Jump to content

6 Applicant for 2020


Pure facts

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

baron: remember this thread from the 2016 elections?

Presentation order 0f 2016 Bid Cities

Another bit of procedure which the IOC has to correct. Why bother with an order which would still have one or 2 cities that are going to be ejected? My point was that get into a final random order when you have the list of FINAL candidates -- not before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scenic torch relay from Greece to Turkey we're gonna have huh? :rolleyes:

or not..

Altho if that were to happen, I'd think they'd pass it thru Cyprus first to show that they've buried the hatchet. I mean that would mean a lot more symbolically--if the IOC allowed it, than just running it up thru the northern part of Greece, crossing directly into Turkish territory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see Baku or Doha hosting in 2020. Of the remaining four, I can imagine the next two years playing out in a variety of ways that could result in any one of them winning.

Istanbul's chances seem heavily dependent on the specifics of their bid. If the mini-bid book tells us that 2020 is just a rehash of their previous bids, then they're not really a contender. If it's a newly revised, well-thought out plan, however, they're as close as the IOC will get to a legitimate new-frontier option.

I think economic concerns could have a major impact on both Madrid and Rome. If Spain and/or Italy have a total meltdown (not at all far-fetched), it would be difficult to justify them hosting the Games -- even with the knowledge that South Africa is aiming for 2024. If disaster is averted, they are probably the bids to beat and whichever one plays the political game the best will win.

As for Tokyo -- I'm not ready to label them an also-ran just yet. In fact, if somebody held a gun to my head and demanded a prediction, I'd pick Tokyo -- despite PC.

Fortunately, no one's holding a gun to my head....

As of now, I don't think there's enough information to anoint a favorite. Any one of the four could win. A lot can happen in two years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As of now, I don't think there's enough information to anoint a favorite. Any one of the four could win. A lot can happen in two years.

I agree, no obvious early favourite. One of the most wide-open races at the starting blocks for a long time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see the current financial mess in Italy and Spain sure with the Olympics. How can the governments of these nations get public support went costs are going up pension are getting cut no jobs things are very different today then the games of past. Torino had to be bail out now with Rome. Barcelona lost money just look a London. Athens facilities not used. In todays world with the current financial situation nope not Europe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see the current financial mess in Italy and Spain sure with the Olympics. How can the governments of these nations get public support went costs are going up pension are getting cut no jobs things are very different today then the games of past. Torino had to be bail out now with Rome. Barcelona lost money just look a London. Athens facilities not used. In todays world with the current financial situation nope not Europe.

But the IOC will always find a sucker gov't to stage its spectacles...as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is also a good reason Y the IOC probably won't be giving the U.S. another Summer Games anytime soon. As long as those primadonna wannabes have other pansies to cater to their fanciful rear ends, that's who they're gonna go with. Best bet for the U.S. right now is a Winter Games where the IOC could be more willing to appease us for the sake of appeasement. But the Summer prize I don't see on the near horizon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The IOC only picks what is in front of them. Tokyo offered a much more expansive prestige bid compared to any other bid in 2016 and they lost. Its not always the biggest and most bombastic bid that wins. Sometimes it does (Sochi, Beijing), sometimes it doesn't (Pyeongchang, London and Rio).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are giving Istanbul too much credit. Turkey certainly has the economics, population and government will to be a successful Olympic host, but Istanbul has only ever put forward 3 very substandard bids. They will need substantial retooling and Istanbul itself will need considerable investment to be a successful Olympic host. Having two strong European bids in the race canniblizes much of a potential support base and Doha bidding (and likely making the short-list) will do the same to the Muslim vote. Add in Tokyo taking away some Asian voting and providing another place for Western Asian votes and Turkey really would need to rely on votes from Africa and the Americas to stand a chance.

Also think Turkey losing to France for the 2016 European Championships is very indicative of Turkey's inability to garner votes. Especially in a race they were widely expected to win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are giving Istanbul too much credit. Turkey certainly has the economics, population and government will to be a successful Olympic host, but Istanbul has only ever put forward 3 very substandard bids. They will need substantial retooling and Istanbul itself will need considerable investment to be a successful Olympic host. Having two strong European bids in the race canniblizes much of a potential support base and Doha bidding (and likely making the short-list) will do the same to the Muslim vote. Add in Tokyo taking away some Asian voting and providing another place for Western Asian votes and Turkey really would need to rely on votes from Africa and the Americas to stand a chance.

Also think Turkey losing to France for the 2016 European Championships is very indicative of Turkey's inability to garner votes. Especially in a race they were widely expected to win.

Hmmmm. I disagree. I'm not saying they'll win (I probably still lean more to Rome's chances at this stage) but I honestly think the time is ripe for them, and they couldn't really time their bid any better than this moment:

* The rivals might be (sorta) solid, but not really inspiring;

* They've made a lot of progress in making concrete a lot of their plans from previous bids;

* They seem to have a more optimistic economic outlook than most of their rivals;

* They're a perfect compromise candidate among the regions bidding this time around;

* They're honestly the very best candidate you could want if you are looking to reach out to the moderate Muslim world; and

* They're probably a low-risk site for the IOC to continue their move into new regions.

And there's already IOC members publicly stating that they like their chances. I wouldn't read too much into their past bidding experience - every race has its own dynamics, and this time round there's a lot in their favour. Nobody rated Rio as a strong chance at this stage of the 2016 race either. But ultimately, the time also favoured them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are giving Istanbul too much credit. Turkey certainly has the economics, population and government will to be a successful Olympic host, but Istanbul has only ever put forward 3 very substandard bids. They will need substantial retooling and Istanbul itself will need considerable investment to be a successful Olympic host. Having two strong European bids in the race canniblizes much of a potential support base and Doha bidding (and likely making the short-list) will do the same to the Muslim vote. Add in Tokyo taking away some Asian voting and providing another place for Western Asian votes and Turkey really would need to rely on votes from Africa and the Americas to stand a chance.

Also think Turkey losing to France for the 2016 European Championships is very indicative of Turkey's inability to garner votes. Especially in a race they were widely expected to win.

I do think you have some valid points there, if only to pop some of the wild optimism that's surrounding Istanbul's on this board at the moment. Certainly, we know Rio cam from not even shortlisting to winning, but inbetween they hosted a PanAm Games, and had some significant influence within the IOC. Turkey can show neither, and I'm not quite sure what differentiates this bid from their previous ones.

But I would say I agree with Rols that looking at this field there's no stand-out city like perhaps there has been when Istanbul has bid in the past. Of course, relying on a weaker field says a lot in itself in some ways, but you can only beat who you're up against and I do feel Istanbul has a better chance this time around.

As for Euro 2016, I think that's a little unfair. Yes, Turkey was expected to do well and to be fair they did, but there were two factors going against them. Firstly, a French UEFA President who would have had some clout in giving the tournament to France. Secondly, the fact that Euro 2016 will be the first time the tournament has had 24 teams. It's not really surprising UEFA went for a safe pair of hands for this tournament this time around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think you have some valid points there, if only to pop some of the wild optimism that's surrounding Istanbul's on this board at the moment. Certainly, we know Rio cam from not even shortlisting to winning, but inbetween they hosted a PanAm Games, and had some significant influence within the IOC. Turkey can show neither, and I'm not quite sure what differentiates this bid from their previous ones.

But I would say I agree with Rols that looking at this field there's no stand-out city like perhaps there has been when Istanbul has bid in the past. Of course, relying on a weaker field says a lot in itself in some ways, but you can only beat who you're up against and I do feel Istanbul has a better chance this time around.

As for Euro 2016, I think that's a little unfair. Yes, Turkey was expected to do well and to be fair they did, but there were two factors going against them. Firstly, a French UEFA President who would have had some clout in giving the tournament to France. Secondly, the fact that Euro 2016 will be the first time the tournament has had 24 teams. It's not really surprising UEFA went for a safe pair of hands for this tournament this time around.

I do not. I remember the lead-up to that race and many thought the result would be 7-6 for Turkey. Platini certainly had influence, but Turkey was the excepted winner.

Also to throw things into the equation there is 17 IOC members that will not vote for Istanbul under any circumstance (Israeli, Greek, French, German, Austrian, Norwegian, Russian and Swiss members). So after Rogge and those 17 you are looking at a voting pool of 95. Minus the 10ish Japanese, Italian and Spanish members and you are down to 85 votes. So to secure victory Istanbul would need as many as 57 of those 85 votes. I cannot see Istanbul being able to do that without a Bach or a Nuzman or a Pound.

This race is so much more about 2022 and 2024 then it is about 2020. The Austrians, Germans, Swiss, French, Swedish, Norwegian, Russians and Chinese all want a games sooner then later and the Italians and Spaniards are in the race. Getting the games out of Europe for 2020 is desirable to almost everyone in the world but the Americans and Chinese. Neither of which have substantial power within the IOC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not. I remember the lead-up to that race and many thought the result would be 7-6 for Turkey. Platini certainly had influence, but Turkey was the excepted winner.

Also to throw things into the equation there is 17 IOC members that will not vote for Istanbul under any circumstance (Israeli, Greek, French, German, Austrian, Norwegian, Russian and Swiss members). So after Rogge and those 17 you are looking at a voting pool of 95. Minus the 10ish Japanese, Italian and Spanish members and you are down to 85 votes. So to secure victory Istanbul would need as many as 57 of those 85 votes. I cannot see Istanbul being able to do that without a Bach or a Nuzman or a Pound.

This race is so much more about 2022 and 2024 then it is about 2020. The Austrians, Germans, Swiss, French, Swedish, Norwegian, Russians and Chinese all want a games sooner then later and the Italians and Spaniards are in the race. Getting the games out of Europe for 2020 is desirable to almost everyone in the world but the Americans and Chinese. Neither of which have substantial power within the IOC.

just 2 months ago greek prime minister had a speech about Istanbul 2020 and especially mentioned st very important" ıstanbul is the only city we support for 2020". tough french germans are more positive to istanbul while they are thinking about 2024 race. madrid and rome will kill their bids. Russia, putin is a very close friend to Erdogan and they will back İstanbul as i think. Israel no way :D scandinavians i dont know but sweden is always back turkey for EU entrance and in other issues. but its politics no body knows what will happen 1 month later.

in another way of look, having 2020 in Istanbul is also ease the problems EU and Turkey face, economical enviorment and relations. EU countries supporting Turkey can use this too for more votes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not. I remember the lead-up to that race and many thought the result would be 7-6 for Turkey. Platini certainly had influence, but Turkey was the excepted winner.

Also to throw things into the equation there is 17 IOC members that will not vote for Istanbul under any circumstance (Israeli, Greek, French, German, Austrian, Norwegian, Russian and Swiss members). So after Rogge and those 17 you are looking at a voting pool of 95. Minus the 10ish Japanese, Italian and Spanish members and you are down to 85 votes. So to secure victory Istanbul would need as many as 57 of those 85 votes. I cannot see Istanbul being able to do that without a Bach or a Nuzman or a Pound.

This race is so much more about 2022 and 2024 then it is about 2020. The Austrians, Germans, Swiss, French, Swedish, Norwegian, Russians and Chinese all want a games sooner then later and the Italians and Spaniards are in the race. Getting the games out of Europe for 2020 is desirable to almost everyone in the world but the Americans and Chinese. Neither of which have substantial power within the IOC.

You don't know that. Nothing is ever linear enough to say that members will not vote for a certain city/country under any circumstances. If everything was so mathematical, we could have said that Pyeongchang never would have gotten the support of the IF heads like Fasel and Kasper, the Chinese and Japanese and their allies to keep Harbin and Tokyo alive, and anyone that ever felt slighted by the Koreans in the past. Nobody knows who voted for what, but 2/3 of the IOC ended up voting for PC, and that's something no one could ever have predicted. There must have been some IOC members who voted for PC that would "logically" not have voted for PC on geopolitical or personal considerations.

It's fun to play the geopolitical guessing game, but that's all it is: a guessing game. I see no reason to automatically dismiss all those European members you mentioned above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not linear, its self-serving. Pyeongchang got their traditional base of African, Latin American and Asian votes and the European votes serving their own interests were the difference this time between defeat and victory. This same group will do whatever they can to get the games out of Europe to open up 2022 and 2024. Otherwise 2022 will be a walk-over for an American bid.

And we know from the last race the Swiss, Austrians, Swedes and Norwegians lobbied hard against Munich in the closing stages, as did the Chinese and Japanese against Pyeongchang. We also know that the Chinese want Shanghai 2028 or 2032 and the Russians are looking at the same time-frame for St. Petersburg or Moscow. It will be the same this time. NOC's will lobby within their own interests. It does not serve the French interest to go to Rome, Istanbul or Madrid in 2020, nor the German, Swiss, Austrian, Swedish or Norwegian interest. And if Istanbul were to get past either Madrid or Rome, their full and considerable weight would be brought to bare against the remaining European bids to keep 2024 alive for Europe. Competing interests, aligning for self-service. That is all an IOC election is. And if you do not think this kind of thinking doesn't happen one only has to look at 2010 as a clear indication of the weight aligned Europeans can bring to bear to set themselves up for a future race.

And this is all why Tokyo is currently the oddmakers favourite. Because if it outlasts Rome or Madrid Europe will bring their support behind it sending the games to Asia and opening up a European double for 2022-2024.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also think Turkey losing to France for the 2016 European Championships is very indicative of Turkey's inability to garner votes. Especially in a race they were widely expected to win.

It seems they got experience there... And it was just one vote, i think istanbul has learned on its past failures (i hope so) otherwise it will be the same as in their past non-shorlisted bids

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not linear, its self-serving. Pyeongchang got their traditional base of African, Latin American and Asian votes and the European votes serving their own interests were the difference this time between defeat and victory. This same group will do whatever they can to get the games out of Europe to open up 2022 and 2024. Otherwise 2022 will be a walk-over for an American bid.

And we know from the last race the Swiss, Austrians, Swedes and Norwegians lobbied hard against Munich in the closing stages, as did the Chinese and Japanese against Pyeongchang. We also know that the Chinese want Shanghai 2028 or 2032 and the Russians are looking at the same time-frame for St. Petersburg or Moscow. It will be the same this time. NOC's will lobby within their own interests. It does not serve the French interest to go to Rome, Istanbul or Madrid in 2020, nor the German, Swiss, Austrian, Swedish or Norwegian interest. And if Istanbul were to get past either Madrid or Rome, their full and considerable weight would be brought to bare against the remaining European bids to keep 2024 alive for Europe. Competing interests, aligning for self-service. That is all an IOC election is. And if you do not think this kind of thinking doesn't happen one only has to look at 2010 as a clear indication of the weight aligned Europeans can bring to bear to set themselves up for a future race.

And this is all why Tokyo is currently the oddmakers favourite. Because if it outlasts Rome or Madrid Europe will bring their support behind it sending the games to Asia and opening up a European double for 2022-2024.

Yeah, but the euros hoping for 2024 I'm sure are also aware that with Durban in there, it will throw a monkey wrench into the 2024 euro plans. So they can't really think past 2022 concretely. Or at least it's stupid and serves no purpose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2022 will not make diffrence... It will be europe like it or not, And perhaps a Madrid or Rome win could be harmuful for a Paris or Berlin, a Istanbul or Tokyo will harm Durban... so the USA will gave a real chance in 2024. By the way i didnt mentioned Baku or Doha as a winner its REALLY UNLIKELLY :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...