, particularly youth.” (
Sochi2014.ru)
After a while, when I looked back at the first image, it started to seem dated and one dimensional. Very pretty, yes. And I still really like it as an image. But modern, no. So this time at least, I think the Olympic Committee made the right choice.
Of course, I could be completely wrong. What do you think?