Jump to content

Could Tokyo Be Cut First?


Recommended Posts

While Tokyo seems to have a flawless technical bid, it seems that it has the least excitement (even on this forum - it has by far the least replies).

Do you think that the most global and strongest economic city of the four could be cut first?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply
While Tokyo seems to have a flawless technical bid, it seems that it has the least excitement (even on this forum - it has by far the least replies).

Do you think that the most global and strongest economic city of the four could be cut first?

Every city could leave the vote at the first round... This election is much more harder that the one 4 years ago.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that any city can be cut first, but I think Tokyo and Chicago are the most vulnerable in the first round given the large block of Euro IOC delegates that could support Madrid (or even Rio), and the American nations will most likely go with Brazil (with Canada as an exception).

What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do these people continue to post repetitive rubbish all day long!! Don't they have better things to do in life?

True!

Is more interesting criticize singers of the videos of candidates, for example. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

each City can win, but also can go out first

it is really a dead-race imo

I agree that any city can be cut first, but I think Tokyo and Chicago are the most vulnerable in the first round given the large block of Euro IOC delegates that could support Madrid (or even Rio), and the American nations will most likely go with Brazil (with Canada as an exception).

What do you think?

i don´t think all European IOC members will go with Madrid

because a Madrid win would destroy European hopes for few years, back to back games in europe would mean no chance for Paris and all other euroepan cities for the games in 2020 and even 2024

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with BaronIV... it's either gonna be the Europeans or the Japanese cut first. The IOC must know that it's time to bring the Summer Olympics back to the Western Hemisphere (they've been ignoring this side of the world long enough already). And if they still wanna snub the U.S., they still have Brazil as as good secondary option (not to mention "the first" factor for South America).

And it's been discussed many times b4 that the IOC members don't necessarily vote based on their continental relation in a certain race. On the contrary, they would most likely vote for their continental interest for 'future races', i.e: European strategy (placing bids from Paris, Berlin & Rome in a better position for 2020 & considering we'll have 2012 already on European soil, which would make a Euro 2016 Games highly unlikely [not to mention Sochi 2014 thrown in the mix there, too]).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tokyo could be the first cut because....

1. IOC may not want the Summer games to go to the Far East so soon after the Beijing Olympics

2. IOC may not want to eliminate Pyeongchang from the Winter Olympic Race for 2018 (If Toyo is selected as host, Pyeongchang has no chance for a Victory)

3. IOC may want to give the games to a new city (A city that has never hosted the games before)

However Tokyo will fair well in the race because....

1. The plans for the Olympics are very compact

2. The city has had the games previously.

But I believe that the first city that is most likely to be eliminated is....

1. Rio...because the country isn't really rich, and ethically, they should spend their money of more important things

2. Madrid...because after London, IOC will want to vote for a city outside of Europe

.....and since both Rio and Madrid are cities that some would regard as having similar culture, it is likely that the votes may back one of the two cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tokyo could be the first cut because....

1. IOC may not want the Summer games to go to the Far East so soon after the Beijing Olympics

2. IOC may not want to eliminate Pyeongchang from the Winter Olympic Race for 2018 (If Toyo is selected as host, Pyeongchang has no chance for a Victory)

3. IOC may want to give the games to a new city (A city that has never hosted the games before)

However Tokyo will fair well in the race because....

1. The plans for the Olympics are very compact

2. The city has had the games previously.

But I believe that the first city that is most likely to be eliminated is....

1. Rio...because the country isn't really rich, and ethically, they should spend their money of more important things

2. Madrid...because after London, IOC will want to vote for a city outside of Europe

.....and since both Rio and Madrid are cities that some would regard as having similar culture, it is likely that the votes may back one of the two cities.

China hosted the games in 2008.

Today, Brazil is a country of middle class. The Program for the Acceleration of Growth (PAC) calls for a total of 504 billion real (235 billion U.S. dollars) through 2010 to be invested in building and repairing highways, airports and ports nationwide, boosting energy development in the north, and providing housing, water and sewage systems that will benefit poor Brazilians.

I think, we can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and since both Rio and Madrid are cities that some would regard as having similar culture, it is likely that the votes may back one of the two cities.

Sure! Rio de Janeiro is a spanish speaking city with bullfightings all around and some are proposing a name change to Rio de Enero. And I heard Madrid's Carnival and Bossa Nova are legendary, as well as it's proximity to Lisbon makes it the largest lusophone city outside Portugal. BTW, Spain has already over 20 gold medals in the 2009 Lusophony Games, currently being hosted by Lisbon.

Check it: http://www.lisboa2009.org/

Now seriously: I have no idea about where this Brazil-Spain cultural similarity came from. As I've said before, France, The Netherlands and even England have more entries in our history books than Spain. Please, let's check our sources...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, in the Games Bids School:

Evaluation of student: The Hero

knowledge about the Brazilian economy: note zero (0)

knowledge of Brazilian culture: note zero (0)

knowledge about the power of Brazil: note zero (0)

Disapproved. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay... so I may be wrong about the exact make up of Rio and Madrid.

But if you really generalise the cities, then you have the following:

Angolo- Saxon City: Chicago

Far East Asian City: Tokyo

Spanish/Latin City: Rio and Madrid

So my point is that there is likely to be a split in the voting, at least in the first round. And if one of the two is eliminated, it is likely that the other city may get to the final round and possobly win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will be Madrid or Chicago. Madrid wont get much support from Europe and South America. London2012 and the way Spain handles the doping issue (compared to the UK, FRA, ITA or GER), are the biggest disadvantages.

Chicago? Well, it has the charm of Gelsenkirchen, Sheffield, Lille or Naples. The US can do better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's unfair. Look at the images coming from Chicago of their plans. Sailing across the harbour with skyscrapers in the background, the Olympic island, the quirky tennis venue with the church next door, the venues right in the city minutes walks away from its attractions. Comparing it to those cities is ridiculous!

Chicago is in the second tier of world cities along with the likes of Madrid in my opinion. A games there isn't a bad idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...1. Rio...because the country isn't really rich, and ethically, they should spend their money of more important things

And China is rich?

And Greece? And South Korea (in 1988)??? And Mexico???

Brazil's GDP (PPP) 2008: 1,998 trillon US dollars... 7th in the world...

C'mon, be serious at least...

There is nothing in the IOC rules that say only rich countries can bid...

It's a prejudicial comment!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's unfair. Look at the images coming from Chicago of their plans. Sailing across the harbour with skyscrapers in the background, the Olympic island, the quirky tennis venue with the church next door, the venues right in the city minutes walks away from its attractions. Comparing it to those cities is ridiculous!

Chicago is in the second tier of world cities along with the likes of Madrid in my opinion. A games there isn't a bad idea.

Maybe you are right. But when I think about an American city with some kind of flair, it is LA or SF maybe even Washington DC. But I have never been to US so far. No one has to agree with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing in the IOC rules that say only rich countries can bid...

It's a prejudicial comment!

No, there isn't...but don't you think the IOC would be irresponsible and with no conscience if they awarded their billion-dollar baby to a country that can ill afford to host it?

But then. Brazil is doing well economically, danny, so why are you taking offence at the statement? I think Hero was simply stating a matter of fact which makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for the heck of it I thought I'd go back to the topic of this thread. At the risk of offending all the Tokyo-philes out there, as of now I expect Tokyo to be cut first. The bid is generating far less enthusiasm than any of the others. Judging by the style of the bid book and evaluation visit photos, Tokyo's whole approach is elegantly minimalistic. Unfortunately, the minimalism accidentally seems to reinforce the lack of excitement. The bid seems technically solid but bland. In a tight race between four capable candidates, somebody has to fall first and my bet is that it will be Tokyo. Nobody's going to have the heart to squash Rio right out of the gate unless they falter badly in the evaluation report. I can't imagine they would throw Obama's support back in his face by bouncing Chicago first. Although it seems highly unlikely that the Games would return to Europe, Madrid's bid is excellent, they're a repeat bidder and the IOC is disproportionately European. So, yes. Tokyo out first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here in the UK we will probably spend round £12 billion on the games, and that figure is not likely to stay still. And although it is great to be the host city, after the games are gone, people will make up their own minds whether the games were worth it or not.

The improvements to tranport and public services, will be an advantage, but if there are empty facilities, well that will be a waste.

Therefore it is best that countries that are more richer, should host the games, as it is easier for them to do so.

Although Mexico City hosted the Games in 1968, there was violence when students protested before the games started.

Also Brazil will have the World Cup in 2014, so it would be very expensive for Brazil to host two major events in two years. (but some of you may say that Mexico and Germany were able in the late 60's and earlier 70's).

And with the global recesssion...I think it is fair to give major hoting events to different countries and cities. (Again just an opinion)

on the topic of Tokyo to be cut first....I don't think they will.

I believe that they could still have a chance at winning, and wouldn't be surprisd if they did win.

well....there is only another 43 days to go

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...