Jump to content

How it is going to play out


Recommended Posts

I think we can confirm that this is a three horse race...No disrespect to Madrid, and Moscow...but I can't see any way they can pull this off.

Some points to understand;

NEW RULES....NEW RESULTS

This election is under the NEW Post SLC Scandal IOC rules. Thus nobody is going to shock people here. Moscow isn't buying their way into the race...and the Spanish and JAS aren't going to gift give, and pressure their way into victory.

EXAMPLE: When Nagano was awarded the Games in 98. His former royal dictator urged many to vote for Jaca, Spain in the first round. Knowing it had no chance, but for the sake of not humilating the City and it's bid. When it came down too it, those votes for Jaca nearly cost the best bid on the board (Salt Lake City) an exit in the first round. Eventually it came down to a 7-7 tiebreak between Jaca and Salt Lake...with Salt Lake moving on to the next round. The end result was Nagano over Salt Lake in the final..by a fairly slim margin. But his royal execellency's throne nearly knocked the finalist out of the race early...And OBVIOUSLY had a long term impact on that scandal, and how power players in the IOC work.

Throw in the minimal time IOC members are allowed to spend with bid cities and you have members who know of the Cities..but haven't been lavished as they have in the past. Most of them are voting off of personal preference AND the IOC Evaluation Reports.

NO UPSETS

New York would be the closest thing to an upset in this race.....But in the new format we've had three races. 2006, 2008, and 2010. The 2006 race was your typical IOC vote. Rome was a capable canidate for the 2004 Summer Games..but Athens was the sexy pick. That could also be said about 2010...where Geopolitics, and Toronto's 2008 Bid played a key role in Vancouver beating Peyongchang and leaving the 2012 race as clearly Europe's to lose. 2008...Well, it's clear that it was something that was to nobody's surprise. The IOC nearly went to Beijing in 2000, Clearly showing it's appreciation for a second time bidder, where the pay day could be substantial.

Using that judgement...Paris is the front runner...New York is the "Beijing" type pick. Huge rewards, with less of a gamble..but no Olympic Bid Experience.

This could look more like the 2000 Olympic Bid Ballot then anything else..with Paris and New York close into the final ballot. One a previous bidder, the other a potential gold mine.

THE SECOND ROUND AND MADRID

The key to the whole race is where Madrid falls.....I've already said that they have no chance despite the strong bid....but the job they've done at courting support away from Paris will determine London and New York's chances.

FOUR BIDS...TWO ALLIANCES....ONE RESULT

There are two ways this will play out after Moscow is gone

1) Paris

2) London/NYC

4) Madrid

or

1) Paris

2) London or NYC

3) Madrid

4) NYC or London

The order of the second ballot will set in order how the stones will fall

If it's the first one both New York and London have a fantastic shot depending as long as the Madrid votes don't give Paris a majority. That will be a close call at that time...but if it doesn't...it plays out like this

1) Paris

2) NYC or London

3) NYC or London

Then

A toss up between Paris and the victor of that race....

If it's the second one.....it's safe to assume that Madrid's votes fall mostly to Paris and that the New York/London alliance isn't strong enough to show a credible challenge.

1) Paris

2) NYC or London

3) Madrid

And Paris over NYC or London in the end.

Just for the recond...here's where many of us believe this will break down regionally....

The Americas: New York for the most part

Europe: Mostly Paris, some Madrid, some London

Africa: Mostly Paris, a few for London, NYC, and Madrid

Asia: A few for everybody....I think NYC, and London will see the most

The Commonweath: Mostly London...

And here's where we think votes are going upon elimination

Madrid: Paris

London: NYC

Paris: Not going to happen

Moscow: Divided

NYC London

There seem to be two stacked alliances which is going to pick the host City.....It would be a shock if anything else happened

FIVE SOLUTIONS....FOUR ROUNDS...ONE FAVORITE

There are FIVE ways this could all break down

Chances: Paris 3/5, London 1/5, and NYC 1/5

First...for London

Round One: Paris, London, NYC, Madrid, Moscow

Round Two: Paris, London, NYC, Madrid

Round Three: Paris, London

Round Four: London over Paris

Then for NYC

Round One: Paris, NYC/London, Madrid, Moscow

Round Two: Paris, NYC/London, Madrid

Round Three: Paris, NYC, London

Round Four: NYC over Paris

Now for Paris

Round Two: Paris, NYC, London

Round Three: Paris is the majority

Round Two: Paris, NYC, Madrid

Round Three: Paris, NYC

Round Four: Paris over NYC

Round Two: Paris, London, Madrid

Round Three: Paris, London

Round Four: Paris over London

If Madrid surprises...which it won't...it only helps Paris out.

Just my two cents...

I personally think that Paris wins on the fourth ballot over London...and it will be by 20 or so votes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we can confirm that this is a three horse race...No disrespect to Madrid, and Moscow...but I can't see any way they can pull this off.

Some points to understand;

NEW RULES....NEW RESULTS

This election is under the NEW Post SLC Scandal IOC rules. Thus nobody is going to shock people here. Moscow isn't buying their way into the race...and the Spanish and JAS aren't going to gift give, and pressure their way into victory.

EXAMPLE: When Nagano was awarded the Games in 98. His former royal dictator urged many to vote for Jaca, Spain in the first round. Knowing it had no chance, but for the sake of not humilating the City and it's bid. When it came down too it, those votes for Jaca nearly cost the best bid on the board (Salt Lake City) an exit in the first round. Eventually it came down to a 7-7 tiebreak between Jaca and Salt Lake...with Salt Lake moving on to the next round. The end result was Nagano over Salt Lake in the final..by a fairly slim margin. But his royal execellency's throne nearly knocked the finalist out of the race early...And OBVIOUSLY had a long term impact on that scandal, and how power players in the IOC work.

Throw in the minimal time IOC members are allowed to spend with bid cities and you have members who know of the Cities..but haven't been lavished as they have in the past. Most of them are voting off of personal preference AND the IOC Evaluation Reports.

NO UPSETS

New York would be the closest thing to an upset in this race.....But in the new format we've had three races. 2006, 2008, and 2010. The 2006 race was your typical IOC vote. Rome was a capable canidate for the 2004 Summer Games..but Athens was the sexy pick. That could also be said about 2010...where Geopolitics, and Toronto's 2008 Bid played a key role in Vancouver beating Peyongchang and leaving the 2012 race as clearly Europe's to lose. 2008...Well, it's clear that it was something that was to nobody's surprise. The IOC nearly went to Beijing in 2000, Clearly showing it's appreciation for a second time bidder, where the pay day could be substantial.

Using that judgement...Paris is the front runner...New York is the "Beijing" type pick. Huge rewards, with less of a gamble..but no Olympic Bid Experience.

This could look more like the 2000 Olympic Bid Ballot then anything else..with Paris and New York close into the final ballot. One a previous bidder, the other a potential gold mine.

THE SECOND ROUND AND MADRID

The key to the whole race is where Madrid falls.....I've already said that they have no chance despite the strong bid....but the job they've done at courting support away from Paris will determine London and New York's chances.

FOUR BIDS...TWO ALLIANCES....ONE RESULT

There are two ways this will play out after Moscow is gone

1) Paris

2) London/NYC

4) Madrid

or

1) Paris

2) London or NYC

3) Madrid

4) NYC or London

The order of the second ballot will set in order how the stones will fall

If it's the first one both New York and London have a fantastic shot depending as long as the Madrid votes don't give Paris a majority. That will be a close call at that time...but if it doesn't...it plays out like this

1) Paris

2) NYC or London

3) NYC or London

Then

A toss up between Paris and the victor of that race....

If it's the second one.....it's safe to assume that Madrid's votes fall mostly to Paris and that the New York/London alliance isn't strong enough to show a credible challenge.

1) Paris

2) NYC or London

3) Madrid

And Paris over NYC or London in the end.

Just for the recond...here's where many of us believe this will break down regionally....

The Americas: New York for the most part

Europe: Mostly Paris, some Madrid, some London

Africa: Mostly Paris, a few for London, NYC, and Madrid

Asia: A few for everybody....I think NYC, and London will see the most

The Commonweath: Mostly London...

And here's where we think votes are going upon elimination

Madrid: Paris

London: NYC

Paris: Not going to happen

Moscow: Divided

NYC London

There seem to be two stacked alliances which is going to pick the host City.....It would be a shock if anything else happened

FIVE SOLUTIONS....FOUR ROUNDS...ONE FAVORITE

There are FIVE ways this could all break down

Chances: Paris 3/5, London 1/5, and NYC 1/5

First...for London

Round One: Paris, London, NYC, Madrid, Moscow

Round Two: Paris, London, NYC, Madrid

Round Three: Paris, London

Round Four: London over Paris

Then for NYC

Round One: Paris, NYC/London, Madrid, Moscow

Round Two: Paris, NYC/London, Madrid

Round Three: Paris, NYC, London

Round Four: NYC over Paris

Now for Paris

Round Two: Paris, NYC, London

Round Three: Paris is the majority

Round Two: Paris, NYC, Madrid

Round Three: Paris, NYC

Round Four: Paris over NYC

Round Two: Paris, London, Madrid

Round Three: Paris, London

Round Four: Paris over London

If Madrid surprises...which it won't...it only helps Paris out.

Just my two cents...

I personally think that Paris wins on the fourth ballot over London...and it will be by 20 or so votes

I agree for the most part except on one thing.

the voters who vote for London, NYC, and Madrid will mainly be anti-Paris in the sense that very little of those votes will go onto Paris.

Paris is very much a love it or hate it type of bid. Many people have it on their #1 and many people have it on their #4.

Thus I think for Paris to win this, they need a good chunk of Moscow's votes, and they need a 3rd round exit for NYC. The NYC vote is indifferent to a Paris or London win, and I think even if London gets the majority of those votes, Paris will only need about 10 to push it over the 50+1% it needs to win.

I find it funny how the Americans essentially hold the cards in this race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MOSCOW EXITS ROUND ONE, votes mostly to london and paris

MADRID EXISTS ROUND TWO, votes mostly transferred to London, for the moment i am believer that the london-madrid alliance is true,

NEW YORK makes it to round three but fall short,

LONDON battles it out with Paris and win by a few votes, that in my ideal world

in the real world i think paris will beat london by 11-15 votes in the final round.

Does anyone know if they vote for the winner and then announce the votes in each round then the winner

or do they vote in round one and announce the results after each round???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MOSCOW EXITS ROUND ONE, votes mostly to london and paris

MADRID EXISTS ROUND TWO, votes mostly transferred to London, for the moment i am believer that the london-madrid alliance is true,

NEW YORK makes it to round three but fall short,

LONDON battles it out with Paris and win by a few votes, that in my ideal world

in the real world i think paris will beat london by 11-15 votes in the final round.

Does anyone know if they vote for the winner and then announce the votes in each round then the winner

or do they vote in round one and announce the results after each round???

Mo, They announce the exact tally after a winner has been determined....They will announce (Or at least it's been done in the past) when a city has been eliminated after the round of voting has taken place.

Also...one note I forgot to mention

Rough Call...my %'s for a victory

Paris - 70%

London - 15%

New York - 15%

I don't buy a London-Madrid type of side deal....Nor do I buy a Paris love it or hate it feel in the IOC. Yes..it certanly does exist outside of the voting room....but inside the fact is that Paris is a fantastic bid, and it's the third time they've bid. I think this plays out a little differently if the Brits weren't so busy posing Manchester as a canidate a few years back instead of London. But you can't change history...and that fact really hurts London because as evidenced by Athens, Torino, Beijing, and Vancover....The IOC tends to reward Nations who have either bid unsuccessfully, or bid for a Summer Games with a deserving City, and lost...then put out another City for the smaller Winter Games. Which for those interested means nothing to many IOC Members from warm climates.

The way I see it....if the Brits could throw a Winter Olympic City into the 2014 Mix....It would go Paris, GBR, NYC...etc. But as we know, there isnt' much in terms of a Winter Climate there.

Also...as always, the number of votes which transfer is going to be a majority...There will always be a few stragglers that go the other way. I firmly believe Rogge when he believes that this will come down to a few votes.....But if those few votes will matter in the Final Round remains to be seen...Round Two is the key round...If Madrid survives it....Don't expect it to be a close finish. If New York survives it.....it's anyone's call.

FWIW: I believe there's a French City waiting in the wings for the 2014 Winter Games should Paris fail.....If your sitting in Peyongchang right now...I'm pulling for Paris....I think Sofia would be tough to beat anyways.....but throw in a French City after three failed Parisean attempts, and it's almost a sure thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My God you are an idiot.

The 1998 vote started with SLC and Aosta, Italy getting 15 votes a piece, and then forcing both those two cities into a tiebreak.

SLC never faced Jaca in a vote off, and no bid got only 7 votes in any round - do your bloody research.

Jaca started with 19 votes - which Samaranch was the cause of, but right or wrong, the Italians co-erced a heap of votes to Aosta as well.

Past Votes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My God you are an idiot.

The 1998 vote started with SLC and Aosta, Italy getting 15 votes a piece, and then forcing both those two cities into a tiebreak.

SLC never faced Jaca in a vote off, and no bid got only 7 votes in any round - do your bloody research.

Jaca started with 19 votes - which Samaranch was the cause of, but right or wrong, the Italians co-erced a heap of votes to Aosta as well.

Past Votes

I stand corrected.....

The point doesn't change.....The fact was, Jaca was the worst bid on the board, Salt Lake the best....yet because of his royalty, whatever he liked to be called....Salt Lake was nearly taken out on account of his wishes.

After that first round, Salt Lake made it to the Finals....before falling to Nagano. In what in all reality was a race Salt Lake would never win because it would mean that the 96, and 98 Games would both be in the United States.

Now, is there anything else incorrect sir....Like how London would have been better off if they had bid for previous races instead of Manchester. Or how this is pretty much a three horse race right now....

According to Dick Pound...who was urged by his excellency to vote for Jaca and instead voted for Salt Lake....His holyness was relieved that in the end, that Pound stuck with his mind, instead of the dictator's heart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe "idiot" was to strong a term - will "doofus" suffice in future rants??

There is something to be said about the potential London may have had in 2004 - but that's another topic entirely.

As for 2012, please remember that Moscow and Madrid will also have thier sympathy votes - and this may indeed see a 'sure thing' top tier bid like NYC, London or potentially Paris take a fall.  In fact if Paris isn't the winner, it would be best for them to be ditched first round so then the French can just rant and rave about how the IOC is still corrupt and have ignored the strongest bid, yada yada...  instead of being beaten by London or NYC - which would be a bitter pill to swallow.

I too expect Moscow will bow out first, but I secretly hope one of the big 3 get bounced first...

Also I really am sick of this "it's Europes turn" sh!t the media is pushing.  Um Europe had 2004 and will have 2006.  I think North America has a stronger claim for a Summer Games with or without Vancouver 2010.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe "idiot" was to strong a term - will "doofus" suffice in future rants??

There is something to be said about the potential London may have had in 2004 - but that's another topic entirely.

As for 2012, please remember that Moscow and Madrid will also have thier sympathy votes - and this may indeed see a 'sure thing' top tier bid like NYC, London or potentially Paris take a fall.  In fact if Paris isn't the winner, it would be best for them to be ditched first round so then the French can just rant and rave about how the IOC is still corrupt and have ignored the strongest bid, yada yada...  instead of being beaten by London or NYC - which would be a bitter pill to swallow.

I too expect Moscow will bow out first, but I secretly hope one of the big 3 get bounced first...

Also I really am sick of this "it's Europes turn" sh!t the media is pushing.  Um Europe had 2004 and will have 2006.  I think North America has a stronger claim for a Summer Games with or without Vancouver 2010.

See, you know I respect your opinion....so I take no offense for calling me an idiot...I blanked...I deserved it...It was kinda a kick in my own behind

That being said

The whole Europe's Turn stems from as you and I both know...how the 2010 Election played out. If it was Peyongchang over Vancouver....Isn't it a Toronto-New York-Paris race right now instead of the three European Cities, Moscow, and New York. And didn't we all seem to agree that Toronto had perhaps the strongest bid, and the bid experience from 96, and 08..to win.

Two North American Cities with fantastic credentials were hurt by the 2010 choice of Vancouver....not just New York.

I don't see the geopolitical implications of selecting Athens....The IOC was lucky it worked out for the best and that Athens wasn't selected to host in 1996. But Greece and the Olympic Movement do go hand in hand...And even if Paris is selected there have been as many European Summer Games hosts as we'd like to believe..In the last oh..52 years if Paris wins..it would be Rome 60, Munich 72, Barcelona 92, Athens 04, Paris 12 (Moscow wouldn't count)...Five as opposed to North America's Four...Mexico City, Montreal, Los Angeles, and Atlanta.

I also would just love to see Paris get knocked out first....If that means we just hand them 2014 to Anecy?(sp)? right on the spot..that's fine. But I'd love nothing more then to see Chirac humilated like that.

But I just don't see it happening....

The other interesting point with New York's bid is that the IOC would make a crapload more on it's TOP Programme then it made in Atlanta. Given that ACOG and previous OCOG's were given a better cut then they are now percentagewise...It also has a lot of those TOP Clients expiring following 2008.

This would also explain why the USOC is pleading for 2012, or 2016. Other signed clients of the OCOG's...(I.E. Not TOP Clients) They generate revenue for the NOC involved. In this case the USOC would get a major cut, and the OCOG not as much. With NYC being said City...and bidding wars ready to break out..the USOC is looking at a huge payday from the New York Olympic Experience.

Also..with the TV Rights deal with NBC through 2012 already...and the IOC keeping roughly 60% of that I believe...It just makes more sense to start the bidding for 2016-2018-and 2020 upon announcing New York as the host city in 2009. Why risk losing that gigantic payday by picking New York now?

I see more of a Capetown treatment for New York...seeing as they'll make the Top Three....Get a "Thanks for the Bid..Try Again" going away gift. And bid successfully with a much bigger IOC payoff down the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing one of the previous posts, I will be surprised if there was a tie in one of the ballots. With this kind of 5 cities on the ballot, it would be hard for me to see that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see NYC in exactly the same situation as Paris was in 2001 (for the 2008 Games).  Considered one of the Top 3, it has enough little blackmarks against it to be told to wait 4 more years and be the Olympic Games in waiting.

Paris is the Beijing.  They may not have it as easy as Beijing with a clear majority on the second ballot, but they certainly aren't as controversial as Beijing.  People won't be marching in the streets of Singapore with "Free Bordeaux" signs (except maybe as a last ditch bribe).

Sadly, London is the Toronto.  A really good bid and the one they'd probably pick if Paris wasn't on its third bid.  But while Canadian geopolitics took Toronto out of this race, European geopolitics will take London out of the next race.

Still this is a mystery.  One of the tells will be in their eyes.  Jean Chretien, former Prime Minister of Canada, said the difference between his IOC presentations in 2001 (on behalf of Toronto) and in 2003 (on behalf of Vancouver) was that in 2003, they did one thing they didn't do in Moscow - they looked him in the eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...