Predicting the future can be a dangerous game, especially when it involves an international event of such magnitude as the Olympics.

However, two prestigious magazines, the Economist and its closest Chinese counterpart, Caijing, have done just that, and as such have staked their reputations on forecasting events at next summer's Beijing Games.

The predictions of the Economist in its special issue entitled "The World in 2008" can be summarized as follows:

The Beijing Games will prove a magnet for China critics and will focus global attention on environmental issues in the country, despite a "patriotic fervor and a surging economy" that will help keep domestic discontent under wraps.

Politics aside, the Economist paints a positive picture for China's Olympic-related business and sports next year.

It says the world will become more familiar with Chinese corporate names, as several domestic companies stand to benefit from the Olympics including national carrier Air China and sports apparel maker Li-Ning. China will top the gold-medal table with 45 golds, it predicts, followed by the United States with 41, and Russia with 32.

For the record, the Economist claims to be "renowned for its breadth of coverage and sharp, entertaining analysis," and it helps readers "get an international perspective and an independent view on the events shaping our world."

Some Chinese may argue that its political prophesying regarding the Beijing Games smacks of negative reporting, as is so often the case with Western media when they cover different social systems. Nonetheless, the magazine remains a force to be reckoned with.

In comparison, Caijing's analysts have taken a more subtle approach for its year-end "2008: Forecasts and Strategies" special. They seem to have intended to lay out a complex understanding of the sporting event for readers, rather than telling them what is likely to happen based on the information that is currently at their disposal.

On Beijing's pledge to host a Green Olympics, Caijing lists a number of environmental variables but falls short of making any concrete predictions. It also explores whether the controversial State-sponsored sports system should come to an end after China reaps a bumper harvest of gold medals at the Beijing Games, but decides against presenting any clear-cut alternatives.

Will China's Olympic economy slump after the Games, like neighboring countries in the past? Caijing says in its editor's note: "Our view is: maybe not."

Caijing also predicts that a dozen new Chinese medal hopefuls will make names for themselves at the Games, but errs on the side of caution by opting not to bet on the number of gold medals the country will accumulate.

This does not mean that Caijing's opinions are to be taken any less seriously. It says on its website that it has "built an impressive reputation as the leading voice in Chinese business and financial circles," and its reporting has "gained international recognition for its independence and exclusive scoops."

For the special issue, Caijing says it has fielded an all-star team of writers. Indeed, one may find Caijing's discussions on the Olympics helpful for understanding more about the complexities of the phenomenon. However, making forecasts or teasing out answers to questions of this nature has proved a challenging task for Caijing, with most of its arguments ending on a hesitant or vague note.

The accuracy of the two magazines' forecasts or views remains anyone's guess -- at least for the next seven months or so.