FIS vs TTR

So the discussion as to whether FIS' takeover from TTR for the snowboarding qualification for the Sochi Olympics this year would totally ruin it didn't seem to come to much. The TTR (Ticket To Ride) have always run all snowboarding events and are the go-to guys for events, but for some reason, FIS (International Ski Federation) thought they could do it better, therefore fueling uproar in the snowboarding world.

I read that some snowboarders were thinking about pulling out of the Olympics because they didn't agree with the FIS takeover and couldn't see how this was going to be beneficial for the representation of snowboarding (particularly with the introduction of slopestyle), so there was a lot of pressure heading into the games. Snowboarders think that the FIS don't understand snowboarders (but let's face it, we're a strange bunch anyway) and because they judge differently to TTR, they don't listen to how the snowboarders want their events organised and judged.

Also, because the FIS were put in charge of the Olympics, they employed a different company that build the FIS ski courses to build all of the half pipe and slopestyle courses, but of course these were not the same people that usually build the snowboarding courses at events. The snowboarders go-to company are called Snow Park Technologies and they couldn't be popular, so naturally FIS were risking a lot by not using them.
It was said by a few of the pros that the Olympic slopestyle course was not as good as it could be and some jumps were slightly off because the members of the FIS' building company are not snowboarders and therefore couldn't test it properly.

But, the one thing that can be said about this situation is that it didn't reach the major media coverage which can only be taken as a good thing, because it obviously didn't cause as much trouble as initially thought.

Soul Mate or Soul Fake?

My sister and mum have recently been having an elongated, stretched out conversation about soul mates over the last few days and their thoughts about them couldn't be more different to mine. You know the idea that there is one soul mate for everybody and that you meet your soul mate, well that's what I believe but they don't. They think that somebody has to earn the role of a soul mate which I can see the theory in but I don't think that; I believe in fate and I believe that meeting your soul mate is fate and not earnt.

My sister also went into that whole 'IF THERE'S ONLY ONE PERSON FOR EVERYBODY, WHAT IF I MISS THEM AND DON'T END UP WITH THEM?' (she is Charlotte from Sex and the City I'm completely sure).
Which got me thinking, surely you could love somebody but without them being your soul mate and if you were unfortunate enough to break up, then you're moving on to find your soul mate, because if you broke up with somebody then maybe they're not your soul mate because you would do anything to keep your soul mate if you knew that you had them.

I'm one of those people that think that love should be an extraordinary thing and that there should be nothing mediocre about it and to be spent with your soul mate - the person that understands you best and is like or is your best friend. But on the other side of the coin, are soul mates just made up to trick people into thinking that they've found their person when maybe they haven't? Are they a way of making people think that all is fair in love and war?