Jump to content

Recommended Posts

MK: The question is are they going to now? (regarding NY hostin)

Answer: NO they are not bidding

MK: Who is to say that we might see a pair up of Osaka, Lisbon, Panama City, Boston and Quinto.

Answer: I'm saying it right now, you won't see that.

MK: On this same theory who is to say that we wont see NYC, Paris, Durban, Shanghai and Berlin battling.

Answer: More likely minus NYC

MK: But your right. Their are many US cities that have the opportunity to host a spectacular games

Answer: EXCEPT (acording to you) LA, NYC, Philly, SF and Detroit which have NOTHING to offer.

MK: It was clear to the US media that Chicago not being selected was a huge upset.

Answer: No, it was a huge upset that they went out first, but logical after you consider the politics to defeat Chicago early.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Boston, Massachusetts is taking the first big steps towards looking into the feasibility of a Summer Games bid for the earliest year 2024. On Thursday, January 10, 2013, the MA State Senate file a Re

Oslo was an abortion - Boston is a miscarriage.

We prefer "Masshole" to "total douche".

MK: The question is are they going to now? (regarding NY hostin)

Answer: NO they are not bidding

MK: Who is to say that we might see a pair up of Osaka, Lisbon, Panama City, Boston and Quinto.

Answer: I'm saying it right now, you won't see that.

MK: On this same theory who is to say that we wont see NYC, Paris, Durban, Shanghai and Berlin battling.

Answer: More likely minus NYC

MK: But your right. Their are many US cities that have the opportunity to host a spectacular games

Answer: EXCEPT (acording to you) LA, NYC, Philly, SF and Detroit which have NOTHING to offer.

MK: It was clear to the US media that Chicago not being selected was a huge upset.

Answer: No, it was a huge upset that they went out first, but logical after you consider the politics to defeat Chicago early.

Hold up relax. You don't know that NYC isn't going to bid. They were just handed this letter by the USOC a few days ago. How do you know that they aren't. Post a link to prove this credibility.

Again, you have no proof of this either. The climate in two years time may be diffrent. As i've stated we don't know yet. Its far to early to even Hypotosize who is going to run. Don't say "Osaka, Lisbon, Jakarta arent going to bid" when it hasnt even been discussed by NOC's yet. thats abit foolish no?

They have much to offer. Its the climate that those cities have and the diffrent variables affecting their possibilities. I doubt Cash Strapped California is interested in throwing a 3 Billion dollar party any time soon and any politician there that thinks they should is committing political suicide. Detroit has a major housing bubble issue, massive shortfalls in deficit and a homeless and jobless population that is unsubstantiated. I doubt they are even considering never mind bidding. It would make no sense for them to build huge white elephants for their citizens to stare blankly at. NYC, Thats all dependent on the Climate and the opinion of New Yorkers. You have other logisitcal questions that need to be handled such as where you place and Olympic sized stadium within New York City and still appease the IOC and the citizens. It's not Impossible and NYC has much to offer but its chances don't seem likely. Philidelphia and Boston seem like the only viable options seeing as they have future possible tennants in colleges and have the possibility for expanding.

Stop taking everything i say verbatum. Of course every american city has the ability to host the games and make it possible. What i meant to say is that at CURRENT for 2024, Boston seems like the only city, in my opinion that could make it work within this time frame. Relax Paul, Sit down and take a breather. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boston is a very unfriendly city, unless you are form there or the north east.

I't really a bore.

Elitist liberals are the worst.

While I certainly sympathize with your perspective, we're not *that* unfriendly. We're just not southerners, you know?

Maybe it's just me, but does anyone here (and by anyone, I'm really talking about the regulars.. you know, those who were posting here before there was a Boston thread) find it odd that in a little over a month, we've spawned a 22-page thread on Boston and by my rough count, there are at 5 or 6 people who joined GB specifically to discuss Boston, several of which went into very lengthy posts discussing the virtues of a Boston bid. Perhaps it's the skeptic in me, but when I see someone come on here and say that San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York don't have much to offer, something just doesn't quite seem right.

To all of the new posters here.. Boston2024, boston_2024, TeamRik, ChrisValentine, and now MaritimeKid (am I missing anyone else here?), I admire the passion for the city of Boston and how they would make a good Olympic host. But let's tone it down here a bit, shall we? We know a potential Boston organizing committee would have to play to some of these things, but let's not make it out to seem like Boston is God's gift to the Olympic movement and that other cities are crap by comparison

I've certainly been more interested in discussing the logistics than anything else. As for why there's so many people that joined, my theory is that because this thread was linked to on a forum that specifically discusses urban development in Boston (I know thats where I found it).

The Olympics would make Boston the "Athens of America"?

Of course it wouldn't; Boston already is the Athens of America. Thats one of its nicknames, along with Beantown and the Hub of the Universe. Of the three, its the easiest to grasp: Athens was renowned as a center for learning in the classical world, Boston is renowned as a center of learning in the modern world.

PS, did anyone get a chance to look at my proposal for the olympic village housing?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

PS, did anyone get a chance to look at my proposal for the olympic village housing?

I did, As much as Northeasten has alot of uses, i feel like the Olympic Village has to be a Centric place. It's a nice idea to have the village spread out like the many dorms and housing complexes along Alston, cambridge and brigton. But i feel like a true to life Village in the north of the city near wonderland would make the most sense. Turn some down trotten housing into new complexes and support such an athletes village, but then again; if one college was ready to make some housing updates i don't see why BC, BU or Harvard couldn't pick up the responsibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see you found my post so amusing. Like I said, I admire your passion for Boston (although again, it seems odd that so many brand new posters are coming here in support, and very strong support at that, of Boston), but the hyperbole is a little much. The Olympics would make Boston the "Athens of America"? The Boston Tea Party and the Olympic movement are related? And then my personal favorite.. Boston seems the only viable contender and that Philadelphia, Detroit, San Fran, Los Angeles, and New York don't have much to offer? I've lived my whole life in NYC. I know I'm probably not going to see an Olympics here in my lifetime for plenty of reasons, but that's insulting to say that New York has nothing to offer. And if you're looking at potential competitors to a Boston bid, certainly Durban is in the conversation. But not Osaka, Lisbon, and Jakarta. Try Tokyo and Madrid and Paris. That's what they're up against.

I'm not trying to thwart discussion on Boston. I just think it's taking it a little too far to sell Boston as "the birthplace of America" (close, but not quite). Or to compare the Olympics to the Gay Games as a basis to go off of. It's hard to swallow some of these pitches when those claims are being made and someone's first ever post in this forum says that Boston is the only viable contender. We're all about personal opinions here and none of us are experts, but come on..

Again, opinion here, but I don't see it that way. The USOC isn't shying away from Chicago and New York as options. Chicago and New York are shying away from the USOC as an option. They took their 1 shot and now they're not interested anymore. I don't think it says much to cite their failings when a lesser city in Atlanta won. It's all about circumstance, and the field probably isn't going to get any less competitive going forward. I'm sure they USOC would love to pour their heart and soul into winning (as opposed to the 2012 and 2016 bids?.. were they not trying to win there)? Boston has a lot of things going for them, and I'm certainly not trying to take that away from them. They do have history, they do have a number of colleges and universities in addition to pro sports history. If you want to discuss the merits of their bid, I'm more than happy to participate in that discussion. But keep in mind that you cannot view a prospective Olympic bid entirely in a vacuum, because when it comes down to it, this is a competition. And all that's going to matter in the end is how does Boston or whoever else stack up against the other competitors

Being a gold star member like yourself doesn't make anyone elses opinions, including new followers any less viable than yours. This is merely a forum for people who are infatuated with the Olympics to have friendly and interesting discussions.

Let the Exploratory Committee do their job and come back with the real facts and well...the back and forth will still be going on here : )

Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't find any single reference to the total number of rooms available, though the list of events by # of rooms booked is fairly illustrative. In 2010, the city apparently had no difficult in hosting events that required anywhere from 5k to 41k hotel rooms, and, honestly, I don't think most residents ever even noticed. So, the hotel room matter seems to be fairly under control.

What quality is expected for the accommodations for the athletes themselves? Would college suit style buildings be sufficient (or even dorm style)?

A little out of date but a huge document here on the IOC Village requirements:

http://www.gamesmonitor.org.uk/files/Technical_Manual_on_Olympic_Village.pdf

See the Chapter starting on Page 60 to see diagrams of past Olympic villages, diagrams of ideal layouts, space requirements for facilities within the village.

Another point, which I know is true for London and must be for all host cities, is that athletes musn't have kitchens within their accommodation. Instead a large temporary dining facility is built with all food cooked and served on site. In London's case, after the Games many of the bedrooms will be refitted into kitchens. So whilst London has built enough bed-space for 16k athletes, what we'll have post-Games is infact 3000 new homes.

http://www.london2012.com/media-centre/media-releases/year=2012/month=01/article=london-2012-begins-bedding-in-at-olympic-village-6-month.html

Hope this is of some help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did, As much as Northeasten has alot of uses, i feel like the Olympic Village has to be a Centric place. It's a nice idea to have the village spread out like the many dorms and housing complexes along Alston, cambridge and brigton. But i feel like a true to life Village in the north of the city near wonderland would make the most sense. Turn some down trotten housing into new complexes and support such an athletes village, but then again; if one college was ready to make some housing updates i don't see why BC, BU or Harvard couldn't pick up the responsibility.

No one campus would be able to support the Olympic Village; it would tie up the sum total of a campus's housing stock by twofold or better (particularly problematic for NU, since they have nearly half the student body taking summer classes anyway). I spread my Village across the city because I don't want any one area to be dominated by one monumental development project.

If the Village were to be all centrally located, it'd either take up the majority of the air rights over the Mass Pike (prime real estate, otherwise), or the city would have to totally take over the Newmarket district. As much as an industrial district might be ugly, its still not something thats totally worthless; better to take bits and pieces and attempt to weave the Village into the fabric of the city, from my point of view. But, again, I'm looking more 'long term' than just the games themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a gold star member like yourself doesn't make anyone elses opinions, including new followers any less viable than yours. This is merely a forum for people who are infatuated with the Olympics to have friendly and interesting discussions.

Let the Exploratory Committee do their job and come back with the real facts and well...the back and forth will still be going on here : )

I'm a gold star member? Didn't know that.. cool!

Yes, I'm aware what this forum is. I'm merely pointing out that where a Boston urban development forum has someone point to this site (thanks for that info, Chris.. figured there was something like that which drove people here) that all of a sudden we have a bunch of Massholes :lol: posting here extolling the virtues of the city of Boston. Again, I have no problem with that whatsoever, but let's still try and keep things in perspective during all this back and forth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A little out of date but a huge document here on the IOC Village requirements:

http://www.gamesmonitor.org.uk/files/Technical_Manual_on_Olympic_Village.pdf

See the Chapter starting on Page 60 to see diagrams of past Olympic villages, diagrams of ideal layouts, space requirements for facilities within the village.

Another point, which I know is true for London and must be for all host cities, is that athletes musn't have kitchens within their accommodation. Instead a large temporary dining facility is built with all food cooked and served on site. In London's case, after the Games many of the bedrooms will be refitted into kitchens. So whilst London has built enough bed-space for 16k athletes, what we'll have post-Games is infact 3000 new homes.

http://www.london2012.com/media-centre/media-releases/year=2012/month=01/article=london-2012-begins-bedding-in-at-olympic-village-6-month.html

Hope this is of some help.

Wow, thats a great resource (well, two). I'm gonna spend some time pouring over them. Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a gold star member? Didn't know that.. cool!

Yes, I'm aware what this forum is. I'm merely pointing out that where a Boston urban development forum has someone point to this site (thanks for that info, Chris.. figured there was something like that which drove people here) that all of a sudden we have a bunch of Massholes :lol: posting here extolling the virtues of the city of Boston. Again, I have no problem with that whatsoever, but let's still try and keep things in perspective during all this back and forth.

Exactly! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a gold star member? Didn't know that.. cool!

Yes, I'm aware what this forum is. I'm merely pointing out that where a Boston urban development forum has someone point to this site (thanks for that info, Chris.. figured there was something like that which drove people here) that all of a sudden we have a bunch of Massholes :lol: posting here extolling the virtues of the city of Boston. Again, I have no problem with that whatsoever, but let's still try and keep things in perspective during all this back and forth.

What do you call a NYC-Hole?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How are the people who started the Thread "New"? LOL.. just because we are new to your forum does not makes us new on this subject.. but as I have learned from earlier game play conversations, anytime you post a rebuttal or facts to support your topic or argument the "Alumni" like to attack, and twist everything to fit their AGENDA, which is to dismiss anything you post...

So as I commented in the beginning I am no longer engaging in conversation with those members, and will continue to communicate with those who have a clear vision and conversations that enlighten both sides positive and negative of this conversation...

- there are over 10,000 hotel rooms currently in development in Boston which is #5 in the country for Conventions of this size and larger.

- 87% of Bostons hotel market are Luxury Hotels
- Boston is the 4th Ranked LEED Certified State this year. (NYC 7th)
- 2012's 4th Quarter was the Strongest Quarter in Five Years for the U.S. Building Martet - Boston had the 2nd Highest in the Country
- No denying the MBTA would need upgrades, but just a note there are Currently HUGE upgrades already taking place and many projects have been completed in the past 2yrs
- The Boston Redevelopment broke ground on 22 Projects last year and 37 this year, we are the only city who not only continued building during the recession but the only city able to approve new projects and we are leading a huge building boom, there are 6 new high-rises, being built all of which include hotels, as well as Bostons 4th Tallest Building at 60 Stories.

I believe that that Boston Redevelopment Authority and the Massachusetts Convention Authorities as well as the Hotel Market would take HUGE Pride in not only making this happen in Boston but funding or finding funding, they have approved billions in the "Innovation Districts" of our city and we have been recognized as the most Innovative City in the Country...

And Senate & House Members from every County of Massachusetts have co-signed the Exploratory Committee Bill for Boston 2024 and Living not only in Boston, Provincetown and Western Mass I know that all of those locations are ready, willing, and PUMPED to support Boston 2024.

"Taxachusetts" a long standing nickname, primarily because its fun to say was extinguished long ago... Do we go by state mottos now to chose an Olympic City because NH should win then for sure "Live Free or Die!" -
State Business Tax Climate Ranks - 2012/2013
Overall Rank: 22nd
Corporate Tax: 33rd
Individual Income Tax: 15th

Sales Tax: 17th
Property Tax: 47th
Unemployment Insurance Tax: 49th


ALL of the IOC Documents: Archived, Current & Future can be found here: http://www.olympic.org/documents-reports-studies-publications

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeesh, thats a lot of drama going on...

Anyway, Rik, I've gotta temper your enthusiasm there. The rest of the state is still holding a grudge against Boston for the Big Dig. Almost nobody in the state is aware that there's interest in bidding for the Olympics, and I don't think the majority of the population outside of the 495 beltway cares much one way or the other. Not that they'd necessarily be opposed, but there's a world of difference between that and "ready willing and pumped."

I know the appeal of pure boosterism can be quite tempting, but there's no need to deliver sales pitches on an internet forum. Lets just continue to look at the nuts and bolts and see what problems and opportunities there are.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

- there are over 10,000 hotel rooms currently in development in Boston which is #5 in the country for Conventions of this size and larger.

- 87% of Bostons hotel market are Luxury Hotels

- Boston is the 4th Ranked LEED Certified State this year. (NYC 7th)

- 2012's 4th Quarter was the Strongest Quarter in Five Years for the U.S. Building Martet - Boston had the 2nd Highest in the Country

- No denying the MBTA would need upgrades, but just a note there are Currently HUGE upgrades already taking place and many projects have been completed in the past 2yrs

- The Boston Redevelopment broke ground on 22 Projects last year and 37 this year, we are the only city who not only continued building during the recession but the only city able to approve new projects and we are leading a huge building boom, there are 6 new high-rises, being built all of which include hotels, as well as Bostons 4th Tallest Building at 60 Stories.

I believe that that Boston Redevelopment Authority and the Massachusetts Convention Authorities as well as the Hotel Market would take HUGE Pride in not only making this happen in Boston but funding or finding funding, they have approved billions in the "Innovation Districts" of our city and we have been recognized as the most Innovative City in the Country...

And Senate & House Members from every County of Massachusetts have co-signed the Exploratory Committee Bill for Boston 2024 and Living not only in Boston, Provincetown and Western Mass I know that all of those locations are ready, willing, and PUMPED to support Boston 2024.

"Taxachusetts" a long standing nickname, primarily because its fun to say was extinguished long ago... Do we go by state mottos now to chose an Olympic City because NH should win then for sure "Live Free or Die!" -

State Business Tax Climate Ranks - 2012/2013

Overall Rank: 22nd

Corporate Tax: 33rd

Individual Income Tax: 15th

Sales Tax: 17th

Property Tax: 47th

Unemployment Insurance Tax: 49th

ALL of the IOC Documents: Archived, Current & Future can be found here: http://www.olympic.org/documents-reports-studies-publications

Very well stated. The only major issues are as stated, a suitable Olympic Stadium, Transportation upgrades and Public Support. These are all to be hashed out in due time. But i'm glad that the discussion is being initiated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeesh, thats a lot of drama going on...

Anyway, Rik, I've gotta temper your enthusiasm there. The rest of the state is still holding a grudge against Boston for the Big Dig. Almost nobody in the state is aware that there's interest in bidding for the Olympics, and I don't think the majority of the population outside of the 495 beltway cares much one way or the other. Not that they'd necessarily be opposed, but there's a world of difference between that and "ready willing and pumped."

I know the appeal of pure boosterism can be quite tempting, but there's no need to deliver sales pitches on an internet forum. Lets just continue to look at the nuts and bolts and see what problems and opportunities there are.

I don't think anyone should temper anyones enthusiasm nor do I think anyone has the right or responsibility to do so LOL.. and Being a member of ALL of these communities I do if fact know that these areas are "Ready, Willing & Pumped!" in the exploratory process of a Boston Bid. ALL of these locations have BIG ties with not only Current Local Olympic Heroes but are also Locations where Sports were Created and are cultivated to this very day.

But since you are not in the everyday I don't know how you can say what their feelings are, I made it clear that I was commenting on personal knowledge, just because something has not been put into the press does not mean that knowledge of the endeavor is unknown, especially to the people who may or may not be directly involved in making an event like this come to life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How are the people who started the Thread "New"? LOL.. just because we are new to your forum does not makes us new on this subject.. but as I have learned from earlier game play conversations, anytime you post a rebuttal or facts to support your topic or argument the "Alumni" like to attack, and twist everything to fit their AGENDA, which is to dismiss anything you post...

new [noo, nyoo] adjective

1. of recent origin, production, purchase, etc.; having but lately come or been brought into being: a new book.

2. of a kind now existing or appearing for the first time; novel: a new concept of the universe.

3. having but lately or but now come into knowledge: a new chemical element.

4. unfamiliar or strange (often followed by to ): ideas new to us; to visit new lands.

5. having but lately come to a place, position, status, etc.: a reception for our new minister.

New to the subject.. no. New to the forum, yes. Many of you. I could imagine what, say, an NFL forum would be like if a bunch of fans from 1 team all showed up at once and starting posting. I have no problem with engaging in a discussion on the merits of Boston hosting an Olympics. But I should remind you that in your very first post here on this forum, this is how you introduced yourselves to us...

And from personal experience as a Board Member of Bostons Bid for the 2014 Gay Games which is they LARGEST Sporting and Cultural Event in the world to and above par to the Olympics, this is an extremely feasible opportunity for Boston. Boston couldn't be a better fit for the Summer Olympics, and all of the cities and surrounding Sports Teams & Owners are fully on board to this kind of event coming to the city of Boston.

You compared hosting the Olympics to hosting the Gay Games and said that the Gay Games are above par to the Olympics. In your next few posts, you proceeding to compare the capacity of Harvard Stadium to previous Winter Olympics stadia. You called Gillette Stadium (I'll leave the spelling mistake in here because it's funny), "the Future Location of Super Bowels L and XLIX". So now you're going to sit there and accuse us of twisting things to fit their agenda? If that's not the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.

I'll say it again.. I admit I'm skeptical when it comes to a city like Boston aspiring to host the Olympics. So I apologize if it seems like I'm shooting down everyone's ideas and pointing out negatives where the Boston crowd is mostly looking for positives. But that's why I keep reminding you guys to tone it down with the hyperbole. To Chris's point.. it's 1 thing to play up your city and make it seem like the IOC needs to select Boston (assuming they get past the USOC first). But behind that, there does need to be a technically sound plan there. New York learned that the hard way. I remember from their presentation that it was all style and absolutely no substance. You guys have the style covered, no question. Now let's see how much real substance there is out there, especially now that the USOC has made this game very real for all the prospective host cities.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to thank those who have been contributory figures with some significant issues that need to be studied and addressed, I have personally found them very helpful and regardless if you think Boston is a Viable candiate or not I think that positive communication is vital for any cities bid process, we can all learn from each others bid process and help others as well.. A US Olympic Bid Win is a Win for the entire Country.

Link to post
Share on other sites

new [noo, nyoo] adjective

1. of recent origin, production, purchase, etc.; having but lately come or been brought into being: a new book.

2. of a kind now existing or appearing for the first time; novel: a new concept of the universe.

3. having but lately or but now come into knowledge: a new chemical element.

4. unfamiliar or strange (often followed by to ): ideas new to us; to visit new lands.

5. having but lately come to a place, position, status, etc.: a reception for our new minister.

New to the subject.. no. New to the forum, yes. Many of you. I could imagine what, say, an NFL forum would be like if a bunch of fans from 1 team all showed up at once and starting posting. I have no problem with engaging in a discussion on the merits of Boston hosting an Olympics. But I should remind you that in your very first post here on this forum, this is how you introduced yourselves to us...

You compared hosting the Olympics to hosting the Gay Games and said that the Gay Games are above par to the Olympics. In your next few posts, you proceeding to compare the capacity of Harvard Stadium to previous Winter Olympics stadia. You called Gillette Stadium (I'll leave the spelling mistake in here because it's funny), "the Future Location of Super Bowels L and XLIX". So now you're going to sit there and accuse us of twisting things to fit their agenda? If that's not the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.

I'll say it again.. I admit I'm skeptical when it comes to a city like Boston aspiring to host the Olympics. So I apologize if it seems like I'm shooting down everyone's ideas and pointing out negatives where the Boston crowd is mostly looking for positives. But that's why I keep reminding you guys to tone it down with the hyperbole. To Chris's point.. it's 1 thing to play up your city and make it seem like the IOC needs to select Boston (assuming they get past the USOC first). But behind that, there does need to be a technically sound plan there. New York learned that the hard way. I remember from their presentation that it was all style and absolutely no substance. You guys have the style covered, no question. Now let's see how much real substance there is out there, especially now that the USOC has made this game very real for all the prospective host cities.

Oh here we go again... MOVE ON!... Your personal attacks are ridiculous and juvenile and have no place here. I have a VAST amount of knowledge on this subject and this city and just because

I may have been to passionate about something or posted something that you have personal issue with but that does not discredit ME, or my information. As you can see I have pulled my own reigns and took some time off from this forum and came back on a new level. Nobody here needs you to keep them in check

Link to post
Share on other sites

You were way too gung-ho when you first joined Rik and some of your attempts to sell Boston's Olympic credentials, as Quaker says, were rather odd. But as you say, there's no point keep bringing that up. Let's all move on. For me, Boston seems like an interesting city. Its borderline viability as an Olympic host and middling international recognition mean we can't either dismiss it completely as one would for smaller cities or take its hosting abilities as a given as one would for mega-cities. It's an ideal city for a thread like this, seems to me anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

new [noo, nyoo] adjective

1. of recent origin, production, purchase, etc.; having but lately come or been brought into being: a new book.

2. of a kind now existing or appearing for the first time; novel: a new concept of the universe.

3. having but lately or but now come into knowledge: a new chemical element.

4. unfamiliar or strange (often followed by to ): ideas new to us; to visit new lands.

5. having but lately come to a place, position, status, etc.: a reception for our new minister.

New to the subject.. no. New to the forum, yes. Many of you. I could imagine what, say, an NFL forum would be like if a bunch of fans from 1 team all showed up at once and starting posting. I have no problem with engaging in a discussion on the merits of Boston hosting an Olympics. But I should remind you that in your very first post here on this forum, this is how you introduced yourselves to us...

You compared hosting the Olympics to hosting the Gay Games and said that the Gay Games are above par to the Olympics. In your next few posts, you proceeding to compare the capacity of Harvard Stadium to previous Winter Olympics stadia. You called Gillette Stadium (I'll leave the spelling mistake in here because it's funny), "the Future Location of Super Bowels L and XLIX". So now you're going to sit there and accuse us of twisting things to fit their agenda? If that's not the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.

I'll say it again.. I admit I'm skeptical when it comes to a city like Boston aspiring to host the Olympics. So I apologize if it seems like I'm shooting down everyone's ideas and pointing out negatives where the Boston crowd is mostly looking for positives. But that's why I keep reminding you guys to tone it down with the hyperbole. To Chris's point.. it's 1 thing to play up your city and make it seem like the IOC needs to select Boston (assuming they get past the USOC first). But behind that, there does need to be a technically sound plan there. New York learned that the hard way. I remember from their presentation that it was all style and absolutely no substance. You guys have the style covered, no question. Now let's see how much real substance there is out there, especially now that the USOC has made this game very real for all the prospective host cities.

And FYI - "OUT OF CONTEXT" your new handle... I did not COMPARE them.. I Stated Facts.. and that was on the number of athletes. The Bid Process is just as stringent, the amount of money it takes is huge and takes the same techniques to achieve. And there are MORE Athletes, MORE Cultural attendees and More Sporting Events then the Olympic games. Which directly answers any question of # of Hotel Rooms required or the ability to showcase each sport.

Just because its more expensive, more days, more media etc. Does not discredit what I was trying to point out. PEOPLE, PROCESS, OBJECTIVE, HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION, REQUIREMENTS...

And Foxboro was on the damn list of stadiums and then removed, it's called a process and a short list!... Just because they did not ended up getting a superbowl, and just because NEW ENGLAND WEATHER would be the largest issue as stated by the coaches of all NFL teams does not my information was INCORRECT!

Of course your skeptikal and your trying to discredit every person for your on vindictive personal agenda and if there is anyone who should be discredited its anyone who without knowledge tries to attack every single sentence another person says. Why are you in this forum?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You were way too gung-ho when you first joined Rik and some of your attempts to sell Boston's Olympic credentials, as Quaker says, were rather odd. But as you say, there's no point keep bringing that up. Let's all move on. For me, Boston seems like an interesting city. Its borderline viability as an Olympic host and middling international recognition mean we can't either dismiss it completely as one would for smaller cities or take its hosting abilities as a given as one would for mega-cities. It's an ideal city for a thread like this, seems to me anyway.

And I have acknowledged this, I took a break, I moved on and I came back with a new outlook and openness and eager to invest in learning from all sides..

Quaker needs to get off his pedistal and move on as well.. Personal attacks are uncalled for and I have STATED myself that I know Boston has many battles to fight and many negatives but I also know that every issue that is against us can be fixed and changed, the only obstacle that can't be hurdled is the negative attacks that are personal and not based on the subject.

Just like an election it doesnt matter how much proof you have or how much you try to show someone that your the best candidate there will ALWAYS be people who are just stuck in their own head and wont push their pride or lack their of it aside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And there are MORE Athletes, MORE Cultural attendees and More Sporting

Events then the Olympic games. Which directly answers any question of #

of Hotel Rooms required or the ability to showcase each sport.

It doesn't directly answer anything to do with hotel rooms. Tickets sold for London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics, around 11 million. Tickets sold for the Gay Games, measured in the 10s of thousands as far as I can see.

It's hard to discuss issues of viability when your figures seem not to tally.

Maybe that was a typo and you didn't actually mean hotels but instead meant village requirements. I've no idea what the village requirements for the Gay Games are and whether there is any overlap between those and what is required for the Olympics. Perhaps you could expand your thoughts on this?

Edited by RobH
Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't directly answer anything to do with hotel rooms. Tickets sold for London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics, around 11 million. Tickets sold for the Gay Games, measured in the 10s of thousands as far as I can see.

This is why people get frustrated. If you're getting basic things like this wrong, it's hard to discuss issues of viability. That's not a personal swipe, please don't take it as such.

EDIT: I assume that maybe that was a typo and you didn't mean hotels but village requiremtns. I've no idea what the village requirements for the Gay Games are and whether there is an overlap between those and the Olympics. Perhaps you could expand your thoughts on this?

Again you are making the the conversation to be what you think it should be about... I was not trying to address ticket sales.. Why would I, even if I had no olympic knowledge a layman would know that ticket sales for the Olympics would be astronomical..

And PEOPLE weren't frustrated, you were... I continued to have constructive conversations with others and you would then join that conversation and change the context of those as well..

And I will no longer address this topic, I have apologized, stated my enthusiasm took the best of me especially when it comes to writing online things you can't edit or revise. I am here to talk about an Olympic Bid for Boston in 2024, not your agenda. Either move on with me or waste your own time addressing a petty argument and every swipe has been personal, I'm sorry that the Gay Games do not meet your Standards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about the Gay Games not meeting my standards. Where did I say anything like that? Stupid thing to say.

in you are making the the conversation to be what you think it should be about... I was not trying to address ticket sales

No, you were addressing hotel numbers. If you can't understand basic arguments about how hotels relate to ticket sales and about how the number of hotels available for a Gay Games doesn't "directly answer" the number of hotel rooms needed for an Olympics, that's not my problem.

Whatever Rik. I tried. It seems you want to take everything personally. I've not got the time for that.

Edited by RobH
Link to post
Share on other sites

And Foxboro was on the damn list of stadiums and then removed, it's called a process and a short list!... Just because they did not ended up getting a superbowl, and just because NEW ENGLAND WEATHER would be the largest issue as stated by the coaches of all NFL teams does not my information was INCORRECT!

Of course your skeptikal and your trying to discredit every person for your on vindictive personal agenda and if there is anyone who should be discredited its anyone who without knowledge tries to attack every single sentence another person says. Why are you in this forum?

See, this is my thing. I was over everything that happened last month, except you have to come back and accuse us of having an agenda and twist facts when that is EXACTLY what you were doing from minute one. You talk about your "VAST amount of knowledge" and then tell ME to get off my pedestal? Oh.. and Gillette Stadium was NEVER under consideration to host a Super Bowl. That is a factually incorrect statement.

I'm done with this. I apologize if I've come off as harsh, but this will be the last thing I say on this matter. You're on an Olympics bid forum. I don't doubt your knowledge of all things Boston, but most of us here probably know a few more things about Olympic bidding than you're willing to give us credit for. Please respect that if you're going to compare the Olympic Games to another sporting event (doesn't matter what is if you're going to try and play that card here) that, especially in the context of an Olympics bid, is not the same.

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...