Jump to content

The 2016 Vote Predictions Thread

Sir Rols

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply
It really seems that it depends on who will be cutted first...

It's a good line of thoughts...

I disagree. When it comes down to a simple majority, it shouldn't matter who gets cut and in what order - if more people back Chicago or prefer it as their second choice, it won't matter if Madrid goes first. Similarly, if more people like Rio as their first or second choice, it won't matter if Tokyo goes first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. When it comes down to a simple majority, it shouldn't matter who gets cut and in what order - if more people back Chicago or prefer it as their second choice, it won't matter if Madrid goes first. Similarly, if more people like Rio as their first or second choice, it won't matter if Tokyo goes first.

It's true too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with the idea that Madrid and Tokyo's race for third will impact Chicago vs. Rio.

First off, there is no guarantee that all Madrid's supporters will back Rio or that all Tokyo's supporters will back Chicago (though I suspect the general trend will hold).

I think the first round could be EXTREMELY close, bordering on a four-way tie. If, for example, Tokyo is eliminated first, Chicago is not going to pick up enough votes to win in the second round. I think the same would be true of Madrid/Rio. The order of the elimination of Tokyo and Madrid is not going to have a fundamental impact on who wins in the final. (Of course, all of this is assuming that it is indeed Chicago and Rio in the final. Maybe Tokyo or Madrid has a surprise in store?)

To complicate matters further, if you look at previous votes, it's pretty obvious that some IOC members cast what I will call "pity votes" in the first round to make the contest seem more balanced. Then they show their true colors in the second round. (I think this is less likely to happen in this race because of the overall quality of the bids, but it's still possible.) The reason you can tell this happens is that very often a bid will receive FEWER votes in the second round than in the first. If all the IOC members are voting their true preferences throughout, the total votes for the remaining bids should at least hold steady, if not increase. Of course we can't rule out the possibility that a few might just change their minds...

It's going to come down to a lot of IOC members' second and maybe third choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rio in second ballot by a couple over the majority needed, getting the votes needed to claim victory from initial Tokyo/Madrid supporters (whichever city is out in the first ballot) with ChiTown voters staying put. Doubt Tokyo or Madrid will attract enough votes in either the probable final 3 situations to make a sizeable third amount.

And, this 2016 vote is cool and all, but Beyonce had one of the best videos of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a Rio supporter with biased way of thougths but I really think Rio can win in the second or third ballot with good diference of votes.

South American never hosted card will play a significant role on it.

That's my guess based on all I've reading in the last two years (unfortunatelly I don't understand those japanese characters).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My prediction

First Round

28 - Rio de Janeiro

26 - Chicago

23 - Tokyo

21 - Madrid

Second Round

41 - Rio de Janeiro

30 - Tokyo

29 - Chicago

Third Round

The Franco-Italiano-Japaneseo-Deutscho-Anti-Koreano-Anti-Americaso-Pro-Africao alliance forms resulting in

52 - Tokyo

50 - Rio

Paving the way for a Munich victory for 2018 and an all-out-war for the 2020 games between Rio de Janeiro, Cape Town, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Chicago/NYC/LA, Toronto, Baku, Istanbul, Dubau, Doha, Nairobi fight to the death.

Go Tokyo, its your birthday. Domo arigatou gozaimasu

I mean the Japanese shocked the Olympic world with a surprise victory in 1991, why not 2009.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Chicago (the best bid) dropped first

Obama put his foot in it on Leno; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHntwoAMq1I...feature=related

2. 3 rounds sudden death

Madrid (the best 2nd best bid) gone next, too much Europe

3. Final round Tokyo Vs Rio

Toss up here.

Tokyo has a better bid and can pull it off, but we need to give South America a chance too...

Rio gets it with the worst bid so the diversity is felt...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What, my thread wasn't good enough? ;)

First round: hasta la vista Madrid

Second round: Sayonara Tokyo

Third round: l8r Chicago and Bom dias Rio!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because there is only one day left, I think the IOC has better things to do than read our forums....

I am going to come clean and post my true feelings and expectations for this race.

1.) I DO SUPPORT CHICAGO. Ten years ago I thought it would be a wonderful Olympic host. The world has not yet discovered the city as an international destination and it is absolutely delightful. The Games would be fantastic. I never could get excited about New York 2012, but I do have real confidence in Chicago. As an American, I also find that patriotism kicks in and I want my country to have the honor of hosting.

2.) THE UNOFFICIAL POLICY OF CONTINENTAL ROTATION IS GOOD. The Olympics must be a global event. They should not be reserved for particular continents or countries. This is the reason why neither Madrid nor Tokyo nor (I fear) Chicago will win. Tokyo is too close to Beijing. Madrid is too close to London. The U.S. has hosted eight times -- including Atlanta '96 and Salt Lake City '02. The technical merit of the bids is irrelevant. All three of these choices would be redundant in different ways.

3.) I BELIEVE RIO WILL WIN. The "new frontier" card is not a gimmick -- it is real. The question is not whether Rio's bid is the best bid technically. Truthfully, I do not believe it is. Despite what the evaluation report says, Rio's bid is unquestionably the riskiest. As I said, the question is not whether Rio's is the best bid technically -- the question is whether it is GOOD ENOUGH. I believe it is good enough. I believe Rio will require much more oversight than the other bids. I believe that all the promised infrastructure improvements are unlikely to be completed. I believe it is very possible that the Games in Rio will be "less polished" than Games in the other three cities. But I'm not sure this really matters. I think the IOC will overlook it.

The Olympics are fundamentally a global event and they must encompass the globe. Rio offers not only geographical variety, but cultural variety as well -- particularly in comparison to recent hosts. This will be good for the Olympic movement. Rio is also in a favorable time zone for American tv audiences and, though the IOC will not make as much money as they would if the Games were in Chicago, they will make more than if the Games were in Madrid or Tokyo. Rio will have a responsibility, however, to manage the money and the organization as well as possible so that the people of Rio actually experience some benefit from the Games.

4.) I BELIEVE THE U.S. SHOULD AND WILL HOST ANOTHER SOG RELATIVELY SOON. It is very important that the IOC keep American audiences engaged in the Games in order to maintain American sponsorship. Plus, the IOC can rely on the U.S. to stage solid Games. If Chicago narrowly loses this race, the U.S. will be in very good position the next time it bids. I doubt the U.S. will pursue a Winter Games. I think the focus will remain on the Summer Games and my bet is that the year will be 2024.


First out: Tokyo.

Number of Rounds: 3 (possibly with tie-breaks)

Winner: Rio, by just a few votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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

  • Create New...