Jump to content

And Shortlisted Are...


Recommended Posts

BTW, doesn't the half-mil application fee go back to the applicant -- except for the eventual host city? Or is it non-refiundable once you've made the Final list?

There are two fees: a first one that covers the application phase and a second one that covers the candidature phase.

There are non-refundable as they cover the cost for attending the various seminars and observer programs, give access to the Olympic Knowledge Database, cover the cost of the IOC Evaluation Commission visit and so on...

There was at one point a deposit paid by the candidate cities that was refunded to the non-successful candidates. I am not sure whether it still exists or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Now that I am looking back on history...

There has not been less than five candidate cities since the 1981 selection of Seoul. To me that cements a selection of at least four cities, with a good possibility of five. I can't see Doha making the cut without Rio making it also. It would just be a slap in the face. However, I can see Rio making it over Doha.

So I say at least four candidates, maybe even five. Prague and Baku have no chance whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is usually a lot more bids than this though, 9, 10 or 11.

My guess is 4 (including Rio), so that that covers 4 continents.

For 2020, as I outlined in another thread (now gone), this is the winnowed down, more realistic list:

- Baku

- Busan (if 2018 doesn't go to PC)

- Capetown

- Delhi

- Doha

- Dubai (according to Zenica)

- Istanbul

- Rio

- Roma

compared to Wikepedia's all-inclusive 2020 list: :rolleyes:

Cape Town, South Africa

Busan, Republic of Korea

Delhi, India

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Copenhagen, Denmark

Hamburg, Germany

Istanbul, Turkey

Lisbon, Portugal

Prague, Czech Republic

Rome, Italy

St. Petersburg, Russia

Boston, United States

Monterrey, Mexico

Philadelphia, United States

Toronto, Canada

New Orleans, United States

Brisbane, Australia

Melbourne, Australia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I have mentioned in the past, the short-list procedure is a relatively "new" process that the IOC introduced in 1995 for the 2002 Games, because there were far too many cities starting to vie for the same respective Games. So going back to 1981 or whatever is irrelavent since the IOC didn't have a short-list process back then.

There are usually many more cities applying for a certain *Summer* Games than what we have at the moment (as Faster pointed out). So since we only have 7, I can't see more than 4 going through, considering 2 bids have no chance & the other 2 are hit or miss, at best. I wouldn't be surprised at all if only the top 3 technical bids make it through.

And like jeremie & I were discussing earlier, how far is the IOC Executive Board going to take the "sympathy" applicants this time around. Cause, as has been mentioned, they can have the potential to cause an upset & the IOC could wind up with what the majority of the members don't want.

If it's 4 though, it would be seem appropiate that a candidate from each continent be represented for the effect of the "universality of the Games". The IOC kinda did this for the 2004 Games, back in '97, when they included bids from Europe, South America & Africa. And for 2010, we also had 3 bids from 3 different continents. Maybe some sort of trend there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The top three bids represent the 3 continents in the race

Baku - Eurasia (I am not getting into if its European or Asian)

Chicago - Americas

Doha - Asia

Madrid - Europe

Prague - Europe

Rio de Janeiro - Americas

Tokyo - Asia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will be surprised if there are only three candidates, as I can potentially see five candidates, but I think it will only be four at the end of the day - Chicago, Madrid, Rio and Tokyo (one from each "real" continent, except Africa and Oceania).

It would be great if there was only a three city race - Chicago, Madrid and Tokyo, but I just don't see it happening for a SOG - even if there are only seven cities bidding...

We'll just have to see in June I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but we all know that the lumping of North & South America as one, is a complete farce.

And that's OK if indeed it were still ONE connected land mass and the same homogenous culture. But after 1905 (or whenever the Panama Canal was cut), they are 2 distinct continents; and it's only an accident of Olympic -- note, Olympic - NOT world history -- that the 2 separate American continents are lumped together as one. It's really time for that new Olympic logo. Maybe the 6-pointed star of a certain **cough-cough** city might 'light the way' for the IOC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can definitely see 4, but I wouldn't be surprised in the least if it were just 3 either.

Again, how far is the IOC Executive Board gonna go with Rio & Doha. I just can't see them throwing 2 upset spoilers just for the sake of "encouragement & inclusion". I could see 1, but not 2, if it's not what the majority members really want (i.e. Almaty 2014).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can definitely see 4, but I wouldn't be surprised in the least if it were just 3 either.

Again, how far is the IOC Executive Board gonna go with Rio & Doha. I just can't see them throwing 2 upset spoilers just for the sake of "encouragement & inclusion". I could see 1, but not 2, if it's not what the majority members really want (i.e. Almaty 2014).

Agreed. Doha is the furthest stretch of the two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but we all know that the lumping of North & South America as one, is a complete farce.

Depends on who you talk to, the actual board is subjective, what is considered North and South as well. Its geographic ambiguity at its finest. If there is two continents where do they start? Where does the Caribbean fit in? It can just be more convenient to say that it is the Americas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no subjectiveness & no ambiguity. What's ambiguous, are the people who can't distinguish between the two. Look at any atlas or do a google & it's very explicit as to what North & South America really is. The Caribbean lies in North America, anything south of Panama is South America. Europe & Asia are considered 2 differents continents, when there's clearly no seperation of land mass between those continents & where to determine where they start or end (i.e. people on here debating where Sochi, Baku lie in).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sympathy votes in the early rounds could kick out one of the safe solutions (unless the Executive Board take the unprecedented move of further shortening the list after the Evaluation Commission report is published).

Wouldn't that be like a rotten thing to do? The E.C. report is released like a month before the final vote. Why drag the 'sympathy' candidates through the mud & inflate their hopes, when it could all be swept right under the rug from them so close to the end of the campaign. I don't think such a move would go over to well. They should nix any candidates that don't necessarily meet the criteria right from the get go then & to avoid any rough predicaments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no subjectiveness & no ambiguity. What's ambiguous, are the people who can't distinguish between the two. Look at any atlas or do a google & it's very explicit as to what North & South America really is. The Caribbean lies in North America, anything south of Panama is South America. Europe & Asia are considered 2 differents continents, when there's clearly no seperation of land mass between those continents & where to determine where they start or end (i.e. people on here debating where Sochi, Baku lie in).

There is a debate as to where the divide is, some argue the Panama Canal, others the Panama-Colombia boarder. If you go to Panama, they will say west of the canal is North America, east is South America. Most people up here will say the Panama-Colombia board.

But the fact remains the IOC recognizes only 5 continents, the Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia and Oceania.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a debate as to where the divide is, some argue the Panama Canal, others the Panama-Colombia boarder. If you go to Panama, they will say west of the canal is North America, east is South America. Most people up here will say the Panama-Colombia board.

But the fact remains the IOC recognizes only 5 continents, the Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia and Oceania.

Who cares what the IOC recognizes (although, they do recognize that they would like to bring the Games to South America for the very 'first' time someday). That doesn't make them the embodiment of world geography.

Besides, (& as you pointed out as well) the clarification is still clear that the divide lies somewhere in Panama. General distinction enough. Plus, not to mention the argument with some on these boards that South America (as a continent) has never hosted. That throws away the whole "Americas'" concept out the window.

And again, the same could be said for Europe/Asia. Some say the dividing line is the Ural mountains, others say the Russian border &/or somewhere in the Caucasus, it's not very clear either, but yet Eurasia is recognized in world geography as 2 seperate continents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who cares what the IOC recognizes (although, they do recognize that they would like to bring the Games to South America for the very 'first' time someday). That doesn't make them the embodiment of world geography.

Besides, (& as you pointed out as well) the clarification is still clear that the divide lies somewhere in Panama. General distinction enough. Plus, not to mention the argument with some on these boards that South America (as a continent) has never hosted. That throws away the whole "Americas'" concept out the window.

And again, the same could be said for Europe/Asia. Some say the dividing line is the Ural mountains, others say the Russian border &/or somewhere in the Caucasus, it's not very clear either, but yet Eurasia is recognized in world geography as 2 seperate continents.

Classification does matter because its what the IOC uses and what they use is what matters. The IOC has five rings, not six.

In most academic geography circles the Americas is treated as one entity because of the distinctive characteristics that define the landmass. There is a lot of ambiguity because of a couple reasons, Mexico, Central or North?, Greenland? A lot of political maps don't include Greenland as part of the Americas landmass, but it is physically apart of the same archipelago as the Canadian Arctic Islands. There is some Caribbean islands that can be defined as different depending on which map and who you talk to. Than there is Latin vs Anglo America. Things are not always cut and dry especially when boarders are so artificial. There is a lot more to definition than physical location or some arbitrary boarder. A combination of physical, political, cultural and historical aspects go into defining what is what and these definitions change over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it isn't. Academically speaking, North & South America are easily defined. Again, look at any atlas, almanac or google it. Again, it's only ambiguous when many people themselves don't know the distinctions to begin with.

"Latin" & "Anglo" America are a totally different issue all together. Because now you're just entering the relm of geo-politics, (like Western & Eastern Europe) which has nothing to do with the geography of the land mass. Again, Eurasia is a perfect example of this. But we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this, cause it's just becoming a circle now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Classification does matter because its what the IOC uses and what they use is what matters. The IOC has five rings, not six.

As I have said, faster, that 5-ring classification of the Idiots Olympic Committee, is OUTDATED. I believe it was adopted before the Americas were cut into 2 by the Panama Canal or the Panama-Colombia border. So, in fact, Europe really belongs to the Asian land mass because there is NO discernible demarcation line like the Panama Canal. (If Turkey is considered a Eurasian country, so should Russia be.)

It's funny that you would argue this. This is an argument I would expect james to make. Not you. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't that be like a rotten thing to do? The E.C. report is released like a month before the final vote. Why drag the 'sympathy' candidates through the mud & inflate their hopes, when it could all be swept right under the rug from them so close to the end of the campaign. I don't think such a move would go over to well. They should nix any candidates that don't necessarily meet the criteria right from the get go then & to avoid any rough predicaments.

I agree it's very, very unlikely for the reasons you mentioned.

Back in 2001, a vote was organised among the EB after the Evaluation Report was published on whether Osaka and Istanbul should be able to present their bids to the session. I think it was a close call.

But yeah, since the report is published a month before the Session, it's almost pointless to make a further cut: won't save much money for the unlucky cities and would only humiliate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in 2001, a vote was organised among the EB after the Evaluation Report was published on whether Osaka and Istanbul should be able to present their bids to the session. I think it was a close call.

Don't mean to sound cynical, but why does this sound like if it was a further move to just hand these Games over to Beijing. Not like they needed it anyway, they won by a landslide, but it just has the sounds of some sort of conspiracy. Considering how the E.C.R. had Beijing (in rhetoric) up there with Toronto & Paris, & not to mention that Osaka was ranked #2 in the preliminary report & the inclusion of Istanbul after just barely making the benchmark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't mean to sound cynical, but why does this sound like if it was a further move to just hand these Games over to Beijing. Not like they needed it anyway, they won by a landslide, but it just has the sounds of some sort of conspiracy. Considering how the E.C.R. had Beijing (in rhetoric) up there with Toronto & Paris, & not to mention that Osaka was ranked #2 in the preliminary report & the inclusion of Istanbul after just barely making the benchmark.

Actually I don't think so. Without Istanbul and Osaka in the run, Beijing would most likely have won in the first round.

I think it's simply a matter of not further humiliating Osaka and Istanbul.

(but yeah, it was obvious from day 1 that the Games were headed to Beijing unless a disaster happened).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The division of the contintents is so ambiguos that not even the geologists agree... the definition of America as a continent is more about history than science. So arguing if America is one single continent or both is plain stupid. For most Anglo countries, there are two continents; for Hispanics, is just one and we'll never agree in this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The division of the contintents is so ambiguos that not even the geologists agree... the definition of America as a continent is more about history than science. So arguing if America is one single continent or both is plain stupid. For most Anglo countries, there are two continents; for Hispanics, is just one and we'll never agree in this matter.

Well the Americas is made up of 7 plates (N. America, Caribbean, S. America, Juan de Fuca, Nazca, Cocos and Scotia) Its these plates acting in a similar manner towards each other that have created a similar basic geography of both continents. When it comes to political or sport in most circles its one unified entity. And since we are talking about sport and almost all federations treat the Americas as one entity that is what is important.

South America can be a new frontier because the middle-east is a new frontier being part of Asia. As North Africa would still be if Cape Town hosts in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to political or sport in most circles its one unified entity.

Well in at least 2 major global sports, Faster, they are classified separately. As you well know, FIFA recognizes a CONCACAF for North America, and another one for the South. FIVB (volleyball) similarly has a NORCECA and a CSV for the South. The other sports that don't are operating in the past century and better get with it fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...