Athensfan Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Chicago was just unlucky to be eliminated first. Looking at the voting it's obvious that no city was going to beat Rio - particularly when Tokyo had already hosted a Games, Spain had hosted as recently as 1992 and the United States had hosted Olympic Games eight times (which was all clearly pointed out in the Rio presentation for any IOC members who may have forgotten!).Rio not only convincingly defeated Chicago, but also convincingly defeated the other two cities - even if USOC relations were very positive and/or US foreign policy had been less aggressive lately, Chicago may have lasted longer, but it would not have influenced the final result. Just as 2012 was destined for Europe, as soon as Rio made the shortlist, 2016 was destined for South America. I think you're right in saying that it was Rio's time. Even if the USOC were buddy-buddy with the IOC, they would not have won. However, I don't believe they would have been eliminated first with only 18 votes. There is a message in that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stir.ts Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 The unexpected happens, I was hoping for an unexpected victory for Chicago, it was as likely to happen as what did, so I don't think we were wrong for supporting Chicago. The bid was exceptional and I'm so glad we were there! I'm not discouraged by the IOCs vote; it could be looked at as a vote of confidence, if you believe the theory that contingencies assumed the US would get through round 1, and they could to donate their 1st round Chicago vote to the less advantaged. What happened may encourage more honest early voting in the future. I don't know if the US should put forth a 2020 bid, I don't think a great bid would be too soon. No matter what happens we can expect the unexpected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoFan90 Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Hey...Chicago 2016's loss to me was a huge blow...especially with me following the bid, donating, and supporting it since 2006. But i see some glimmer in what they had done, and support the group World Sport Chicago and believe that the pride of my hometown and its sister state of Wisconsin which I live in now and would have hosted cycling events has grown tremendously these past 4 years. But i dont believe Chicago is out and done....in my opinion i think Chicago should possibly bid for the 2013 or 2015 IOC Session, thus allowing the Olympic Family to view and become comfortable with the city...even though IOC sessions are ususally reserved for smaller nations. I think the USOC has to come to realize that they must return to the try with the same city approach that they used with Los Angeles. The IOC WILL NOT be comfortable with another new city. Then..once the IOC is comfortable...bid again with a stronger more prepared bid in 2024....though i still think Chicago would have a chance in 2020. I congratulate Rio and see great potential in Chicago in the years ahead...Chicago 2016 was only the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceNarcissus Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 The USA should concentrate on another winter bid sometime in the 20s. The summer games are full of potential non-repeating cities now but still only a couple dozen countries are capable of a good winter games. What with Vancouver hosting, another European city coming soon, and likely PC being a bigger contender than ever for 2018 I don't see why the Americans shouldn't use the opportunity to gain more trust from the IOC. Unfortunately this means no large city like Chicago or New York would get the summer games for quite a long time, but it's a slow process for anybody. Just look at Spain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 The USA should concentrate on another winter bid sometime in the 20s. The summer games are full of potential non-repeating cities now but still only a couple dozen countries are capable of a good winter games. What with Vancouver hosting, another European city coming soon, and likely PC being a bigger contender than ever for 2018 I don't see why the Americans shouldn't use the opportunity to gain more trust from the IOC.Unfortunately this means no large city like Chicago or New York would get the summer games for quite a long time, but it's a slow process for anybody. Just look at Spain. I disagree, Ice. I think the U.S. should avoid WOG's like the plague. The SOG's are the main attraction, the big show, the big money-maker and far more popular with American audiences. If we get a WOG first, we'll have to wait eons for a SOG and that will be bad news for American sponsors, audiences -- even athletes. NO WOGS FOR THE USA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 But i dont believe Chicago is out and done....in my opinion i think Chicago should possibly bid for the 2013 or 2015 IOC Session, thus allowing the Olympic Family to view and become comfortable with the city...even though IOC sessions are ususally reserved for smaller nations. I think the USOC has to come to realize that they must return to the try with the same city approach that they used with Los Angeles. The IOC WILL NOT be comfortable with another new city. I heartily agree. I think an IOC session would be an excellent first step of good faith and relationship for the US before another bid. And your case for Chicago makes lots of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stir.ts Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I don't get why people insist that the 1996 Olympics left no legacy for Atlanta - has anyone on here actually been to Atlanta post games? The Olympics really helped improved Atlanta and North Georgie's infastructure, it made the city expand the airport and MARTA, it put them as a respected major metropolis on the U.S. map, it has become one of the fastest growing cities in the U.S. and a major business center, it left a sports and cultural legacy for the city of Atlanta, helped improve facilties at GA Tech and GA State, revilitalized impoversiehd areas, and finally it proved that the Southern USA does have multicultural and booming cities and that it is not some backward civilization that Hollywood sometimes depicts it as. My mate from New Zealand had this to say about Atlanta : "I had no idea that Atlanta would be so metropolitan and big" Atlanta may not be a NYC or Chicago but it's certainly no Oklahoma City or Wichita totally agree, it's a great city and tons of fun to visit. But that cauldron had to be one of the worst ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braz Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Remember: a mere couple of votes changed from Tokyo to Chicago could have changed the whole "narrative" (to use an Obama-style word) of the voting process. Which is why I think this point should not be disregarded: Chicago’s Loss: Is Passport Control to Blame? http://intransit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10...ntrol-to-blame/ Make sure to read the comments, most of which merely confirm the fact. The question from the Pakistani IOC member seemed shallow at the time, but he was right: entering into the United States can be “a rather harrowing experience.” Obama's vacuous feel-good answer certainly did not help. Most IOC members or their relatives have already had that experience and, if they come from non-visa-waiver countries, such as Pakistan, "harrowing" is a gentle word to describe the whole process. Maybe there was no influence of this in the whole matter. Probably not. But it certainly did not help. The US should really try to improve this process: security is paramount, but it can be accomplished with professionalism, gentleness, and civility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cauê Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Why a different candidate for the next american application? For me, Chicago deserves a new chance. Not for 2020 but for 2024 or 2028. For 2020, will be in Europe... Rome or Paris. And, for 2024, for me, Cape Town or an american city (I prefer Chicago now). But, if Cape Town wins for 2024, Chicago 2028! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cauê Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Now, for olympics in USA, I prefer Chicago for 2024 or 2028! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTimeOnly Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I disagree, Ice. I think the U.S. should avoid WOG's like the plague. The SOG's are the main attraction, the big show, the big money-maker and far more popular with American audiences. If we get a WOG first, we'll have to wait eons for a SOG and that will be bad news for American sponsors, audiences -- even athletes. NO WOGS FOR THE USA! Fully agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justinslot Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Remember: a mere couple of votes changed from Tokyo to Chicago could have changed the whole "narrative" (to use an Obama-style word) of the voting process.Which is why I think this point should not be disregarded: Chicago’s Loss: Is Passport Control to Blame? http://intransit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10...ntrol-to-blame/ Make sure to read the comments, most of which merely confirm the fact. Lord those comments are depressing. Just from my own experiences (and I'm an American)--I can't tell you how much friendlier the process is to cross from the US to Canada than the reverse. I mean the uniforms alone--the Canadian guards dress like police officers. The American guards dress like the SWAT team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie4040 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I think Lake Tahoe & Big Sky would be Americas best bets for a WOG. Honolulu, Denver, & Austin represent the few major US cities that would allow for the most exciting and freshest bids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Honolulu, Denver, & Austin represent the few major US cities that would allow for the most exciting and freshest bids You WOULD pick just abut the three most untenable cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie4040 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 You WOULD pick just abut the three most untenable cities. I'm just picking 3 fun cities that haven't been bid yet, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I'm just picking 3 fun cities that haven't been bid yet, that's all. Yep, there's a reason for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Well it took 2 previous from Australian cities in 1992 and 1996 for get Sydney the 2000 games. San Francisco 2020 anybody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 San Francisco 2020 anybody? Now THAT could get my juices flowing for the USA in 2020. Sheesh. If 2020 ended up being San Francisco versus Rome versus Tokyo versus Capetown, I don't know which bid I'd get behind more. What a luscious line-up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted October 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 And another serious stadium problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTimeOnly Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 The American guards dress like the SWAT team. Big deal. Every been to Paris? Police roaming around with automatic weapons everywhere. Standing in front of the Hotel Crillion and near Notre Dame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinderella Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I've said it 1000 times. The rings are a logo. Not indicative of a policy. In the very real world, North and South America are very different and separate continents. At least, in the very real European world the students are told that America is just ONE continent divided into North, Central and South. I don't see therefore that 2020 should be for North America, but Asia/Europe. And what city is the best for this combination? Obviously Istanbul, that also would be a sharp contrast to Rio 2016. USA should wait until 2024 IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Who cares whether it's one or two continents? The IOC will decide that it's two if they want USA to win in 2020, or one if they don't. Neither result would be "wrong". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTimeOnly Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 At least, in the very real European world the students are told that America is just ONE continent divided into North, Central and South. Do they teach that there is only one continent, known as "Eurasia" as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainad Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Do they teach that there is only one continent, known as "Eurasia" as well? In a geographical sense,that is correct.But Europe has long been recognized as a separate entity politically,culturally and environmentally ever since ancient times! I believe the same is the case for the two Americas.True they are connected geographically by the narrow isthmus of Panama but they are worlds apart in the same way as Europe differs from Asia.Africa and Asia are also geographically connected by the equally narrow isthmus of Suez but no-one would try to argue that they are one continent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucas_leobas Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 In Brazil, we study Europe and Asia as different continents, but America as just one, subdivided in North (including Mexico), Central (the isthmus and the Caribbean) and South America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.