Yes, at my local high school, for soccer, my night time exposure is ISO 6400, 1/500 sec, f/4 on an APS-C dSLR. I shoot with the Nikon D7200 and Nikon 70-200/4. The faster 70-200/2.8 was 2x heavier than the f/4 lens. Carrying the extra weight for 5 hours, was the reason I did not get the f/2.8 lens.There are some sports like gymnastics where action happens in one place and MFT body with said Sigma 56mm f/1.4 is really all you need for great shots assuming that competition is not held in a dimly lit boiler room at midnight.
But at the opposite end of the scale is something like soccer (at least 95m*65m) which is played also indoors here in the north. Situation outdoors might be even worse during winter months because only major stadiums have really good lights. The only practical way to shoot anything with primes is to select one end, position yourself so that you can take good action shots from that goal and ignore 80% of the events in the game because players are just too far away (or they are directly in front of you). Even in this case the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 is the only affordable option for low light sports shooting.
In the linked youth sports thread someone had taken good shots with Olympus 75mm f/1.8 which might be even better focal length for most but it's more than twice as expensive as Sigma and Sigma is as sharp wide open as they get. F/2.8 just isn't fast enough for MFT indoor sports shooting which is a huge problem because there are no zoom lenses faster than that. If I'm ever going to invest more for sports shooting, I just have to cough up the money for FF body and 24-200 f/2.8 zoom which will set me back by 3500€
I will sometimes use the EM1 and 40-150/2.8, but I prefer using the Nikon 70-200/4.
We don't have snow here, but we do have RAIN. Once I was so soaked before the game even started, that I quit and went home.
The major reason that I use the EM1-mk2 for sports is the 19fps frame rate, which is 3x faster than the 6fps on my dSLR.