Jump to content

2020: Who's the Frontrunner?


  

99 members have voted

  1. 1. Who's the frontrunner in the 2020 race so far?



Recommended Posts

FYI:

Oh yes, if you're acting in self-interest, one can think far ahead enough. You'd have to think the Italians and Swiss voted for Pyeongchang to bolster their chances. I was thinking more of the general members that don't have a vested interest in any future race.

There might be some thinking far enough ahead to want to have South Africa in 2024, but that's offset by those who DON'T want South Africa in 2024, out of self-interest. The Canadians, Americans and French as potential possibles come to mind. They might have a reason to vote for Istanbul, for example, to load up on new frontiers before the 2024 race. (Then again, Dick Pound probably doesn't care about that and will vote for his Olympic alma mater Rome anyway... but that's a good thing, this unpredictability will make for a fun race!)

Edited by Gangwon
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 592
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

If, as looks likely, Turkey is the only candidate for Euro 2020 I'd find it impossible to believe their government would turn around to UEFA and say "actually, no, we don't want this". That'd be such

I think Turkey saying they want the European Championships and the Olympics will work against them. The IOC is not going to want a big show in town in June and the Olympics in August.

It's impossible for any country to stage the same year two major sport events such as Euro and the Olympic Games (and this has nothing to do with Turkey). It would create major challenges regarding ma

And yet others, not just me, still question Istanbul's abilities. I'm still willing to give them the 'benefit of the doubt', before saying "no way", though.

Istanbul may well have its challenges, but the overall image of Turkey, in my mind at least, does not include shanty towns, rampant poverty-fed crime and lack of basic infrastructure like electricity, water and sewerage for a huge part of its population - something even South Africa even acknowledged when it abandoned any 2020 plans because the government said it had more pressing social responsibilities.

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to post
Share on other sites

There might be some thinking far enough ahead to want to have South Africa in 2024, but that's offset by those who DON'T want South Africa in 2024, out of self-interest. The Canadians, Americans and French as potential possibles come to mind.

Yeah, but that's what? Like about 5 votes, versus how many countless others that would look at more as to hasn't hosted? That's like saying China & Japan's self-interest votes should've hampered PyeongChang 2018. But in the end, it had no bearing whatsoever.

Istanbul may well have its challenges, but the overall image of Turkey, in my mind at least, does not include shanty towns, rampant poverty-fed crime and lack of basic infrastructure like electricity, water and sewerage for a huge part of its population - something even South Africa even acknowledged when it abandoned any 2020 plans because the government said it had more pressing social responsibilities.

Can't that be said of China, too, though. It's not like their standard of living is anywhere near that of Western Europe & the U.S. But like I said, I'm still willing to give Turkey the benefit of the doubt before writing them off completely. Definitely moreso than Doha & Baku.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but that's what? Like about 5 votes, versus how many countless others that would look at more as to hasn't hosted? That's like saying China & Japan's self-interest votes should've hampered PyeongChang 2018. But in the end, it had no bearing whatsoever.

I agree that it had no bearing (Chinese and Japanese self-interest). But by the same token, I would imagine that those with a self-interest in an African Olympics would be the ones thinking far ahead (and this is where you and I disagree, because I think that number is probably close to those numbers who have their OWN self-interest in opposing an African Olympics), while the others would take the bidders as they come one cycle at a time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm Istanbul maybe the obiuos choice for those who don't want SA 2024 but its been seen as a risk... In May we'll have a better argument but i support Istanbul, personally but i know it's bid isn't too "safe" for some people... I want Istanbul cuz i want Turkey to win!! I like that country, but also to have a winner in 2024 not from Africa... I mean Durban needs to learn from a failure to win, not win on the first attemp just cuz its Africa... Durban will make a stromg bid and a better one by learing from a failure.. All of the cities have learned and put a biggest effort, then they've won ;)

Btw... Alot of you were saying Madrid wan't a front runner, but now i see that actually many considered Madrid as a front runner :o that's surprising... (Madrid is my choice begind Istanbul, lets not forget it ;)) :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the IOC really only looks to the next two cycles, in this case 2020 and 2022. It's only Gamesbidders who map everything out for decades. Of course there's an awareness of South Africa, the USA, and probably Paris all wanting a chance to host and probably needing an opportunity, but there's no real way to prognosticate as to who will enter, much less win, each race.

The IOC can look backwards, however, and say to themselves "We've had a lot of Europe. Rio has Latin roots like Rome and Madrid. Istanbul is a bit risky. South Africa is lurking. Tokyo is a fantastic contrast to Rio. We can trust them to deliver solid Games. They haven't had the Summer Games for many decades and they're a significant presence in sport. Plus they're overcoming a tragedy. Tokyo looks good."

That's what I'm expecting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too, made the argument against a South African bid for 2020 based off of Rio's win, but was shot down by several of you. I certainly think it is fair to include that as a strike against Istanbul, especially if concerns rise up in Rio's preparations in the next 18 months. But on the other hand, if things are looking good with Rio, Madrid and Rome are in the dumps with their economy, Tokyo plays it safe and has too much backlash about their investment in a mega party while parts of their country are still a toxic wasteland, Doha is too controversial and Baku is just not even worth considering, Istanbul could seem like an interesting choice, especially if they put together a strong and compelling bid.

The way I see it, there are so many factors that it is really impossible to predict the overall psychology of the IOC. I honestly think most members don't think beyond one or two cycles, and who knows if even Paris, Durban or Cape Town will bid in 2024? We do know that 2022 will probably be a European showdown, but I am not certain if that really affects anything.

In the end, some IOC members will vote with their interests in mind, some will vote for the underdogs, some will vote for the most capable, others will just vote because they feel it is good. One thing Istanbul has that Rio didn't, is that it has been a candidate before, and it garnered more votes than Paris in the first round of voting for the 2008 Games. That should at least say something about what the IOC thinks of them.

I am most interested to see what kind of bid Istanbul puts together, and how they market themselves. Rio had ONE singular argument, and they made that point during their first presentation at Sport Accord in Denver, and continued to drive it home with their map all the way to their final bid presentation in Lausanne. Istanbul needs to formulate a message that resonates with the IOC, but I am not too sure the IOC wants to respond to every bid who plays the new frontier card by awarding them the Games.

Edited by Soaring
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the back-to-back new frontier argument will hurt Istanbul more than SA. Africa feels unjustly marginalized, whereas Istanbul is just unusual. "Unjustly marginalized" is a compelling reason to clear the way for a bid. "Unusual" is not.

I still think SA will almost certainly win whenever they bid as long as their plan meets the IOC's minimum benchmarks. The competition is irrelevant. SA is only competing against themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Istanbul is going to win, they're going to have to do so on the basis of merit. I don't see the new frontier card working here. Personally, I doubt they're up to the challenge.

See, I think that's a totally contradictory argument to say Istanbul is not up to the challenge, but South Africa, whose social problems are an incredible order of magnitude greater than Turkey's, is considered a certainty as long as they mail in the application letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

istanbul is not up to the challenge, but that hasn't stopped the IOC in the past.

personally, i think they should just give them the games already so they'll stop bidding because it's getting sad.

some people just want what they quite simply can't have.

istanbul is john hinkly jr to the olympics' jodi foster.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See, I think that's a totally contradictory argument to say Istanbul is not up to the challenge, but South Africa, whose social problems are an incredible order of magnitude greater than Turkey's, is considered a certainty as long as they mail in the application letter.

I'm not talking about whO would be the more capable host. I'm talking about who the IOC will choose. Obviously SA must do more than mail in a letter. They have to meet the IOC's minimum requirements. I believe the "unjustly marginalized" Africa card will carry them the rest of the way.

By contrast, Istanbul may offer a much more competent plan, but unless their plan clearly outshines the competition, the "unusual" Eurasian card is not going to get the job done.

It's a combination of merit and politics that informs the decision. The Africa card is so powerful that the merit just needs to be acceptable.

It is contradictory. It may not seem fair, but that is what I expect from the IOC. They will hold Istanbul and SA to different standards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me clarify: Istanbul may or may not be up to the challenge of hosting the Games (like SA). What I meant in my earlier post is that the IOC will require more from Istanbul than SA in the bid process. I do not think Istanbul is up to the challenge of satisfying the IOC and emerging from the bid process victorious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

JDeller-SittingOnTheFenceIsStrictlyProhibitied.jpg

Okay, I've pondered on it. I'd frame it as, at present (with not really a lot of any of the plans yet really).

Rome a nose ahead, on proviso of Government backing.

Tokyo and Madrid ready to snatch the lead in second.

Istanbul in fourth.

Doha and Baku straddling the ability to make the short list.

In the long run, though ...

Assuming they all make it through to the short list, I still don't see Doha or Baku getting much traction in support. The IOC's already prepping Doha that the whole timing and scheduling issues will be closely scrutinised. Even if they make the short list, I doubt they'll get a warm evaluation report.

Rome depends on how its political and economic cycle plays out. Ditto Madrid as its replacement if Rome bails out. Both could face a hard time getting their message through and may attract opposition. I think I just judge them as both fragile favourites.

Tokyo should be a sure set of hands for the IOC, and certainly not an unattractive prospect. This could be the kind of race that could favour them in the long run. They usually seem to play their cards close to their chests (partly the language thing) and avoid making mistakes. I sure wouldn't b unhappy.

Istanbul's chances depend on how it is able to project itself in the campaign ahead. I still think timing could favour it this time round - they're Europe, they're Asia, they're in a region aspiring to these events, they're moderate and in reasonable shape. The effectiveness of their campaigning is going to be one of features to watch.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

80 % constructed, a few big desire of being Olympic, Madrid must be the one that wins, I believe that the Latin members and Africans will his vote to Madrid, and part of the Europeans, the key will be in the Anglo-Saxons, Baku is not prepared, up to to organize Eurovision 2012 having many problems, Doha with the World Football of 2022 they have enough and in badly place to the COI, I do not see Rome with sufficient chances, Istanbul serious for my winner if Madrid was not, but after it of Rio 2016 loses enough and to the insurance and Tokyo harms them that the Games of 2018 are in Korea

Link to post
Share on other sites

we'll all know by February 9 whether a Rome 2020 logo appears or not. If not, the lead will switch to whomever the Italian support switches to. I think the Italian bloc and its supporters will move to Tokyo--the farthest away from Europe so that maybe, Rome might have a better chance again in 2024 or 2028. Of course, the Italians are already wary of South Africa in 2024. But under the present circumstances, that would be their best move. Istanbul may pick up the rest.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't understand this logic by some of the italians in delaying the bid. Is italy going to be in such better financial shape for years from now for an olympic bid to be acceptable. N then they might have paris, berlin n south africa to contend with. I think they will be making a mistake if they pull out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I really don't understand this logic by some of the italians in delaying the bid

I think that logic is simply putting an optimistic spin on things if Rome does pull out of 2020, nothing more.

Until we know who's won 2020 there's really no way of telling whether Rome will have a better chance for 2024, and who knows how their economy will be in 4 years' time?

Edited by RobH
Link to post
Share on other sites

we'll all know by February 9 whether a Rome 2020 logo appears or not. If not, the lead will switch to whomever the Italian support switches to. I think the Italian bloc and its supporters will move to Tokyo--the farthest away from Europe so that maybe, Rome might have a better chance again in 2024 or 2028. Of course, the Italians are already wary of South Africa in 2024. But under the present circumstances, that would be their best move. Istanbul may pick up the rest.

I don't think Italy's support automatically switches to Tokyo if Rome pulls out. The Italians are not going to be in that strong of a position in 2024 since they pulled out their bid just one cycle before, and they could be up against South Africa or Paris in 2024. I would think they would want to support Madrid or even Istanbul, and clear the way for a South African city, Tokyo or a N. American city to win in 2024, then it opens up 2028 or 2032 for them to bid again.

Anyway, it's all just speculation. Who knows if these countries even vote in "blocks". I think the Brazilians and other South Americans would support Madrid over the overs. I think most African IOC members will go for a European/Middle Eastern city as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rome, please try this is the best chance for Rome, I even would say than Athens was seen as a more difficult competition... Now everybody is in the same position -.- For 2024 Toronto, Paris, Durban and perhaps LA... :S doean't seems too easy...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...