Jump to content

The 2016 Shortlist Are...


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 313
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Definitely shorts listed: Chicago, Madrid and Tokyo (can't decide the order though... I think they will be very very close).

Straddling the benchmark: Doha and Rio (cant' decide either whether they will be shortlisted or no but my gutts tell me that they will be either both shortlisted or neither will be - based on ATR recent PowerBid ranking, I would say both will be shortlisted).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to have my fingers crossed. For Rio not to be shortlisted means politic and nothing more than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to have my fingers crossed. For Rio not to be shortlisted means politic and nothing more than that.

Wasn't that the case in the 2012 shortlist? If you didn't know about it, that shortlist went like this: New York, London, Paris, Moscow and Madrid. Do you see the significance of these cities? Rio got shoved, even though GB predicted "it was going to be in that shortlist for sure."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to have my fingers crossed. For Rio not to be shortlisted means politic and nothing more than that.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION! TECHNICAL EVALUATION! TECHNICAL EVALUATION! James.

The report will provide marks based on a TECHNICAL evaluation for various criteria with detailed explanations.

If Rio is above the technical threshold, it will be shortlisted.

If it straddling the threshold (which would be an improvement over the 2012 bid), only politics can help Rio making the shortlist.

Again, strongly suggest you read the 2012 Applicant Cities Report in order to get a slight idea of what you are talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, it will definitely be Tokyo, Rio and Madrid in that order.

I just pray Chicago makes it. It will be a miracle if they do!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TECHNICAL EVALUATION! TECHNICAL EVALUATION! TECHNICAL EVALUATION! James.

The report will provide marks based on a TECHNICAL evaluation for various criteria with detailed explanations.

If Rio is above the technical threshold, it will be shortlisted.

If it straddling the threshold (which would be an improvement over the 2012 bid), only politics can help Rio making the shortlist.

Again, strongly suggest you read the 2012 Applicant Cities Report in order to get a slight idea of what you are talking about.

He doesn't understand that, jeremie. james still thinks with his heart, most of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, it will definitely be Tokyo, Rio and Madrid in that order.

I just pray Chicago makes it. It will be a miracle if they do!

Rio will surpass Madrid in a technical evaluation when hell freezes over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seriously doubt that both Rio & Doha are going to make it. It's either going to be one or the other, or neither. The IOC isn't going to have 2 "sentimental" bids on the ballot with the opportunity of winning just based on that. And again, Rio's best chances RELY on "politics". Anyone thinking otherwise (*cough*, james), would be utterly & completely foolish & doesn't understand in the least how the Olympic Movement works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't that the case in the 2012 shortlist? If you didn't know about it, that shortlist went like this: New York, London, Paris, Moscow and Madrid. Do you see the significance of these cities? Rio got shoved, even though GB predicted "it was going to be in that shortlist for sure."

Well, looking back at that race, there was already 5 glamour world capitals to make the IOC drool. So Rio (along with Istanbul, a 2008 finalist) got 'shoved' for 2012 simply because there was no more room, when the IOC's plate was already full with filet mignon. This time around, there's room for Ribeye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't that the case in the 2012 shortlist? If you didn't know about it, that shortlist went like this: New York, London, Paris, Moscow and Madrid. Do you see the significance of these cities? Rio got shoved, even though GB predicted "it was going to be in that shortlist for sure."

Well, looking back at that race, there was already 5 glamour world capitals to make the IOC drool. So Rio (along with Istanbul, a 2008 finalist) got 'shoved' for 2012 simply because there was no more room, when the IOC's plate was already full with filet mignon. This time around, there's room for Ribeye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seriously doubt that both Rio & Doha are going to make it. It's either going to be one or the other, or neither. The IOC isn't going to have 2 "sentimental" bids on the ballot with the opportunity of winning just based on that. And again, Rio's best chances RELY on "politics". Anyone thinking otherwise (*cough*, james), would be utterly & completely foolish & doesn't understand in the least how the Olympic Movement works.

How does the Olympic movement works? Let`s know so that we can understand why Rio is not going to be shortlisted according to you.

There are evidences to what Rio`s plans are like. With the economy on the boyant side , tourism gaining much attention than ever before, sporting facilities receiving funds and use for competitions, developing of new roads, fund earmarked for railway appropriated,etc are among these evidences. Security being the major less likely transportation issue has been brought to the round table. I even watched a video on a special squad to combact crime in Sao Palo(if Sao Palo that is not hosting games is receiving such attention why won`t Rio receive much more?), military are be ajoined to police where needed and trouble are much critical.That exist in every country, even in the US(Should be the world most secured country).

Briny over Rio shortlisting by using the past as a yard stick to here is totally absurd and should be refrained from cos it not the right way. Changes matter and that`s what Rio is doing.To fix up necessary things.

I admire Rio`s bid for the basic fact that it has been able to accede over the previous bid by taking a careful look at the things which were the causes of the lost. The infrastrutural development- new Maracaba stadium rated as second best after Chicago`s, Hotels of high quality are being developed, new metro will soon be underway in area closest to venues, just to mention a few. Pan Am and FIFA WC facilities can`t just be discarded, are still going to be there as a test of proof to how Rio can handle big games credibly.

This shortlist can not miss Rio. Look very closly brothers, and I beleive you will see that there`s more reasons for Rio to be shortlisted that not to be shortlisted.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

james,

They've just banished (my) the Ipanema Girl from my signature. I think that's a signal LOUD AND CLEAR. Looks like tHe IOC might not be in the mood to samba for 2016!!

2020 will be a much better fight for Rio between Baku, Capetown, Delhi, Lima and Rio! -- 3 of those south of the equator. Those numbers will be in the southern cities' favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, not denying that Rio has made progress. I am convinced that its mark will straddle the threshold but won't be above it like Madrid, Chicago and Tokyo will.

Then, it's all politics: for 2012 Moscow was straddling the threshold and was shortlisted; for 2014, Almaty was also straddling the threshold but was not shortlisted. Hence, politics is Rio only chance to be shortlisted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

james, you just don't get it. You're almost pig-headed.

NOBODY here (including myself) is NOT saying that Rio absolutely "won't" make the short-list. The thing is, that YOU keep saying that politics is what would keep Rio out of the short-list, while EVERYONE ELSE is saying that politics is what would HELP Rio get on the short-list. So in hindsight, politics is the only thing that would work in Rio's FAVOR. NOT the other way around, like you're absurdly suggesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, not denying that Rio has made progress. I am convinced that its mark will straddle the threshold but won't be above it like Madrid, Chicago and Tokyo will.

Then, it's all politics: for 2012 Moscow was straddling the threshold and was shortlisted; for 2014, Almaty was also straddling the threshold but was not shortlisted. Hence, politics is Rio only chance to be shortlisted.

I don`t know why you can`t see Rio`s progress as a mean to be shorlisted. If Rio is not shortlisted, beleive me, it`s due to politic.PERIOD!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a naive individual you are, to say the least. :rolleyes:

If you think so.There`s not wrong to be naived when things aren`t going the proper way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James,

Nothing would make me happier than to see Rio make the short list _ it would make for a very interesting final race. I'd be overjoyed if Rio went on to win _ I think most of us on this board would simply love the idea of a hosting in such an exotic, picturesque, iconic city.

But the thing is james, the short list is compiled by technical considerations. I've no doubt, Rio has improved its bid over its 2012 one, but it also faces competition from bids from the US, Japan and Spain which, like it or not, have more advanced existing infrastructure and robust economies than Brazil, for all its progress lately. For some reason, you seem to consider technical evaluation as a huge conspiracy by developed countries to make sure no-one else gets the games but them. Why can't you understand that it is rather just the IOC trying to guarantee that whoever it chooses, it will be a city that can stage the games most easily and responsibly and not put the future of the games at risk by handing them over for reasons that have more to do with sentiment than resonsibility and realism. If Rio makes the list next week, it will be because the IOC technical evaulators are confident that if it is chosen in 2009 to host for 2016, they will be able to achieve that with minimal fuss or problems. If they are not named in the list, it will be because they are not convinced of that, and think it would be too risky. Pure and simple. Ensuring a prospective hosts meets the technical requirements is NOT a political conspiracy, it is just plain and pure fiscal and social responsibility. Putting them ON the list, if their case is only borderline WOULD be a political move, to their favour.

Sigh, I'm sure you still won't get it, though. All you want to see is western conspiracies _ you never have liked the fact that staging a games of any kind is simply a big, expensive task, a luxury NOT a necessity, that not every nation is equipped to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...