China under Mao was abysmal in regard to human rights, but then things weren't all that great in any previous historical era. It has always been a very authoritarian and paternalistic society.

Chinese treatment of Tibet is absolutley horrendous. The central government may well have improved their treatment of Han Chinese and other ethnic groups residing within their territory without budging an inch in their clampdown on Tibet.

Would people be treated any better in China if the Olympics were not about to begin in Beijing? I doubt it. Athletes will complete, a lucky few (in a very few dispiclines) will parlay their performances into future riches, big corporations will will make most of the real money, and a whole lot of shiny new infrastructure will remain in place for the foreseeable future. Pretty much the same as if the event were being held anywhere.

The sad lot of the Tibetans probably won't be improved, but it's even less likely to worsen. The greatly increased attention and news coverage, etc., is much more likely to help than to harm the Dalai Lama and his followers.

PS: I've always had the impression that Jesse Owens' victory in the 100-meter dash at Berlin, rather than the long jump, was the defining moment of those Games. (The 100 traditionally determines "the world's fastest human.") Owens did win multiple gold medals that year, definitely including the 100, long jump, and at least one relay. He may have taken the 200 as well.