cfm Jeremie Posted March 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 If the French want to win this time, Nice is the one. The sad thing is that Nice is probably the most attractive candidate to the IOC Members but also the one most likely not get to the status of candidate city, which would be a disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatsnotmypuppy Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 From my point of view, I am not found of giving the games to a city that has already hosted the games in the past. And i know there is a lot of people against a bid in Grenoble.But I will come back to you during the week-end after analysing the report to see the good and bad points of each bids (as we could do have seen yet the bid files)... To be fair - Annecy is pretty much Albertville Pt2. Neither Annecy or Grenoble thrill me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 The IOC would not deny the French a position on the shortlist. If Nice straddled the benchmark, the IOC knows that France are capable, and will organize successful and dream Games for the Athletes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 The IOC would not deny the French a position on the shortlist. Hmmm Lille any one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memorabilia Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 If Nice straddled the benchmark, the IOC knows that France are capable, and will organize successful and dream Games for the Athletes. Yes, but Nice should be over the "is able to organize correctly" line in the benchmark.... and actuallu Nice is just on this line (not over !) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 One should not compare summer to winter. Leipzig could have shortlisted if it wasnt up against NY, London, Madrid, Paris... If Rio were to bid against NY, London, Paris, Madrid, Moscow for 2016, it would not shortlist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 One should not compare summer to winter.Leipzig could have shortlisted if it wasnt up against NY, London, Madrid, Paris... If Rio were to bid against NY, London, Paris, Madrid, Moscow for 2016, it would not shortlist. And one should not rewrite history: - things would have been different if they hadn't happened the way they did What's the point of bringing in summer bids on sentence after stating that one cannot compare summer to winter? Besides, Almaty is a winter example of a city straddling the benchmark and not being shortlisted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memorabilia Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 One should not compare summer to winter.Leipzig could have shortlisted if it wasnt up against NY, London, Madrid, Paris... If Rio were to bid against NY, London, Paris, Madrid, Moscow for 2016, it would not shortlist. You will find below the final rating of the Applicant Cities for the summer 2012 & 2016 Olympics. In any case Leipzig would have NOT been shortlisted for the 2012 as was under the line to host safely the games Rio has not been shortlisted in 2012, as under the line, but has been shortlisted un 2016 as Rio made improvement in 4 years in several items and prooved that it can organized great games with the 2007 Panam Games. This Applicant City's ranking is technical. If you have a mark of above 6 you will be shortlisted.... with the expetion of Doha for the 2016 race... but that's only because of the date they choose to host the games. If you have almost 6, the IOC Executive Committee will decide.... And, here international cities and strong countries would be choosen.... See Moscow for 2012 and Almaty for 2014 ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 oh we all know those scores are "Flexible" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memorabilia Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 oh we all know those scores are "Flexible" No, score are not "flexible"! they are the results of a technical anaylsis and complex process. A candidate city under 6 will be out. What could be "subjective", are the IOC Executive Committee decisions in case of average bid straddles around the 6 final mark! (or some specific case, like Doha, for which the Experts' Group, said it was OK regarding weather but other issue linked to the date should be analysed by the EC). So, I am pretty sure that you will never see the EC going at the opposite of what is proposed by the Experts Group to validate which applicant city should become a candidate one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 No, score are not "flexible"! Oh please. If Rio 2016 was up against Madrid, NYC, London, Paris and Moscow, I doubt they would have made the shortlist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Oh please. If Rio 2016 was up against Madrid, NYC, London, Paris and Moscow, I doubt they would have made the shortlist. Please, who cares what would have happened if whatever? Rio scored higher for 2016 than for 2012, didn't meet the threshold the first time and met it this time: those are the fact. Does it men that Rio has the strongest technical bid, of course not. It does mean that Rio could host 2016 within a reasonable amount of risk, which was not the case for 2012. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I don't agree and thats fine with me. IMO The Rio 2016 bid score would be less inflated if it was up against tougher competition. I support the technical evaluation process and scores in most cases but I do believe they are flexible when they need to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memorabilia Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 So here is the Evaluation Commission Ranking...1st Grenoble 2nd Annecy 3rd Nice 4th Pelvoux Just Grenoble & Annecy are said "having the necessary potential to host OG & PG in 2018 and are able to present a good quality bid and to pass the IOC applicant phase...." Nice is said dangerous because of distance and lack of transport & accommodation structures Pelvoux has no capacity to host Games. I am thinking that only 2 cities will participate to the vote ! The French NOC has announced on saturday that the 4 bidding cities will participate to the vote on Wednesday morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I support the technical evaluation process and scores in most cases but I do believe they are flexible when they need to be. Fuzzy Logic (which is the mathematical model on which the Applicant Cities evaluation process is based) does allow for some flexibility (you can change some thresholds, redefines membership functions, tune the weight and so on) and that's fine with me: this way, bid evaluation can take into account the lessons learned from past Games and/or past bid process which is the whole point. You can expect that the legacy aspect (in particular post games use of venues / infrastructure) to gain more and more importance in future evaluation. And as long as all the parameters are the same for all the applicants, I don't see that as introducing a bias that would favour such or such applicant city: the real question is whether a bid is too risky or not, the ranking or the scores themselves do not really matter (since the process was introduced for the 2008 race, not once has the city with the highest marks in the applicant cities report being elected). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I definitely agree with you but I do believe whether a "straddler" or a city short of the benchmark shortlists depends on the quality of competing cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 For our French speaking members only, Pelvoux answers to the EC report: Pelvoux answers to the EC Report It's getting pretty nasty (Pelvoux basically destroies Grenoble's bid...). I foresee more and more an easy victory from Annecy on Wednesday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Nice! Nice is almost as classy as Pelvoux in its reaction... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memorabilia Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Annoucement will be live on the French NOC website : http://www.franceolympique.com between 10:45 to 12:00 local time (GMT+1). Planning (in french) Organisation de la journée du 18 mars •10 h : Accueil des délégations des villes pré-requérantes •10 h 30 : Accueil de la presse •10 h 50 : ouverture par Henri Sérandour (amphithéâtre – séance publique) •11 h : début du vote (salle du Conseil - huis-clos) •A partir de 11 h10 : annonce du résultat du vote au fur et à mesure en direct dans l’amphithéâtre •A partir de 11 h 45 (estimation) : annonce de la décision finale du Conseil d’administration du CNOSF •Conférence de presse d’Henri Sérandour et, si il y a lieu, du maire de la ville retenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 The live broadcast has actually started (nothing interesting going on) but here is the link: 2018 French Applicant selection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 French applicant city elected during the first round! Name unknown yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Annecy !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memorabilia Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 Annecy !!!! No surprise ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted March 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 No surprise ! Not really but I was not expecting a victory in the first round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.