Jump to content

2016 Candidate Cities Analysis


Recommended Posts

Well, after quickly reading through the applicant cities report here are a few thoughts:

  • first of all, I have to admit that although I knew Rio would progress, I was skeptical about them being above the threshold; I was proved wrong, Rio (barely) made it, mostly I think because of a much more credible transportation plan than the one for 2012 (and of course the experience and venues gained from Rio 2007)
  • Doha had a technically very strong bid (heck, they were almost tied with Chicago) and the only possible explanation I can imagine for them missing the short list is that the IOC vetoed a Games in October. Interesting for the future (Rogge will have to explain how on earth he expects a bid from Dubai, potential bid he was recently praising)...
  • Tokyo and Madrid are in a league of their own with virtually technically flawless bids
  • I am somehow surprised at Chicago (relatively) low score but, hey there is room for improvement and clarification (obviously the expert group found Chicago application lacking details in transportation in particular)
  • Even the two weakest bids get some decent marks and are far from ridiculous; we'll have to keep an eye on those two in the future.

The remaining months will be interesting as:

  • the two technically stronger bid both have major difficulties to overcome (Madrid will have to convince that the Games can stay in Europe for 2016 while Tokyo will have to have a powerful story to tell since we all know being the strongest technical bid doesn't bring you the Games)
  • Chicago, as a distant 3rd, will have to lead a campaign a la London and to gain momentum throughout the bid process if it is to win the crown
  • Rio, although clearly the weakest bid of all the candidate cities, has a rather strong position: there will be a very very strong sentimental push toward Rio.

At this very early stage, I think it will probably be between Rio and Chicago (but Madrid has a card to play...). Unless Tokyo comes up with something really exciting, they are facing an uphill climb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right about Doha:

The official explanation by the IOC about Doha:

"The IOC Executive Board unanimously decided not to grant this exception as it conflicts with the international sporting calendar and would therefore be bad for the athletes and for sports fans.

"Does this mean Doha or another country in the Middle East could never host the Olympic Games? No, not necessarily, especially given the IOC’s desire to see the Games held around the world."

Davies says the EB believed "it would be a disservice to Doha to take them into the next round. Resolving the date issue is something that needs a longer term approach," Davies explained in a statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About Rio, I was sure that they would consider the PanAm experience to make them pass the 6-point threshold. Although the problems were there, they overestimated the number of tourists that would be in the city during the Games, which made the transportation system enough for most of the events (OC obviously was underrated since the Ceremony itself was delayed for 30 minutes due to the mass flow inside Maracana stadium, which is unaccetable for Olympic standards but just a footnote for PanAm level). I went to velodrome using the system and it worked (it was a Thursday afternoon), although if the number of people expected actually showed to watch the events it would be REALLY a problem.

When Rio was awarded the 2007 PanAm Games, in August 2003, much was said about hosting the 2002 South American Games in different parts of Brazil (because it was a last minute change from Argentina I guess). With that in mind, only if Rio staged something like Atlanta 1996 that the city wouldn´t get an upgrade for technical aspects.

I think the grade for Rio was fair enough. Above the threshold but way below the others. Now I want to read the document to see their considerations.

-With that in mind, my question, what were the grades for the 2012 race? Was there something similar for 2008?

-And someone has the direct link for the EB document?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right about Doha:

The official explanation by the IOC about Doha:

well, #1 -- a Middle Eastern Games will always be dicey. The Arabs will have to accept that. Now once they can allay fears of an insecure Games

#2 - they are also going to have to schedule an all-night Games to combat the weather in September (the latest they can move an Arab Gulf Olympics to).

#3 - WILL they allow bikini-clad Israeli lesbians playing volleyball on the beaches of Dubai,

Except #4 - How do you play Beach Volleyball at night?

So, Nope -- the closest a Summer Olympics to an Arab country will be Istanbul.

But some parts of the world just aren't conducive to outdoor sports. The Arabs will just have to accept that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless Tokyo comes up with something really exciting, they are facing an uphill climb.

A lot of people here have always expressed that Tokyo would be one of the favorites for 2016. Why do you think they have an uphill climb (besides Beijing of course), unless they come with something really exciting? Their impressive waterfront plan always comes to mind that people elude to when it comes to Tokyo's pros. I would love to hear your thoughts on this? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of people here have always expressed that Tokyo would be one of the favorites for 2016. Why do you think they have an uphill climb (besides Beijing of course), unless they come with something really exciting? Their impressive waterfront plan always comes to mind that people elude to when it comes to Tokyo's pros. I would love to hear your thoughts on this? :)

For the record, I am a big fan of Tokyo's bid that I have always labelled as the technically strongest.

It remains that Tokyo will need much more than a technically flawless plan.

Rio will have the sentimental card, 20 years after the last summer games in North-America and with a technically sounded plan Chicago's timing is right, thanks to its 2012 bid and the charisma of its leader Madrid is very well connected and will play the Spanish passion card. What's left for Tokyo?

So far, but there is more than a year to go, I haven't read anything about Tokyo's bid that got me excited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of people here have always expressed that Tokyo would be one of the favorites for 2016. Why do you think they have an uphill climb (besides Beijing of course), unless they come with something really exciting? Their impressive waterfront plan always comes to mind that people elude to when it comes to Tokyo's pros. I would love to hear your thoughts on this? :)

Mine? Oh, why, thanks, FYI. Well I do have an inkling of Tokyo's 'secret plan.' OK, don't quote me but I heard that Tokyo will be bringing a whole plane load of those classy show girls -- who usually perform topless at their Nichegeki Theater in Tokyo -- to Copenhagen!!

Sorry, can't post any pics. We have a child in this readership -- you know who.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how much the Israel issue affected Doha?

Well, Doha scored quite well in the "Government support, legal issues and public opinion" theme and I read the sentence "The Working Group notes that Qatar intends to ensure full compliance with rule 53 of the Olympic Charter which authorises entry into Qatar for all persons in possession of the Olympic identity and accreditation and a valid passport" (which is not used for any of the 6 other applicant cities) as an implicit recognition that Israel citizen would be allowed in Doha.

So I would say, officially it didn't affect Doha. What happened behind closed doors at the EB meeting, we'll never know...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if its not Israel, i'm thinking about how much did their poaching of athletes played a part if any.

I don't know if that would have made any explicit effect on the result _ it's not like they're the only one that does it (I mean, even Australia has been known to welcome overseas-born athletes on the Olympic team with open arms). That said, the lack of sports tradition for the region as a whole would probably have been a worrry if they did make it through _ but again, I doubt it made much of a difference in the short list selection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if that would have made any explicit effect on the result _ it's not like they're the only one that does it (I mean, even Australia has been known to welcome overseas-born athletes on the Olympic team with open arms). That said, the lack of sports tradition for the region as a whole would probably have been a worrry if they did make it through _ but again, I doubt it made much of a difference in the short list selection.

Well those athletes voluntarily came to Australia or Canada or France or the US, Qatar and Bahrain has bought athletes, as in giving them money to compete for their country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well those athletes voluntarily came to Australia or Canada or France or the US, Qatar and Bahrain has bought athletes, as in giving them money to compete for their country.

Okay _ Begg-Smith then. Was he burning to be an Aussie, or just burning to be on ANY olympic team, and had a better chance for Oz than Canada?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay _ Begg-Smith then. Was he burning to be an Aussie, or just burning to be on ANY olympic team, and had a better chance for Oz than Canada?

He was booted from the team because he put his business above the Canadian team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"candidate city analysis".... That's funny and interesting to do (i do it myself).... but most of the IOC members will not follow this technical ranking at the end !!!

We should analyse where will be the interest of the ioc members... and that something that is not taking in consideration in the ioc's commission report...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"candidate city analysis".... That's funny and interesting to do (i do it myself).... but most of the IOC members will not follow this technical ranking at the end !!!

We should analyse where will be the interest of the ioc members... and that something that is not taking in consideration in the ioc's commission report...

Oh I know that don't worry ;) , having closely followed the IOC bid process for almost 15 years.

For one, I am convinced that Rio won't be the first city to be eliminated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think they could win?

Very early to tell as there is more than a year to go.

I shall have a better idea after meeting a few IOC members in Beijing (I am eager to learn more about their views on Chicago and Madrid) but, unless they are absolutely trashed by the Evaluation Commission report (a la Osaka or Istanbul 2008), they probably could win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i just hoped the IOC votes according to who has the best bid not because they'll be staying let's say at the Copacobana Palace Hotel in Rio, but then that's what usually happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i just hoped the IOC votes according to who has the best bid not because they'll be staying let's say at the Copacobana Palace Hotel in Rio, but then that's what usually happens.

The thing is, as discussed many times, the "best bid" is subjective: you have 110 IOC members who might have 110 different reasons to vote for such or such city.

The reason why I think Rio could win, is not so much it's beautiful location (although it doesn't hurt) but rather the fact that, if the Evaluation Commission confirms that it's not a too risky choice, it will be the opportunity to have the Games in South America for the first time, which would be a powerful symbol as well as a "feel good" factor for the IOC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, as discussed many times, the "best bid" is subjective: you have 110 IOC members who might have 110 different reasons to vote for such or such city.

The reason why I think Rio could win, is not so much it's beautiful location (although it doesn't hurt) but rather the fact that, if the Evaluation Commission confirms that it's not a too risky choice, it will be the opportunity to have the Games in South America for the first time, which would be a powerful symbol as well as a "feel good" factor for the IOC.

Agreed. Granted, there's still more than a year of campaigning to go _ anything can happen, blunders can be made, masterstrokes can be played, but basically, the EB has now given the IOC members at large the green light to vote Rio for whatever reasons they wish.

If it was just a case of giving the games to the "best bid" _ I assume Olympian was talking best technical bid _ then there's no point in going to a vote _ the Evaluation has ranked them and put Tokyo on top. Why bother asking the members to choose any of the other three at all then?

As you said, "best bid" is so subjective. The best bid is whatever any individual member thinks is best for the games, for the future, for the world, for whateverv reason they prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Granted, there's still more than a year of campaigning to go _ anything can happen, blunders can be made, masterstrokes can be played, but basically, the EB has now given the IOC members at large the green light to vote Rio for whatever reasons they wish.

If it was just a case of giving the games to the "best bid" _ I assume Olympian was talking best technical bid _ then there's no point in going to a vote _ the Evaluation has ranked them and put Tokyo on top. Why bother asking the members to choose any of the other three at all then?

As you said, "best bid" is so subjective. The best bid is whatever any individual member thinks is best for the games, for the future, for the world, for whateverv reason they prefer.

I don't see any of these cities screwing up. The political will seems to be there for all of them, and that is the most probable reason for any of them to take a fall. Best bid, like you say, can mean a variety of things:

-best technical bid = Tokyo at the moment

-best financial windfall for the IOC = Chicago due to global time zone issues and the sponsorship $$ in the US

-best sentimental bid = Rio

-worst in terms of geopolitical fallout = potentially Chicago

-worst in terms of already having hosted the Games = Tokyo

-worst in terms of technical bid = Rio

Those are three pretty major considerations on the positive and negative side that will be weighted differently by every IOC member

Madrid doesn't have anything that jumps out at you w/ any of these factors, but they may no worse than 2nd or 3rd in any of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see any of these cities screwing up. The political will seems to be there for all of them, and that is the most probable reason for any of them to take a fall. Best bid, like you say, can mean a variety of things:

Believe me, boo-boos WILL be made. Even the best laid plans go awry at times. Whether any of the inevitable stuff-ups that will come will effect the result, remains to be seen, but all it takes is one ill-considered comment, a negative TV program, a thoughtless quip about national cuisines, or a joke about cannibals, and lots of good work can go down the drain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...