Jump to content

Tokyo 2016


Mikel

Recommended Posts

Tokyo's attempts to be awarded the 2016 Summer Olympics became slightly easier earlier today when Sapporo (host city for the 1972 Wnter Games) pulled out of the bidding process.  This leaves only Fukuoka and Tokyo challenging each other to be the Japanese candidate.  

The mayor of Sapporo stated that the financial burden would be too great and a poll of the city's residents showed only a third in favour of hosting the Games.  

The southern city of Fukuoka is applying for the first time, however, Tokyo must be the firm favourite for the Japanese candidacy despite having hosted the 1964 Summer Games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply
surely 2016 will be too soon to go back to Asia after Beijing 2008. Is this just a first bid with a view to 2020 or beyond?

I really don't see any problem for the Summer Games to return to Asia eight years after Beijing, afterall the Olympics are returning to Europe eight years after Athens.  If Tokyo were to be awarded the 2016 Games it would still only be the fourth time it has been held within the whole of that continent (Tokyo 1964, Seoul 1988, Beijing 2008) - a continent that consists of most of the world's population.  

Asia is becoming an extremely important continent within all aspects of the Olympic movement - China is one of the most powerful sporting nations in the world, I'm sure they will dominate the medals table in their own Olympics, Japan is also a major sporting nation coming fifth in the 2004 medals table.  Asia is also slowly becoming more important with regards to financing the Olympic movement (multinational sponsors, etc).

There is no doubt that an American city would be a very strong contender, particularly if it's New York, but surely the amount of time between home Olympics would be more a problem for the US (1996) rather than Japan (1964).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, not only an 8-year difference but to the same city again?  While Tokyo is Japan's first city, that's kinda why the USOC has dismissed LA's desires for a 3rd attempt.  Been there; done that.  So why shouldn't that maxim apply to Tokyo as well?

And if Tokyo is serious, then the US will have to go with NYC again.  How can it pit #2 Chicago against Japan's #1 city?  That I think will be a major factor to disqualify all other US cities except for NYC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a big factor will be the 2014 Winter Games.  If PyeongChang wins those, I doubt Asia will get 2016 as well.

This 2014 race may be a factor in whenever Japan will put a bid foward for 2016 or not. However, a fourth Games for that country against "the rest of Asia." That could be hard to swallow for some. More so, on that 2014 race, let's hope that Austrian bid doesn't get tainted by the "charging of the Olympic Village" in Torino to look for a banned Austrian coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, not only an 8-year difference but to the same city again?  While Tokyo is Japan's first city, that's kinda why the USOC has dismissed LA's desires for a 3rd attempt.  Been there; done that.  So why shouldn't that maxim apply to Tokyo as well?

And if Tokyo is serious, then the US will have to go with NYC again.  How can it pit #2 Chicago against Japan's #1 city?  That I think will be a major factor to disqualify all other US cities except for NYC.

I totally agree with you. If the States want to win this race they'll have to go with a strong candidate: NYC. Chicago CAN'T win Tokyo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Pyeongchang might have more of an impact of Tokyo 2016 than Athens did on Torino 2006. Remember that in the bid for 2006 only two cities were considered good enough to be shortlisted - Sion and Turin. So the games were going to return to Europe anyway - the voting members of the IOC couldn't help that.

But with 2014 it's likely that cities from different continents will be shortlisted, making it more vital and competitive. If Pyeongchang wins 2014, I doubt that Tokyo will win 2016 up against a strong American bid. If 2014 goes to Europe, Tokyo has a much better chance of hosting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, not only an 8-year difference but to the same city again?  While Tokyo is Japan's first city, that's kinda why the USOC has dismissed LA's desires for a 3rd attempt.  Been there; done that.  So why shouldn't that maxim apply to Tokyo as well?

And if Tokyo is serious, then the US will have to go with NYC again.  How can it pit #2 Chicago against Japan's #1 city?  That I think will be a major factor to disqualify all other US cities except for NYC.

I totally agree with you. If the States want to win this race they'll have to go with a strong candidate: NYC. Chicago CAN'T win Tokyo.

Atlanta won going up against Athens and Toronto, cities that I would call first-tier compared to Atlanta.  Barcelona, was up against Paris and Amsterdam - again a 2nd tier city wins.  And both Barcelona and Atlanta were successful games from either a financial or logistics standpoint.

Granted - NYC has an advantage.  But if Chicago comes up with a solid, compact plan, whose to say that it wouldn't stand a chance against Tokyo?  

Besides, Tokyo has problems that it didn't have in 1964.  In '64, Tokyo wasn't totally rebuilt after WWII, so it was easier from the standpoint of finding land to build highways and venues.  Now it is one of the most congested cities in the world - much moreso than Chicago or New York.  Finding a place to build venues within a compact area will be problematic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlanta won going up against Athens and Toronto, cities that I would call first-tier compared to Atlanta.  Barcelona, was up against Paris and Amsterdam - again a 2nd tier city wins.  And both Barcelona and Atlanta were successful games from either a financial or logistics standpoint.

Granted - NYC has an advantage.  But if Chicago comes up with a solid, compact plan, whose to say that it wouldn't stand a chance against Tokyo?  

Besides, Tokyo has problems that it didn't have in 1964.  In '64, Tokyo wasn't totally rebuilt after WWII, so it was easier from the standpoint of finding land to build highways and venues.  Now it is one of the most congested cities in the world - much moreso than Chicago or New York.  Finding a place to build venues within a compact area will be problematic.

True, Atlanta did defeat cities that perhaps were ranked above her for the 1996 Olympics, however, perhaps as a result of Atlanta is viewed by the world, we live in very different times now - bigger is better!  

True again, Tokyo does have some difficulties to overcome if awarded the Games but even before that I think Tokyo's main problem is that there won't be a block of support that can be relied upon - Japan has "luke-warm" relations with some of her neighbours and they won't rally behind in support in the same way Europeans or Commonwealth would for each other.  They may end up supporting Tokyo but I don't think there are so many votes that Japan can take for granted in the initial stages.  

Japan could be the main benefactor of any Anti-US feelings across Europe and Asia but, although prevalent at the moment, may not be so great in Copenhagen 2009 (Bush will have gone).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes, the IOC doesn't care about who got the best plan. Just look at 2012, Paris clearly was hailed as an excellent plan, slightly ahead of London. They'll just choose whoever they want to host, or think is very capable of hosting.

Baron's point is right on target. If Japan submits Tokyo, there's no reason for the US to choose any city other than NYC. The IOC might not look at this as a good gesture. It even might look at this as an insult to their egos. Although Chicago and LA are great cities, it still doesn't compare to the what is NYC in the world.

London, Paris, Tokyo and NYC are considered to be the "Alpha" Cities. And if Tokyo comes in and London and Paris already out of 2016, you definitely have to go with your best, which IMO, NYC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlanta won going up against Athens and Toronto, cities that I would call first-tier compared to Atlanta.  Barcelona, was up against Paris and Amsterdam - again a 2nd tier city wins.  And both Barcelona and Atlanta were successful games from either a financial or logistics standpoint.

Granted - NYC has an advantage.  But if Chicago comes up with a solid, compact plan, whose to say that it wouldn't stand a chance against Tokyo?  

Besides, Tokyo has problems that it didn't have in 1964.  In '64, Tokyo wasn't totally rebuilt after WWII, so it was easier from the standpoint of finding land to build highways and venues.  Now it is one of the most congested cities in the world - much moreso than Chicago or New York.  Finding a place to build venues within a compact area will be problematic.

True, Atlanta did defeat cities that perhaps were ranked above her for the 1996 Olympics, however, perhaps as a result of Atlanta is viewed by the world, we live in very different times now - bigger is better!  

True again, Tokyo does have some difficulties to overcome if awarded the Games but even before that I think Tokyo's main problem is that there won't be a block of support that can be relied upon - Japan has "luke-warm" relations with some of her neighbours and they won't rally behind in support in the same way Europeans or Commonwealth would for each other.  They may end up supporting Tokyo but I don't think there are so many votes that Japan can take for granted in the initial stages.  

Japan could be the main benefactor of any Anti-US feelings across Europe and Asia but, although prevalent at the moment, may not be so great in Copenhagen 2009 (Bush will have gone).

Tokyo won't receive many votes because the European countries want to leave America out of the 2020 race, but as an Alpha city, it have support guaranteed (maybe not the needed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tokyo won't receive many votes because the European countries want to leave America out of the 2020 race, but as an Alpha city, it have support guaranteed (maybe not the needed).

I don't think many in the IOC look that far ahead when choosing a host city, voting for a city in America to discount it four years later to increase the possibilities for Europe is a dangerous strategy which could easily backfire.  The US still has to choose its city carefully and the IOC can't guarantee 100% in 2009 on having a choice of brilliant European bids in 2013.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think Tokyo will have a problem venues wise - the main thrust of their plan is a rebuilt Olympic Park within the confines of Yoyogi Park in central Tokyo.  Yoyogi is huge - and contains 4 1964 Games venues.  From what I have read and been told, they plan a 6 venue cluster there, then there is various other nearby venues such as the City Gymnasium, Tokyo Dome etc - as well as the venues in Yokohama.

The main issue is the village.  I imagine it will be on either reclaimed land in the bay or the Japanese will finally level some of the older pre-1980 buildings around Yoyogi and build one there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not have a vertical Olympic Village? A skyscraper overlooking the Olympic Stadium? I know Kuala Lumpur did something like that for the Commonwealth Games back in 1998.

I suppose if it comes down to that.  But who gets the floors with the best views?  And that makes it a tempting target for Mohammed Atta-wannabees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not have a vertical Olympic Village? A skyscraper overlooking the Olympic Stadium? I know Kuala Lumpur did something like that for the Commonwealth Games back in 1998.

Agreed.  I always thought Montreal had the best layout for an Olympic Village across from the stadium.  Nothing wrong with building up.

98906.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Tokyo's Metropolitan Assembly have overwhelmingly passed a resolution to pursue their 2016 Olympic aspirations -Tsunekazu Takeda, the Japanese NOC chairman, stated:  "We would like Tokyo to do their best to produce a wonderful plan, the aim is not only to win domestically, but also to beat the candidates from overseas. We look forward to seeing a high-level bid."

Link to full story.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/4786020.stm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if Tokyo is serious, then the US will have to go with NYC again.  How can it pit #2 Chicago against Japan's #1 city?  That I think will be a major factor to disqualify all other US cities except for NYC.

Baron --

I totally disagree with you about a Tokyo bid forcing the USOC to go with NYC over Chicago. We're not talking Peoria, we're talking Chicago. It does not pale in comparison to New York. It has a totally different character and ambience but it is still a top-of-the-heap cosmopolitan city. Both cities are powerhouses with enormous Olympic potential. It all depends on which city can put together a dynamic leadership team and a splashy bid. For reasons I've enumerated in other threads, I think it is entirely possible that Chicago could outbid NYC and Tokyo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...