Jump to content

Will there be a late bidder in the 2020 race?


Soaring

  

35 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think there will be a late bidder in the 2020 race?

    • Yes
      18
    • No
      17


Recommended Posts

lol ... dude we have a score bout 6. something at 2008 race and drop to 4,9 at 2012 :D so why not dubai:D

Well, the field between cities is not much different than 2016, in 2012 it was a much better field than 2008.

Doha is hosting a little thing called the World Cup, and no doubt have developed plans to tout in their application. So I don't think we will be seeing their score drop. But hey, maybe I can be wrong in my "assumptions". Which is really all they are :D .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

No, I never wrote off their chances. Simply stated that we shouldn't be writing off Doha's chances at making the cut. I know there is no real chance of them actually winning.

Yes, I am sure they are better.

No, not at all.

This is what you said, you wrote "that Baku is not getting short-listed, while Istanbul has a 'chance' in joining them".

If this is not undermining Istanbul's chances, then I don't know what is. Especially when you're now agreeing that their technical capabilities have also improved over the course of the years, alongside Doha. So in essense, lumping Istanbul in with Baku, virtually is absurd & it does make it seem like you're, at least indirectly, writing the Turks off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if so could u please chnage a a reply for me :) if its possible to u :D i can give you my password with pm ..:/

Wouldn't work either...because THE ACCOUNT has to be a Premium one; NOT just the member. Just send a PM to Moderator, have him delete it and then post the correct one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what you said, you wrote "that Baku is not getting short-listed, while Istanbul has a 'chance' in joining them".

If this is not undermining Istanbul's chances, then I don't know what is. Especially when you're now agreeing that their technical capabilities have also improved over the course of the years, alongside Doha. So in essense, lumping Istanbul in with Baku, virtually is absurd & it does make it seem like you're, at least indirectly, writing the Turks off.

Technically, all of the cities have a "chance" at not being short listed. It is just the way the process is. It is highly unlikely Rome, Madrid and Tokyo would be at any risk of not being short listed though.

The point that I was trying to make is that "in my opinion" (note that), I think Doha has a much better chance at being short listed this time around. If you are going to write off Doha, I think that is not looking at the total picture which was the IOC executive board approving their new dates, which was really the sole reason given for their defeat in 2016.

Then in my opinion, Istanbul has a greater chance at joining Baku in not being shortlisted, because the IOC essentially gave a signal of their approval of Doha. Now, they might come up with new reasons not to shortlist them this time around, but I guess that is the nature of the beast.

I have said more than once, what seems to me to be the likeliest scenario (if the race remains at the current six cities), is that Baku will be the only city to not make the shortlist.

I don't know what else you want me to say...

Wouldn't work either...because THE ACCOUNT has to be a Premium Member. Just send a PM to Moderator, have him delete it and then post the correct one.

Just think if we had the power to edit people's responses! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't work either...because THE ACCOUNT has to be a Premium one; NOT just the member. Just send a PM to Moderator, have him delete it and then post the correct one.

why am i that much stupid tonight* i just reply it and just get the accounts different :/ i think it was a hot day today for running :( my brain cells not working

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the IOC wants to shortlist only 4 and not single Baku out, both Doha and Istanbul are just as likely as joining Baku on the loser's bench.

Even if Doha's main reason of elimination in 2016 was the schedule, it doesn't mean this time they are good to go. In 2016 only three bids have higher score than Doha and this time it could be 4. It's all relative.

If the IOC mandates only 4 to go on, even if Doha scores an 8 they could still be gone as long as there are four others scoring higher.

That goes for Istanbul too. If the shortlist process is purely technical, they may be outscored by Doha and not make it to the candidate round no matter how culturally attractive Istanbul is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Istanbul meets the technical benchmark set forth by the Executive Board (& I don't C why they wouldn't, with their great improvements on infrastructure over the years since their last attempts) then the Turks are in. Even if it then means that they have to include Doha because they "scored higher" for the sake of inclusion.

There was even an article that someone posted here like last month about how an IOC member, or someone within the realm, was mentioning how Istanbul's 2020 chances seem much higher than in any of their previous bids. So I just can't see the IOC suddenly renouncing a viable & compelling candidate, like Istanbul, for the mere sake of a technicality to admit Doha. In order for that to happen, Istanbul's proposal would literally have to suck, & I don't see that as an outcome. I seriously doubt that the IOC would be that foolish if Istanbul's plans are adequate & comprehensive enough. It's not like they're a Baku. Far from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Istanbul meets the technical benchmark set forth by the Executive Board (& I don't C why they wouldn't, with their great improvements on infrastructure over the years since their last attempts) then the Turks are in. Even if it then means that they have to include Doha because they "scored higher" for the sake of inclusion.

There was even an article that someone posted here like last month about how an IOC member, or someone within the realm, was mentioning how Istanbul's 2020 chances seem much higher than in any of their previous bids. So I just can't see the IOC suddenly renouncing a viable & compelling candidate, like Istanbul, for the mere sake of a technicality to admit Doha. In order for that to happen, Istanbul's proposal would literally have to suck, & I don't see that as an outcome. I seriously doubt that the IOC would be that foolish if Istanbul's plans are adequate & comprehensive enough. It's not like they're a Baku. Far from it.

This goes back to my question in another thread. If enough capable cities are bidding, some cities have to be dropped. If Toronto, Los Angeles, Berlin, Paris also entered the race along with Rome, Madrid, Tokyo, Istanbul, Doha, and Baku, who would you shortlist? In that situation I can totally see Istanbul and some other major cities not going through even if they more than meet the technical benchmark.

In the current situation, it all depends on if IOC wants to single out Baku and let it be the only one dropped, or a application phase death match between Istanbul and Doha.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This goes back to my question in another thread. If enough capable cities are bidding, some cities have to be dropped. If Toronto, Los Angeles, Berlin, Paris also entered the race along with Rome, Madrid, Tokyo, Istanbul, Doha, and Baku, who would you shortlist? In that situation I can totally see Istanbul and some other major cities not going through even if they more than meet the technical benchmark.

In the current situation, it all depends on if IOC wants to single out Baku and let it be the only one dropped, or a application phase death match between Istanbul and Doha.

Well, it's sorta two-fold. While the evaluation for the shortlist is a bit of a technical benchmark now, ensuring those who make the candidate list are capable hosts, part of the reason for its introduction in the first place was to cut back the huge fields of 10 or more from the 1990s and turn of the century, and get rid of frivolous bids from the likes of Havana and Tashkent, and so make the final fields were more manageable.

You're right, if this was a huge field with the likes of Berlin, Paris and Chicago et al as well as those already in, then they probably would have to be quite ruthles and set a high benchmark for who they'll cut. But on this field of six, provided they all pass "technical quality control", IMO there wouldn't be a huge need to cut any.

As to Istanbul - well, they made the benchmark once (for 2008), and missed out on 2012 when they were just one contender from a very big applicant field. I assume their technical capabilities will probably be improved and tweaked a bit since those earlier bids, so I can't see why they'd be at any great risk of being dropped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also the issue of the evaluation commission going through six cities, prepare six formal reports, and have to sit through six presentations during election day. Not fun for the IOC.

I guess it happened back in 1996. I was too young for that bid, was there some sort of evaluation commission back then similar to today? AFAIK the whole concept started after the SLC scandal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any minimum mark a city needs to score to be shortlisted? I once read somewhere that no cities scoring less than 6 can be shortlisted, but I don't know if that's a "rule" or if the IOC can shortlist whoever they want, no matter the score.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This goes back to my question in another thread. If enough capable cities are bidding, some cities have to be dropped. If Toronto, Los Angeles, Berlin, Paris also entered the race along with Rome, Madrid, Tokyo, Istanbul, Doha, and Baku, who would you shortlist? In that situation I can totally see Istanbul and some other major cities not going through even if they more than meet the technical benchmark.

In the current situation, it all depends on if IOC wants to single out Baku and let it be the only one dropped, or a application phase death match between Istanbul and Doha.

Well, that's just it. There are no other "capable" cities in this round. This is the same reasoning some Americans & Canadians tried using for their respective NOC's to submit bids cause of the supposedly low number of expected applicants for 2020.

And if South Africa had finally decided that they were bidding for 2020, I would've said then that the IOC would've been hard-pressed as to which "new frontier" bids to let through to short-list. Then I could've seen Istanbul chances threatened, but not now with the sand castle of Doha.

And as far as the current application phase "death match". It looks like the IOC's Executive Board has the pen already to write on Doha's death certificate just in case. They've already singled Doha out.

or if the IOC can shortlist whoever they want, no matter the score.

The IOC has already proven that they can do that. By tossing aside Doha for 2016, in favor of the eventual, lower scoring, Rio in the preliminary technical evaluation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The IOC has already proven that they can do that. By tossing aside Doha for 2016, in favor of the eventual, lower scoring, Rio in the preliminary technical evaluation.

Yes. However, all shortlisted cities for 2016 had scored more than the supposed minimum of 6. Scoring more than 6 doesn't ensure being shortlisted, but is it necessary to score at least 6 to advance to the candidate stage? Could the IOC shortlist a city scoring 5.7 for example?

Link to post
Share on other sites

^For 2008, I remember in the preliminary that Istanbul "straddled the benchmark" & thus that's Y they were allowed to continue in the bid process. Although, I can't remember exactly (& I don't have that info right in from of me) if they "straddled" right above or right below the benchmark.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...