Jump to content

2020 Applicant files - Let's share the links...


SwissO

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'd forgotten bidding cities use the pictograms from the next edition of the Games in their applicant files and bid books. Nice surprise to be flicking through Tokyo's to see London's pictograms. :D

And they're all rather close together in Tokyo's map as well!

Link to post
Share on other sites

wow... if its gonna happen anew barcelona renovation will happen...

the best city plan to use every corner and needs renovations..

as an istanbuller i would like to live in a city like this planned and sports arenas spread whole city instead of 1 place...

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ Actually, it was "exclusive" to a lot of people, as the game in question was Duke Nukem Forever, only what 10 odd years in the making.

That being said, I don't think Istanbul is the strongest or the one to beat. They have a sound plan, but surely taking a break from one bid race could have gotten far more "planned" venues done, perhaps even some "additional" ones.

And what about the Olympic Stadium? They proposed a larger capacity in their 2012 bid, and even a possible 90,000 capacity in some other past bids. Surely for such a modern stadium they would have anchored an appropriate legacy capacity but even they had to remove several thousand obstructing seats, decreasing it from 80,597 to 76,092. You would think a modern stadium completed in 2002, would not require modifications a mere 3 years later and furthermore not require any modifications (with the exception of expansion) for any future Olympics.

It would be nice to see Istanbul get the Olympics, but I think their 2020 bid is a tad weaker than some past bids.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ Actually, it was "exclusive" to a lot of people, as the game in question was Duke Nukem Forever, only what 10 odd years in the making.

Who? What? Never even heard of it.

I think the average IOC'er is NOT the Bid Book geek you are. Many of them don't even read the bid books. It's only the Evaluation COmmittee that does. So comparison of earlier plan vs. the present plan I don't think really play into the picture. You (or I if I were on the Eval Committee) deal with what is there present and alive...not what was in the books 8 or 10 years ago and that's weighed against what the other plans are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ Correction, 15 years in development http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Nukem_Forever

I'm sure the IOC member reads the bid books, after all if they are permitted to vote, they should do at least a glance at the bid documents. Aren't all NOC's recieved their own copy of a bid book? Most certainly the voting members are.

What's present and alive isn't so flash IMO, too many projects to undertake even though you have the Olympic Stadium almost ready. It's understood if you need to build because you don't have specific venues, but this is Istanbul, a multiple bidder, which should have made much more of the Olympic Park venues planned, so they could build and have far more to offer now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, there's always gonna be some that read the bid books, but there'll be plenty enough who don't get further than the summary pages, and a few beyond that who won't open them. Not everyone's gonna like poring through long technical manuals, and as gets debated here often enough, a large slab of the membership will vote on emotional or strategic reasons anyway - they won't care too much once the short list's signed off.

The tech guys on the IFs will probably give the books and the most regard, and point out any problems they have with the plans (they'll sure complain if they don't like anything), but really it's easy enough to get a fair measure of what each bidders strengths and weaknesses are from general comments and the summaries. I have never really read one, but generally find out here and in the media coverage what the main points of each bid plans are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ If there were a good analogy for IOC members and bid books, I'd say it's like homework. You don't really want to do it, but you gotta get it over and done with eventually and before the deadline. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah. More like getting that new electronic gizmo or new car N not bothering with that cumbersome owners manual cuz u wanna get to playing with your new toy right way. N u just get the hang of it as u go long.

N besides, Rio's 2016 plans weren't that much of an improvement from their previous ones. Other than having hosted the PanAms, the 2012 N 2016 ones weren't that much different. N yet they went from totally being pushed to the wayside for 2016 to eventual crowned winner for 2016, even sneaking by Doha's supposedly better plan. N perhaps that's what Istanbul is looking at.

N seriously, for someone that's always praising Baku's lackluster plan, it's just absolutely LAUGHABLE that you're even critiquing Istanbul's bid!

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ If there were a good analogy for IOC members and bid books, I'd say it's like homework. You don't really want to do it, but you gotta get it over and done with eventually and before the deadline. :P

Perhaps. And like homework, a lot will get by just fine on the crib notes. That's what executive summary chapters are for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...