Jump to content

Repeat Summer Olympic Host Countries


Soaring

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Why has Birmingham (UK) never been raised as a possibility for the next British olympics? It's the second city, is regenerating fast, & has the NEC for all indoor sports already there. Surely Brum should at least be up with Manchester/Glasgow.

I suppose Birmingham could also be a realistic host in terms of size (about 2.5 m) and sports infrastructure. It just hasn't got any kind of international profile and has quite a small / low key city centre for its size. Birmingham Airport also only handles about 9m passengers per year and so it would have to be expanded quite a bit. There are the beginnings of a light rail system in Birmingham, but again there would have to be serious money spent in this area to get it up to the scale that Manchester has with Metrolink. Birmingham bid for 1992, but didn't really make any impact with the IOC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BR, just out of interest, how far away is New Orleans? If NO wanted the games, could BR potentially host some of the events?

New Orleans is 80 miles from BR. I don't think that it could be used even for a soccer match. New Orleans itself is also small, however. It's metro area is only 1.2 million, not anything significantly larger than BR or even Tulsa.

Plus, New Orleans airport is also quite small by international standards. Less than 9 million passengers a year. In terms of hotel capacity, it fairs better than the other two simply bcuz New Orleans is more well known bcuz of Mardi Gras & the French Quarter & people want to go there for that.

But apart from that, New Orleans would have a lot of work to do in order to be "Olympic ready". Too much work to even be practical really. Not to mention the weather wouldn't be ideal during Games time bcuz of their location in the Gulf.

I think New Orleans is one of those places that sounds nice in theory, like Las Vegas or Orlando, but not in actuality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BR, just out of interest, how far away is New Orleans? If NO wanted the games, could BR potentially host some of the events?

Yeah, New Orleans is an hour away by car. If they added a train (preferably mag-lev or commuter rail) BR could host Swimming events, basketball, baseball and even football. LSU stadium has more (comfortable) seating then most Olympic stadiums now, it holds 90,000 people and they are making it bigger, when that's finished it will fit 100,000. NOLA's bid would most likely do what London did to her east side 'rebuild it'. Yet like FYI said NOLA would be a b**** to get around. The games would also have to be held the last two weeks of May to avoid a hurricane which would cause problems. The city is also the #1 human trafficking city (slavery) in the US.

Overall while I would like to see her East side rebuilt and population rallied up the city needs to do more than BR to bid in the near or distant future.

New Orleans is 80 miles from BR. I don't think that it could be used even for a soccer match. New Orleans itself is also small, however. It's metro area is only 1.2 million, not anything significantly larger than BR or even Tulsa.

Plus, New Orleans airport is also quite small by international standards. Less than 9 million passengers a year. In terms of hotel capacity, it fairs better than the other two simply bcuz New Orleans is more well known bcuz of Mardi Gras & the French Quarter & people want to go there for that.

But apart from that, New Orleans would have a lot of work to do in order to be "Olympic ready". Too much work to even be practical really. Not to mention the weather wouldn't be ideal during Games time bcuz of their location in the Gulf.

I think New Orleans is one of those places that sounds nice in theory, like Las Vegas or Orlando, but not in actuality.

Completely agree, SO MUCH, would have to be done to make the city work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh really? I honestly thought NO was one of the more Olympic-ready cities in the US, didn't expect that. Still, as I said in another thread, the next games in North America will either be in the Northeast US, or more likely in Toronto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought New Orleans was one US city that would have the world profile to prove attractive. But, yeah, I've ben told here often it's not big enough - not to mention that Katrina really meant it's not a location that could even be considered for the past few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought New Orleans was one US city that would have the world profile to prove attractive. But, yeah, I've ben told here often it's not big enough - not to mention that Katrina really meant it's not a location that could even be considered for the past few years.

Well Katrina reconstruction could win them the bid like London. The east side of the city is really down and the Olympics placed there would do what London did to their east side.

Oh really? I honestly thought NO was one of the more Olympic-ready cities in the US, didn't expect that. Still, as I said in another thread, the next games in North America will either be in the Northeast US, or more likely in Toronto.

Nah, the only city that will get the Olympics soon on this side of the world is Boston or Dallas.

JK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a link between the "Baton Rouge" and "Birmingham UK" components of this thread. Birmingham is much larger than BR, but it's still too small to host a modern Summer Olympics. Four decades ago, Munich, which today has a metropolitan population about the same as Birmingham, could host the Summer Olympics successfully. After Munich, Montreal, somewhat larger (now nearly 4 million metro population), had serious problems, and since then, Summer Olympic cities have been centres of metropolitan areas over the 4.5 million population mark on current measures. The exception, which turned out in practical terms not to be an exception, was Athens, just barely over 4 million today.

In Europe's industrialisation, the tendency was for large numbers of medium-sized competing metropolitan areas to develop, often only about about a day's horseback-riding distance apart. Usually, only national capitals are much larger. The federal structure, and vast scale, of the USA, has made room for a different pattern, with ten cities dominating metropolitan populations over 4.5 million, spread over much larger areas than would be possible in Europe.

In terms of size, any of the central cities in the top ten metro areas in the USA should be able to host a Summer Olympiad, but some would want to hold the Games outside the northern hemisphere summer months, which would be awkward. So, New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington, Dallas or Boston, but what about Miami or Houston in hurricane season? In Europe, only Paris, Madrid, Istanbul, Milan, St. Petersburg, Berlin (and maybe Frankfurt or Hamburg, for which OECD population figures are much larger than other sources) could realistically follow the recent hosts.

Smaller cities, even capitals, can't justify the inward investment, because it would boost their infrastructure too much, in relative terms, for regional stability (in the USA, I think San Francisco would be the largest place falling into this category). Of course, when it comes to mega-cities, eastern Asia is the area to watch; in future I expect the Summer Olympics to visit Asia as often as they visit Europe.

For smaller cities, however, there is what might be called "the Manchester question". Can the process of bidding for the Olympics be made advantageous in itself, attracting investment on a relatively small but still worthwhile scale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do you think that we will now see the Australia 92/96/00 pattern used much more by other countries, so regional cities/beta cites first (Brisbane 92), then second cities/high beta/low alpha cities (Melbourne 96), & then finally national capital/alpha city to actually win the Games (Sydney 00). For example, in Canada, you could start with somewhere like Winnipeg, then move on to, say, Vancouver, before going for the win with Toronto. Also, do you think that we are close to running out of potential host cities?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do you think that we will now see the Australia 92/96/00 pattern used much more by other countries, so regional cities/beta cites first (Brisbane 92), then second cities/high beta/low alpha cities (Melbourne 96), & then finally national capital/alpha city to actually win the Games (Sydney 00). For example, in Canada, you could start with somewhere like Winnipeg, then move on to, say, Vancouver, before going for the win with Toronto. Also, do you think that we are close to running out of potential host cities?

probably, we may have to turn back to cities like New Orleans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is really getting bizarre now.

Yup, that's the way I like it.

So do you think that we will now see the Australia 92/96/00 pattern used much more by other countries, so regional cities/beta cites first (Brisbane 92), then second cities/high beta/low alpha cities (Melbourne 96), & then finally national capital/alpha city to actually win the Games (Sydney 00). For example, in Canada, you could start with somewhere like Winnipeg, then move on to, say, Vancouver, before going for the win with Toronto. Also, do you think that we are close to running out of potential host cities?

The Australian pattern may not be typical of anything. Melbourne had already been a host city, neither Melbourne nor Sydney was the capital of Australia, and internally they are probably closer rivals than Sydney's higher international profile would suggest. In most reasonably populous countries, you'd probably get a couple of bids from secondary cities in the 2-3 million metro population range, then the big hitter.

What we can't yet begin to guess, except perhaps by examination of the Winter Olympic host selection, is whether somewhere like Doha can ever overcome its basic disadvantages by simply throwing more and more and more money at the bid.

PS: We're nowhere near running out of potential cities, particularly with so many previous hosts wanting second and third goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Katrina reconstruction could win them the bid like London. The east side of the city is really down and the Olympics placed there would do what London did to their east side.

Nah, the only city that will get the Olympics soon on this side of the world is Boston or Dallas.

JK

There's nothing wrong with being ignorant and wanting to learn. But making such decisive and confident statements which are clearly poorly informed make you look like a flaming troll. Such proud ignorance in a forum like this is just grating, how old are you...12? If you don't know something, ask questions, don't just make stupid pronouncements.

Toronto which you dismissed so casually has a higher probability of being selected than any of the cities you listed. New York, Chicago, Toronto and Los Angeles are the main alpha cities of this continent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's nothing wrong with being ignorant and wanting to learn. But making such decisive and confident statements which are clearly poorly informed make you look like a flaming troll. Such proud ignorance in a forum like this is just grating, how old are you...12? If you don't know something, ask questions, don't just make stupid pronouncements.

Toronto which you dismissed so casually has a higher probability of being selected than any of the cities you listed. New York, Chicago, Toronto and Los Angeles are the main alpha cities of this continent.

First I said Just Kidding at then end of my post implying that I was only joking. Next lets see when the last year was that any games were held in Canada...oh that's right 2010. USA 2002 by 2024 it will have been about five games since Canada held them and about eight or so since Salt Lake City and a lifetime ago since Atlanta. Now I do believe that the US should wait until 2028 to get the summer games because we hosted the centennial games, but any longer till the USA receives the games could be damaging to the USA support of the Olympic movement. For the US to be rejected three times and the last loosing to a Canadian bid would be VERY harmful to IOC support here.

So please get off your "Were hosting the Pan Ams in 2015" high horse as my "BR2028" is asleep in the stables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the IOC are concerned, it has been 28 years since the last US games, & 48 years since the last Canadian games. (These figures are based on the 2024 games). If the hosts of the 2020s are anything other than Tokyo, Toronto, & Paris (in whatever order) I will be surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So please get off your "Were hosting the Pan Ams in 2015" high horse as my "BR2028" is asleep in the stables.

I don't think anyone thinks the 2015 Pan American Games are a must for if Toronto were to host 2024. It certainly helps push the case, but it certainly won't push Toronto over like the 2007 Pan Ams likely did for Rio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toronto would be a great host, but I do not see that happening till the the 2040's. The US will host in the 2020's, and if they do not it sure as alaska will not be Canada. I do see Toronto, Paris, Boston, and a South African nation bidding for 2024 and I think we all know who will win that (cough Paris). The 2028 to an American city. 2032 Buenos Aires, 2036 Melbourne, 2040 Berlin, 2044 Toronto, 2048 Shanghi, 2052 Brazil, 2056 Roma, 2060 Kuala Lumpur, 2064 American City, 2068 Istanbul, 2072 Sydney, 2076 Moscow, 2080 Alberta, 2084 Tokyo, 2088 Israel, 2092 New Taipei, 2096 Athens, 2100 Manchester!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toronto would be a great host, but I do not see that happening till the the 2040's. The US will host in the 2020's, and if they do not it sure as alaska will not be Canada. I do see Toronto, Paris, Boston, and a South African nation bidding for 2024 and I think we all know who will win that (cough Paris). The 2028 to an American city. 2032 Buenos Aires, 2036 Melbourne, 2040 Berlin, 2044 Toronto, 2048 Shanghi, 2052 Brazil, 2056 Roma, 2060 Kuala Lumpur, 2064 American City, 2068 Istanbul, 2072 Sydney, 2076 Moscow, 2080 Alberta, 2084 Tokyo, 2088 Israel, 2092 New Taipei, 2096 Athens, 2100 Manchester!

And the Olympic gold medal for the dumbest post in the history of GB goes to...*birds chirping*

I tend to avoid redneck backwaters, but if the rest of the population in Baton Rouge is as clinically insane as you, I may just drive through there for a nice comedic safari tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the Olympic gold medal for the dumbest post in the history of GB goes to...*birds chirping*

I tend to avoid redneck backwaters, but if the rest of the population in Baton Rouge is as clinically insane as you, I may just drive through there for a nice comedic safari tour.

I'm sorry for placing my opinion on a website that is designed for me to do so. I hope you meant Austin because I do not live in Baton Rouge; I did a few years back, but moved back to Austin.

And the Olympic gold medal for the dumbest post in the history of GB goes to...*birds chirping*

I tend to avoid redneck backwaters, but if the rest of the population in Baton Rouge is as clinically insane as you, I may just drive through there for a nice comedic safari tour.

In the original I was making a joke, and the second was to see your reaction. It's more fun than skiing down Quebec's mountains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go again...
Winter Games have zero influence on the allocation of Summer Games:
Cortina Dampezzo 56 - Roma 60: 4 years
Tokyo 64 - Sapporo 72: 8 years
Montreal 76 - Calgary 88: 12 years
Atlanta 96 - Salt Lake 02: 6 years

Interesting how you fail to point out that the last 3 of those combinations were a summer games followed by a winter games. Order does matter. Given the field of potential host cities for a Summer Olympics, it's a much taller order going for a Summer after hosting a Winter than the other way around. So if you think 2010 would have no bearing on a future Toronto bid, particularly if that bid is for 2024, I'd like to see how that actually works in practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smaller cities, even capitals, can't justify the inward investment, because it would boost their infrastructure too much, in relative terms, for regional stability (in the USA, I think San Francisco would be the largest place falling into this category). Of course, when it comes to mega-cities, eastern Asia is the area to watch; in future I expect the Summer Olympics to visit Asia as often as they visit Europe.

Which countries do you expect to host then? Currently there are only three options, China, Japan and Korea. Unless that number increases, I don't see your prediction becoming reality. China could have a few dozen megacities but they wouldn't be all eligible. And even if they were, it's still only one nation. Europe has one advantage besides a eurocentric IOC and that is the number of countries available, even if North America may come close in available cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First I said Just Kidding at then end of my post implying that I was only joking. Next lets see when the last year was that any games were held in Canada...oh that's right 2010. USA 2002 by 2024 it will have been about five games since Canada held them and about eight or so since Salt Lake City and a lifetime ago since Atlanta. Now I do believe that the US should wait until 2028 to get the summer games because we hosted the centennial games, but any longer till the USA receives the games could be damaging to the USA support of the Olympic movement. For the US to be rejected three times and the last loosing to a Canadian bid would be VERY harmful to IOC support here.

I know the United States pays a disproportionate amount of money to the IOC in terms of TV rights and sponsorships, but I wouldn't call 17 years since Atlanta "a lifetime" (I know it's longer by the time we get to 2024, but still). I agree there's a concern over that support washing up (although telling that to NBC and the $4.38 billion check they wrote to the IOC) without an Olympics held here, but I'd like to think the USOC can win 1 of these competitions on actual merit and that the USOC candidate deserves to beat the competition. Is the IOC really going to lose sleep over passing over the United States again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...