Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Bbut seriously, there is probably truth to both stories. This one here will probably resonate with some IOC voters. But after Rio, a painless event may resonate as well. 

The IOC already has Tokyo 2020  to ease their frustrations over Rio 2016. And out of the 2024 bidders, the only one there that wouldn't be painless is Budapest, & perhaps maybe Rome.

But regardless, even the most prepared Olympic host city wouldn't be a "painless event". Problems, issues, glitches, etc always arise. And to think otherwise would be totally naive.

No city out there is 'perfect', especially when it's comes to something as complex as the Olympic Games of the 21st century.

15 minutes ago, LatinXTC said:

You know I've been getting irritated about how people have been using Michael Phelps as a great example for change. I've been thinking to myself "all he did was smoke a f**king bowl what's got goddamn big deal???" and then I realized I forgot he was stopped for driving drunk I think twice lol

Yep, he was heading down a wrong path & was suicidal. He also went to rehab. So he had problems that were more than just "smoking a fu@king bowl".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Si, dans la course aux Jeux 2024, Los Angeles occupe toujours la position de favori devant Paris, Rome et Budapest, l’édition 2016 n’aura pas fait bouger les lignes (...)

L'Equipe of Monday August 14 page 14

Quote

On dit Los Angeles favori, que c’est le tour des États-Unis…

L'Equipe of Monday August 14 page 24

Edited by hektor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not revealing anything. It's still a couple of blank statements. Who said it? How was it said? Where was that statement said? Paste the whole context, not just a couple of lines. 

The whole "many IOC members are ticked about USADA's meddling about Russia's doping athletes & could 'ruin' L.A.'s chances" would seem to be more damning than over what L'equipe thinks that they know.

If anything, it's a wash when equated with the Russian doping fiasco. Not to mention the whole FIFA mess from last year, that they U.S. was also in charge of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On August 22, 2016 at 5:32 AM, hektor said:

French daily L'Équipe says today that the general feedback they got in Rio from the IOC insiders is that it is the US's turn and as a consequence Los Angeles 2024 is the favourite.

Is this what you're talking about? I found this on their website but it's from Aug 2nd. Not exactly an endorsement of LA but whatever I'll take it. I wouldn't read too much into it though.

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.lequipe.fr/Aussi/Paris-2024/&prev=search

At the opening ceremony of the 129th IOC session Monday night in Rio de Janeiro, Los Angeles bid promoters to 2024 Olympic Games have been delighted on hearing Thomas Bach boast "new technology, virtual reality the cameras 360 degrees "and referring to a recent visit to Silicon Valley. "Young people live in the digital world and this is where we must go," said Thomas Bach. 

This part of his speech was to present the launch on 21 August, the future Olympic Channel, but it corresponded to the message what steps passing the main opponent to the Paris bid for the 2024 Olympic Games ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just think that's their pessimism talking, though. After three prior losses, I could see why some of the French could be skeptical. I still believe that this is Paris' to lose. And as long as the 2024 bid committee also believes in themselves (which I'm sure they do), then they can finally bring this home. We also still don't know the true context on how that was said. So until further evaluation, that's just their opinion, IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alphamale86 said:

Is this what you're talking about? I found this on their website but it's from Aug 2nd. Not exactly an endorsement of LA but whatever I'll take it. I wouldn't read too much into it though.

 

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.lequipe.fr/Aussi/Paris-2024/&prev=search

At the opening ceremony of the 129th IOC session Monday night in Rio de Janeiro, Los Angeles bid promoters to 2024 Olympic Games have been delighted on hearing Thomas Bach boast "new technology, virtual reality the cameras 360 degrees "and referring to a recent visit to Silicon Valley. "Young people live in the digital world and this is where we must go," said Thomas Bach. 

This part of his speech was to present the launch on 21 August, the future Olympic Channel, but it corresponded to the message what steps passing the main opponent to the Paris bid for the 2024 Olympic Games ...

No, it's not about that at all. The lines he quoted (from whereever he got them from) very briefly described how Los Angeles "is the favorite", & how it's "the U.S.' turn". But there's no context to it whatsoever. So it's very skeptical at best, without knowing more details about those brief statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paris is the favorite by far......it Paris where to lose to anyone they may never have an Olympics ever again because they would be sooooooooooo mad! And Europe would probably just never bid again either. So Paris MUST win........there is too much at stake.

LA has other things going on and the IOC hates the US anyway.......I mean we are sooooo American.

AND.....don't for get Trump!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, CITYofDREAMS said:

Wait, what?  Please tell me you're not advocating for allowing drug cheats to compete in the Olympics so that all these investigations won't harm LA's bid.  Which is debatable to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Quaker2001 said:

Wait, what?  Please tell me you're not advocating for allowing drug cheats to compete in the Olympics so that all these investigations won't harm LA's bid.  Which is debatable to say the least.

No I'm not advocating for cheaters to play but going by the IOC reaction with the investigation it would seem they don't have any problems with allowing this to happen otherwise why are they growing angry over the investigation.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, paul said:

L.A. is the favorite by far......if L.A. where to lose to anyone they may never have an Olympics ever again because they would be sooooooooooo mad! Because L.A. is the beacon & answer to the Olympic Movement, & the U.S. provides so much to the IOC, so how can they not see that! And the U.S. would probably just never bid again either, because it would be an insult to us to lose again. So L.A. MUST win........there is too much at stake.

There - fixed that for you. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100-28. I make that France's turn. Come back in 2028, you'll be favourites then for sure (as long as you don't do what Canada look like doing & screw yourselves over by going for the winters). Although I'd far rather see NY #1 than LA #3. Don't know if there's any chance of that though :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, CITYofDREAMS said:

No I'm not advocating for cheaters to play but going by the IOC reaction with the investigation it would seem they don't have any problems with allowing this to happen otherwise why are they growing angry over the investigation.

Why are they growing angry?  Gee, could it be because they're a bunch of spineless jellyfish who are being called out for being spineless jellyfish?  And we supposed to care that the IOC is angry because they'd rather ignore this issue than deal with it?  And maybe the United States should back off the investigation less it hurt their 2024 bid?  No thank you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, paul said:

Paris is the favorite by far......it Paris where to lose to anyone they may never have an Olympics ever again because they would be sooooooooooo mad! And Europe would probably just never bid again either. So Paris MUST win........there is too much at stake.

LA has other things going on and the IOC hates the US anyway.......I mean we are sooooo American.

AND.....don't for get Trump!

If Paris wins the bid for 2024, I don't know how much of that can be attributed to the fact that they might be really butthurt if they lose.  And that they are the likely front-runner, it's not without merit that they got there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Why are they growing angry?  Gee, could it be because they're a bunch of spineless jellyfish who are being called out for being spineless jellyfish?  And we supposed to care that the IOC is angry because they'd rather ignore this issue than deal with it?  And maybe the United States should back off the investigation less it hurt their 2024 bid?  No thank you.

totally agree with you... however is just unfortunate that they will use this against the US bid and we will have another Chicago 2016 scenario here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FYI said:

I just think that's their pessimism talking, though. After three prior losses, 

 

Even in terms of bidding losses w/in the last 30 years, France is ahead there (4 French, including Annecy) whereas the US has only lost in the 2012 and 2016 bids.  So, indeed, that "loss" record favors this Paris bid.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, CITYofDREAMS said:

totally agree with you... however is just unfortunate that they will use this against the US bid and we will have another Chicago 2016 scenario here.

You say that so matter-of-factly.  Very little of what happened with Chicago 2016 makes this similar, except for the fact that Chicago 2016 was never that likely to win (going out first was surprisingly, but that's beside the point), and LA 2024 might not win either.  But all this is for completely different reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the time of the 2016 campaign, Chicago was definitely seen with good chances to win. Saying that it wasn't, is merely in hindsight. With London having been awarded the following Summer Games in Europe, that handicapped Madrid. And with Beijing having just hosted the Summer Games in Asia the year before, that hadicapped Tokyo. So 2016 was widely viewed at the time as "the Americas' turn". And with Rio's bid still facing many challenges (that turned out to be true in the end anyway), Chicago was seen in a good position to snag it from the Brazilians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FYI said:

I just think that's their pessimism talking, though. After three prior losses, I could see why some of the French could be skeptical. I still believe that this is Paris' to lose. And as long as the 2024 bid committee also believes in themselves (which I'm sure they do), then they can finally bring this home. We also still don't know the true context on how that was said. So until further evaluation, that's just their opinion, IMHO.

If there's one lesson I've learned here over the years in GamesBids, is to treat "insider" knowledge of IOC sentiment with a fair dash of scepticism. Even our own members with good contacts amongst IOC members have proven way off the mark when reporting what they've been told - and I've fallen for that.

Thing is, hard to really get a feeling of overwhelming "sentiment" when the IOC are nothing if not an eclectic bunch. Just too many personalities, individuals and agendas within the mix to really get an accurate feel of "mood" - especially this far out from a vote. Then, depending on who you talk to, you'd have to remember they'd also be confirming their own sympathies, inclinations and wishes into what their reporting.

I also think, regarding L'Equipe and Le Monde, that they're probably also projecting the rising tide of Olympic-scepticism sweeping Europe. I'd still be surprised if the IOC didn't see that as their main pressing challenge to overcome. I also think that many would have to be aware of the consequences that would play out if they denied a strong and sentimental bid from France AGAIN for the fourth time in as many decades. Moreso than if they "denied" a country that has already hosted four Olympics - two each of summer and winter - again in the same time period.

Or to put it in another way that's seen bandied about here lately. The IOC can't afford NOT to try to reclaim control of the conversation in Europe. That's less urgent a need in the US.

But I WOULD think that, of course, it would be confirming my own sympathies, inclinations and wishes.

Edited by Sir Rols
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FYI said:

At the time of the 2016 campaign, Chicago was definitely seen with good chances to win. Saying that it wasn't, is merely in hindsight. With London having been awarded the following Summer Games in Europe, that handicapped Madrid. And with Beijing having just hosted the Summer Games in Asia the year before, that hadicapped Tokyo. So 2016 was widely viewed at the time as "the Americas' turn". And with Rio's bid still facing many challenges (that turned out to be true in the end anyway), Chicago was seen in a good position to snag it from the Brazilians.

But but.. the map!  First ever Olympics in South America!  It was a done deal!! :lol:

Not trying to undersell what Chicago's shot at winning was, but note that hindsight has also tells us that the USOC-IOC revenue disagreement was a bigger deal at the time than we realized.  Certainly played into Chicago's odds of winning that we may or may not have accounted for.

2016 will forever be a weird election because the technical scores gave the highest marks to the 2 cities that were handicapped by recent hostings and a Rio bid that had lower scores, but obviously had the South America angle to push.  And in the middle was Chicago with the president of the United States pushing his hometown.  No question it's different to look back than how we thought of it then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

But but.. the map!  First ever Olympics in South America!  It was a done deal!! :lol:

Well, but this is underselling it in the other direction, though. It obviously was that "map" that ultimately pushed it in Rio's favor. 

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Not trying to undersell what Chicago's shot at winning was, but note that hindsight has also tells us that the USOC-IOC revenue disagreement was a bigger deal at the time than we realized.  Certainly played into Chicago's odds of winning that we may or may not have accounted for.

What's still interesting though, that the article below, from seven years ago, illustrates what Rols just pointed out a couple of posts above. That despite what some "IOC insiders" say beforehand, the final result a lot of the time can be quite different. Cuz regardless of the revenue deal (which most of us speculate was also a cause, but have never really known how much of a factor it really was), here it states that "Chicago & Rio have emerged as the two front runners" & that the 2016 race was  "close as hell" now, according to people "close to the process".

http://newsone.com/317387/cnn-chicago-rio-olympic-battle-close-as-hell/

So that's why when I see some on here declaring that L.A. is the new "favorite", or that L.A. is really "closing the gap" on Paris, I just have to chuckle to myself. Cuz if even "IOC insiders" or people "close to the process" can't call it, then much, much less some bias forumers on GB's of all places.

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

2016 will forever be a weird election because the technical scores gave the highest marks to the 2 cities that were handicapped by recent hostings and a Rio bid that had lower scores, but obviously had the South America angle to push.  And in the middle was Chicago with the president of the United States pushing his hometown.  No question it's different to look back than how we thought of it then. 

 Funny you should say that, cuz the USA basketball managing director, Jerry Colangelo, also called it "weird". Citing his suspicions & that the vote was "wired for Rio". Citing that members of the Chicago bid committee were given "bad information" as to the intent of delegates. Which again here, illustrates that you can never trust any information when it comes to perceived "frontrunner" status. Especially on bids that, geopolitically, have the odds stacked against them in the first place (although Chicago wasn't one of those initially). As I've said before on the matter, & which this Colangelo also acknowledges, it's not that he didn't understand why the IOC chose Rio, but that Chicago got sacked first, given what was "the insider info". But in the end, Colangelo digresses.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/international/ct-jerry-colangelo-chicago-2016-olympics-spt-0628-20160627-story.html

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, as big of an LA supporter as I am, I don't think LA is the new favorite at all but what I do think is that they are positioning themselves extremely well to upstage Paris. They aren't making any mistakes right now, the bid seems feasible and affordable, the population excited and the bid seems fresh. Paris is doing a great job but they aren't running away with it as I thought they would be. I get a sense that their approach is more traditional but nothing is wrong with that I just thought with as much hype about Paris being the lock for 2024 that LA would have been a none factor as how Boston was when they were in the race. Lets face it, when Boston got the win we were all like this is a wasted bid, and though some of you may still think LA is a wasted bid as well I think if you are honest with yourself, if LA did manage to win 2024 we wouldn't be shocked or as shocked as we would be if Boston had beaten Paris due to the incredible plan and marketing strategy LA has implemented.

Not knocking Paris but LA's bid is actually superseding expectations where as Paris, to me, is just simply accepted as the winner not because of their bid but because the elements and timing match up if you understand what I mean.

And I'll squash this now Terrorism won't be a deciding factor cause it happens everywhere and Trump only becomes a factor is he wins in November. If that happens LA2024 might as well go home.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...