Kenadian Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 To the people who are picking 5 and more rounds, where are you getting that number? There are only 5 cities in the race and there can only be a maximum of 4 elimination rounds (we are not counting run off ties for last place, just the elimination rounds and they certainly don't eliminate all 5 cities). Are you predicting a tie in the end? I think even in the case of a tie in the end, the IOC President's vote breaks the tie.
Rei Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 Moscow6 rounds Madrid sorry I have to correct it Moscow 5 rounds Madrid Future will give me reason :cool:
Robert Henson Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 To the people who are picking 5 and more rounds, where are you getting that number? There are only 5 cities in the race and there can only be a maximum of 4 elimination rounds (we are not counting run off ties for last place, just the elimination rounds and they certainly don't eliminate all 5 cities). Are you predicting a tie in the end? I think even in the case of a tie in the end, the IOC President's vote breaks the tie. Good point. Didn't think that through properly when I posted. Moscow 4 rounds London
DesmondChan Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 1. Moscow 2. 4 rounds 3. Paris (In fact, I hope it will be New York. The global city has yet host any Olympic Games. New York, the home of the world.)
Robert Henson Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 1. Moscow2. 4 rounds 3. Paris (In fact, I hope it will be New York. The global city has yet host any Olympic Games. New York, the home of the world.) New York, the home of the world Yes, apart from the 5,991,884,865 people who don't happen to live there.
ReadyForYou-2M12 Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 1) New York2) 5 rounds 3) Madrid According to Kendergra's remark, my corrected Prediction... 1) New York 2) 4 rounds 3) Madrid - If we consider that the IOC-voters doesn't want to "humilliate" one of the cities with the "first-round-elimination", New York's "stadium-problem" has provided them the perfect excuse...á la... "You have to understand...we appreciate very much your efforts with the new stadium..but...Please come back in 2016...and we're shure it will be one of the best bids..." And to avoid missunderstanding: This comment should not be considered as a critic against NY....but it is the way IOC will handle the whole stadium-problem (it would have happened the same way if another city would have been the affected one)...
SOlympiadsW Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 two weeks ago I would have agreed...but I highly doubt that now....but it isn't even worth debating because we'll soon found out in 15 days`
Michelle Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 To those of you saying NYC will win... If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards. Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce. This has nothing to do with anti-american feelings, but it makes me wonder how intelligent somepeople are that post here. New York was a long shot even before its problems surrounding its west side stadium. The Mayors games backfired, saying NY had NO other option if the west side stadium failed. Well we know that was a lie, he was just scaremongering, to make the politicans accept HIS plan. Atlanta 96, weak public support, mediocre political support, Vancouver 2010... these are all factors that can't be dismissed so easily. And if you do, then you're in denial. Bringing Ali to Singapore, will only refresh the IOCs minds back to Atlanta 96, which wasn't so long ago, and those games were probably the worst in recent times. Giving the games to NYC over Paris, is to me... unimaginable. Even if I'd rather have the games in NY than Paris. It just won't happen. What a kick in the teeth it would be to Paris and to a lesser extent London, if NYC with all its problems and issues, won the vote. The IOC would need to ask themselves some serious questions. But of course, we all know they do as they please, but this would be a stones throw too far.
SOlympiadsW Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 excuse me but how did this thread suddenly turn yet again into an NYC bashing (Michelle)....all I merely stated was that NYC will most likely not be eliminated first...and I am sorry to say Michelle but NYC is still in this race (regardless of where they stand) and you should be counting no city out....any city that wins this race is fair game at this time, and who ever wins is the winner and that is all that there is to it...
SOlympiadsW Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 may I personally add I believe that PARIS will win this race (as a I stated before) I think all of the cities are long shots (with the exception of London...who I still think faces a large challenge)...something tells me that no matter what 2012 is Paris'
Michelle Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 2012 is Paris to lose, and if it does Im confident it won't be to NYC. And another thing, I hope the USOC opens up its bidding process for 2016. NYC deserves a good run for its money. They shouldn't have the manopoly on US Olympic bids.
SOlympiadsW Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 2012 is Paris to lose, and if it does Im confident it won't be to NYC. And another thing, I hope the USOC opens up its bidding process for 2016. NYC deserves a good run for its money. They shouldn't have the manopoly on US Olympic bids. LOL....you are such a joke....I love how you just grow nastier in nastier on hear...but hey oh well.... NYC doesn't have any monpoly they bid ONCE...that is hardly a monpoly...but whatever....it is unlikely the process will be reopened if NYC choses to bid again (one USOC official was quoted as saying so when asked two weeks ago on the news)....and they will most likely stand a much better shot at 2016....they have only bid once, and first time bids usually do not win anyway so NYC won't be crying in 15 days if they lose...can three of the other European cities say the same thing?....I don't think so... but as I said before these things can really not be predicted (althoguh Paris 2012 has)....so we'll just have to wait and see
Guest ryan04 Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 1 - Paris 2 - 5 3 - "The Games of the XXX Olympiad in 2012 are awarded to the city of New York."
baron-pierreIV Posted June 21, 2005 Author Report Posted June 21, 2005 1 - Paris2 - 5 3 - "The Games of the XXX Olympiad in 2012 are awarded to the city of New York." Here...here, Ryan. And if Paris wins, New York will just declare the 18 arrondissements NYC's 6th borough!! :wwww:
nykfan845 Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 To those of you saying NYC will win... If this happens. It will be a disgrace of the highest order. And the IOC would have problems justifying it, even on their already low standards. Giving the games to a city, which struggles to get its venues in order, a city with a very low public support for the games and to a city who will refuse to fund any shortfalls beyond $250 million... it's a complete and utter farce. This has nothing to do with anti-american feelings, but it makes me wonder how intelligent somepeople are that post here. New York was a long shot even before its problems surrounding its west side stadium. The Mayors games backfired, saying NY had NO other option if the west side stadium failed. Well we know that was a lie, he was just scaremongering, to make the politicans accept HIS plan. Atlanta 96, weak public support, mediocre political support, Vancouver 2010... these are all factors that can't be dismissed so easily. And if you do, then you're in denial. Bringing Ali to Singapore, will only refresh the IOCs minds back to Atlanta 96, which wasn't so long ago, and those games were probably the worst in recent times. Giving the games to NYC over Paris, is to me... unimaginable. Even if I'd rather have the games in NY than Paris. It just won't happen. What a kick in the teeth it would be to Paris and to a lesser extent London, if NYC with all its problems and issues, won the vote. The IOC would need to ask themselves some serious questions. But of course, we all know they do as they please, but this would be a stones throw too far. Pure bulls**t. An utter disgrace of the highest order? :laughlong: Who fails to get their venues in order? Correction "venue" not "venues". About 3/4 of New Yorkers want the Olympics, they just didn't like the original proposed stadium. What a pointless overreaction. You just LOVE instigating s**t don't you?
Mikel Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 1- Moscow/NYC (If the IOC doesn't want to humilliate the Russian city with a drop in the 1st round) 2- 4 rounds (very close race) 3- And the winner is.... MADRID, of course!!!
Hlinur Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 I think IT IS fair if NYC wins. They have never hosted them. If Paris or London gets them, it would be 3-0... is that fair?
baron-pierreIV Posted June 21, 2005 Author Report Posted June 21, 2005 I think IT IS fair if NYC wins. They have never hosted them. If Paris or London gets them, it would be 3-0... is that fair? Bienvenidos, Hlinur, y gracias. Fair comment. And for once, a Madrileno who's not blind unlike the others.
BSTOUT1221 Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 If New York is eliminated on the first round, I think the USOC needs to step in and remind the IOC where over 50% of those greedy little devils' money comes from and to remind them to humiliate a major world city like NYC with first round elimination will not help them secure a great broadcasting deal after the 2012 Games. If the IOC votes NYC out first, that will be a pretty low blow to the biggest hand that feeds them!! Moscow eliminated first 4 rounds New York over Paris in the final round (I could live with London over Paris though!)
Hlinur Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 If New York is eliminated on the first round, I think the USOC needs to step in and remind the IOC where over 50% of those greedy little devils' money comes from and to remind them to humiliate a major world city like NYC with first round elimination will not help them secure a great broadcasting deal after the 2012 Games. If the IOC votes NYC out first, that will be a pretty low blow to the biggest hand that feeds them!!Moscow eliminated first 4 rounds New York over Paris in the final round (I could live with London over Paris though!) I admire your humbleness!! :glare:
Neuquen Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 1.- Moscow....sadly, but well... 2.-4 rounds... 3.-Paris.....Sincerely, this Olympic Bids, are very closed, particulary Paris-London, but we just have to recognize that the IOC will give the games to Paris... I like the five bids, specially Paris and New York, but then, we have to remind that the vote isnt in OUR hands...
argentak Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 1. Moscow. 2. 3 rounds. 3. Paris. I'm guessing Moscow will be out first, followed by New York, and the majority of the votes that originally went to New York would go to Paris because of the whole London vs. New York mentality that's been happening. Madrid will just kind of hang around but never get enough steam.
BSTOUT1221 Posted June 21, 2005 Report Posted June 21, 2005 If New York is eliminated on the first round, I think the USOC needs to step in and remind the IOC where over 50% of those greedy little devils' money comes from and to remind them to humiliate a major world city like NYC with first round elimination will not help them secure a great broadcasting deal after the 2012 Games. If the IOC votes NYC out first, that will be a pretty low blow to the biggest hand that feeds them!!Moscow eliminated first 4 rounds New York over Paris in the final round (I could live with London over Paris though!) I admire your humbleness!! :glare: Can you honestly say that New York is worse than Madrid or Moscow and if so, on what grounds? To eliminate them first just seems ridiculous! It's the IOC members who should practice humility a bit more often. Their prescious Games cost so much these days that they need to backing of big broadcasters and sponsors to make it happen. I just think it's ludicrous for someone to honestly think NYC is out on the first ballot - Baron is more likely to be nice to everyone for a week :laughlong:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.