zenica Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 SOlympiadsW, what do you think about Chicago 2016? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOlympiadsW Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 SOlympiadsW, what do you think about Chicago 2016? I think Chicago is a great city that can definately host an Olympic Games. I also think their Mayor (who is VERY influential) is very serious and has many ideas in mind. I think Chicago in the USOC race would be "one of the cities to beat" However, I think that domestically this bid will be challenged by other cities (most likely NYC, LA, and maybe SF) which can all possibly put forward a better domestic bid then Chicago (we will have to see)...I do however see some early conerns with some of Chicago's early ideas, including the double NFL team thing...I also think that NYC will have a leg up over any city if they chose the bid PROVIDED that they don't do anything funny or have any last minute glitches in their already very technically strong and highly motivated bid as for the USA on a whole, I think if the right city is put forward the USA is likely to go home with those Games why do you ask? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Why? You have commented Dubai and Tokyo but not Chicago. I was eager to know what you think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOlympiadsW Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Why? You have commented Dubai and Tokyo but not Chicago. I was eager to know what you think about it. oh I figured that...I didn't mention to Chicago because I was replying to a post that only mentioned Dubai and Tokyo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 while I think Dubai can put forward a good bid and can definately finance such a venutre, I don't know how they would stand for 2016 really....although I could definately see this one dayas for Tokyo I am 100% certain they can put forward a superb bid that can be financed...but they have two things against them....the city hosted already (how boring would it be to have another repeat city host in a row) and Beijing 2008 and a likely PC 2014 will both work against the bid...however 2016 could serve a great purpose for a win in upcomming races.... I really don't understand why it would be boring to have Tokyo 2016 to follow London 2012 - two repeat host cities. How many people here can remember the 1964 Summer Games, not to mention the 1948 Games - not many people I should imagine (and even fewer by 2012/16). To follow your arguement - it would be far more boring to have an Olympics in an American city again - everyone still remembers Atlanta (perhaps unfortunately) in 1996 and US cities tend to be far less distinctive from each other as a result of their relatively young age. Whilst I have sympathy for a New York Olympics in 2016, I see no problem with the Games going to Tokyo - perhaps culturally Japan would have the upper hand as being a completely different culture to that of the UK. As for Dubai, I see little chance for them even if they bid, as others have stated; they have little Olympic heritage and questionable equality for the sexes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOlympiadsW Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 while I think Dubai can put forward a good bid and can definately finance such a venutre, I don't know how they would stand for 2016 really....although I could definately see this one dayas for Tokyo I am 100% certain they can put forward a superb bid that can be financed...but they have two things against them....the city hosted already (how boring would it be to have another repeat city host in a row) and Beijing 2008 and a likely PC 2014 will both work against the bid...however 2016 could serve a great purpose for a win in upcomming races.... I really don't understand why it would be boring to have Tokyo 2016 to follow London 2012 - two repeat host cities. How many people here can remember the 1964 Summer Games, not to mention the 1948 Games - not many people I should imagine (and even fewer by 2012/16). To follow your arguement - it would be far more boring to have an Olympics in an American city again - everyone still remembers Atlanta (perhaps unfortunately) in 1996 and US cities tend to be far less distinctive from each other as a result of their relatively young age. Whilst I have sympathy for a New York Olympics in 2016, I see no problem with the Games going to Tokyo - perhaps culturally Japan would have the upper hand as being a completely different culture to that of the UK. As for Dubai, I see little chance for them even if they bid, as others have stated; they have little Olympic heritage and questionable equality for the sexes. I am sorry but giving the Games non-stop to the same exact cities that have hosted (I don't care when) is boring.....I don't think this will be a factor though actually used against Tokyo....however Nagano, Beijing, and possible PC win will..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Are you saying that Japan, China and South Korea are the same? I think they are as different to each other as Athens, Torino and London, maybe even more so, all have different languages, cultures, histories, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOlympiadsW Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Are you saying that Japan, China and South Korea are the same? I think they are as different to each other as Athens, Torino and London, maybe even more so, all have different languages, cultures, histories, etc... of course not but just like we won't see a European Games in 2016 after Athens, Torino, and London (keep in mind Europe hosts more then anywhere else) we will not see a Games in Asia in 2016 after Nagano, Beijing, and PC.....it's called geopolitics...sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 No need to apologise! I do understand what you mean. However, because of the geographical limits imposing upon the Winter Olympics it's extremely difficult to avoid continents not having a Winter and Summer Games following on from each other, for example, LA '84 and Calgary '88 or Athens 2004 and Torino 2006 - I don't think it's as important to the IOC as avoiding concurrent Summer Games within the same region. The fact that Europe hosts so often is due to the fact that it's the wealthiest continent with perhaps 20 or so countries capable of hosting the Games - all with at least one member on the IOC. Perhaps Europe does host more than its fair share, but with Berlin, Rome and Paris interested in the Olympics at the moment they'll probably be hosting a few more quite soon. I don't think that Europe will host in 2016 - it will probably be a battle between Tokyo and a US choice. So the IOC may well be left with the prospect of yet another Summer Games in the continent of Asia or yet another Summer Games in the country of the United States. If the vote was tomorrow I would suspect Tokyo would walk that particular contest, however, time is on the US's side as there will be a lot of changes in the country before the Olympic vote in 2009 - so who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 After London and maybe Tokyo 2016 there will be several other cities that will get the Games again, i.e. Rome, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam. The next round for the Europeans will be 2024 or then 2036. Do not forget the other candidates that never had any Games like Johannesburg, Budapest, Prague, Rio, Buenos Aires, Delhi and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 It's unfortunate for them, but I suspect that new frontiers like Cape Town, Delhi, Rio and Budapest will have to wait. With cities like New York, Tokyo, Berlin and Rome bidding opportunities for these new cities to even make it to the shortlist will be scarce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 i suspect that the IOC will need to make a strategic move to bring the games to new frontiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Maybe they should start from 2016! How about: 2016 - Rio de Janeiro 2020 - Cape Town 2024 - New Delhi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 i think 2020 is the best time to start..only allowing cities from continents that have never hosted before to bid...e.g.(without a rotation system) i think when the time is right ...rio will make the shortlist..cape town made it in 1997 and it will prob make it again..depending on the opposition..either way the IOC will need to take a stand and make a bold statement....it will require more work and closer work with the bidding cities and eventual winner... that said..cape town making a shortlist second time round does have the potential to beat other "technically stronger" cities the 2004 cape town bid simply did not really enough votes...which is what it comes down to...it didnt lobby enough due to infighting.raymond ackerman had visited almost every IOC member but due to infighting he resigned from the commitee...long story short...the IOC must make the move... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 In all seriousness I don't believe that a positive discrimination strategy in favour of Cape Town or Rio would be very popular among either the IOC or indeed the cities themselves. The time will come when there is a real push to have the Games in Africa, to make the Olympic movement truely global. I think this should happen without any special treatment for Cape Town - it will stage an Olympics soon I'm sure, I'm also sure the population there would prefer to win based on the merits of their bid book and presentation rather than something arranged beforehand. In the immediate future though, I see South Africa and South America having to wait for the present batch of A-list cities to host first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Positive discrimination is actual. See FIFA, where Mr. Blatter said, that 2014 goes to Brazil. This has nothing to do with democratic behaviour. All countries/cities should have the chance to get the events without any lobbyism. The big organisations have to be reformed from the base on. A good date for IOC to start would be the 118th IOC session in Torino a few days before the Games. For the other organisations like FIFA and UEFA there will be a chance also during this year. So the cities do not have to run behind the IOC members to get their vote any longer. This also will reduce the influence of the single IOC member to it´s real worth. This is the same in FIFA and UEFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 There's never going to be a perfect system for selecting the hosts for Summer and Winter Olympic Games - but the system they use now is perhaps the best we can hope for. I don't think that any country should be barred from bidding for the Olympics, even if it is not considered that region's turn, I don't think the possibility of concurrent Olympics should be completely ruled out in a written document, and I don't believe that there should be any official pressure applied to IOC members to back a certain city or region over another. All these things would only result in less suitable candidates being successful at the expense of better qualified ones. Pressure is applied to IOC members for a number of reasons to choose a certain candidate over another - this could be seen with the overwhelming support for cities like Barcelona and Beijing. However, because no public backing has been proclaimed it gives individual IOC members more freedom and also ensures that the IOC heirarchy is saved from embarrassment if their candidate is rejected - this could be seen last year in the 2012 race where Paris was obviously favoured by some influencial members but still lost to London. No proclaimation in support for a particular region or city should ever be given by the IOC - if a city's infrastructure, detailed plans for the games and presentation are good enough they will increase their chances of winning themselves - this ensures that, as much as possible, the best candidate wins. If Cape Town or Rio want the games, I'm sure they would prefer to be awarded them on merit and not be patronised. Fifa has awarded South Africa and will award South America the football World Cup by limiting the competition against them - I believe it would be a mistake for the IOC to do the same. The Summer Games are far more concentrated and complicated than the Fifa World Cup and need the very best candidates to be successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Good points Stu, and pretty well exactly the reasons the IOC and Rogge himself has given for ruling out any formal rotation policy in awarding hostings. The thing is, while the IOC has explicitly ruled-out formal rotation, that's not to say that it doesn't already follow such a policy unofficially and loosely. It just would never say it's doing so, of course _ why would it limit the potential bidders for any games year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 There's never going to be a perfect system for selecting the hosts for Summer and Winter Olympic Games - Not if they run it by me... :laughlong: :idea: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Without any regulations, inofficially, the Games will be European-American Games with guest visits for the next 40 years. Do you really think all other IOC members that are from Asia, Africa etc will accept this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Without any regulations, inofficially, the Games will be European-American Games with guest visits for the next 40 years. Do you really think all other IOC members that are from Asia, Africa etc will accept this? It's not whether they accept it or not. Remember, the Olympics are nothing but play-time. They are not serious pursuits -- as in, actually feeding people, or curing disease and hunger. So any largesse that are produced from an Olympic Games, is produced from the robust economies of the countries that stage them. And any benefits and extra monies are then distributed by the IOC to the poorer countries; so until Asia & Africa can come forward with equally strong economies that can sustain an Olympic Games or a World Cup, then IOC members from Asia and Africa would do well, to at least recognize that without the efforts of the US and EUrope, and the profits they share -- the state of their sports would be as backwards as they were years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 The rest of the world will get their chances to hold the Summer Games - I'm sure there will be an unofficial internal push in the next decade or so for an Olympics in Africa or Latin America, but is it fair to other cities that they get special treatment? - no it's not. Consequently, Cape Town and Rio shouldn't wait for the Games to land on their laps, they should try their best to create the best possible bids and to improve their profile and infrastructure as other cities around the world have had to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 All these "exotic" cities like Rio, Cape Town, Delhi, Buenos Aires etc will have possibly a chance earliest in 2020 or later (i.e. 2032). The question is if they will be able to host Games then. They have to do a lot to improve their infrastructure etc., first of all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 All these "exotic" cities like Rio, Cape Town, Delhi, Buenos Aires etc will have possibly a chance earliest in 2020 or later (i.e. 2032). The question is if they will be able to host Games then. They have to do a lot to improve their infrastructure etc., first of all. U seem to worry about a lot of things u have no control over. R u always like this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Without any regulations, inofficially, the Games will be European-American Games with guest visits for the next 40 years. Do you really think all other IOC members that are from Asia, Africa etc will accept this? It's not whether they accept it or not. Remember, the Olympics are nothing but play-time. They are not serious pursuits -- as in, actually feeding people, or curing disease and hunger. So any largesse that are produced from an Olympic Games, is produced from the robust economies of the countries that stage them. And any benefits and extra monies are then distributed by the IOC to the poorer countries; so until Asia & Africa can come forward with equally strong economies that can sustain an Olympic Games or a World Cup, then IOC members from Asia and Africa would do well, to at least recognize that without the efforts of the US and EUrope, and the profits they share -- the state of their sports would be as backwards as they were years ago. Exactly Baron. The IOC's always quick to go to new regions and cities _ Tokyo, Seoul, Beijing _ WHEN THEY'RE ready. They know there's no sense awarding a games to a city that just wouldn't be up to it and would cause big problems if given the responsibility. Zenica, as baron said, you seem to take this all so very, very seriously. The Olympics and the IOC are not the United Nations. It's not about being fair, it's all about getting those countries who are rich enough to throw such a party to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.