Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, FYI said:

South Africa has already pleaged that they're not bidding until at least the 2032 Games. They want to get through their 2022 commonwealth games first & then take it from there. So they're outta the way. And if Europe likely wins 2024, then they're outta the way. South America would also be outta the way. And with Asia hosting the next three Olympic Games, then they'll be outta the way, too, for 2028. 

So at this point, 2028 does seem like the most favorable for North America. The U.S. hosting the Games more than any other country doesn't help right now, especially when you factor in 1996. But those wouldn't be factors that would work against a U.S. 2028 bid, when considering all of the above. The only possible strong threat there could come from Canada.

I could see a return to South America if Buenos Aires had a sold bid. Not that they're bidding. My only point being that I don't think Rio would preclude a return to South America in 2028. The Summer games are back in Asia in Tokyo in the same amount of time after they were in Beijing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Aquatic said:

There's no way in hell the IOC would choose L.A. over Paris. If I'm wrong when the time comes, I'll eat my words and say that I was wrong, but, I don't belive I am.

If South Africa bids, for 2028, they will beat L.A. If San Francisco had a sold bid, they would beat L.A. If Chicago came back, they'd beat L.A. Anyone can beat L.A. L.A. only wins when A) There's no other choice or B ) No other viable choice.

Also, I'm not sure why the USOC has such desire to host anyway. To me, even the USOC seems desperate. The USA has had so many olympic games (summer and winter) in such a short timespan (in terms of Olympic years). Sit down and wait a hundred years like Paris has. So greedy.

Why wouldn't they want to host?  That's not desperation or greed.  That the U.S. has hosted as many Olympics as they have is a matter of circumstance.  Atlanta had no business winning in 1996, but none of the other bid cities in the running were worthy.  That U.S. cities got rejected for 2012 and 2016 was a matter of bad timing.  As FYI noted, South Africa has decided to hold off until 2032.  So if Paris wins 2024 (which I think they will, but it's far from a done deal, IMO), then who does that leave for 2028?  Much like 1984, that one may fall right into the USOC's lap and whatever city they put forward is going to be the winner.  Specific to this race though, would a solid bid from San Francisco in this 2024 showdown fare much better than LA?  I don't think they would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Why wouldn't they want to host?  That's not desperation or greed.  That the U.S. has hosted as many Olympics as they have is a matter of circumstance.  Atlanta had no business winning in 1996, but none of the other bid cities in the running were worthy.  That U.S. cities got rejected for 2012 and 2016 was a matter of bad timing.  As FYI noted, South Africa has decided to hold off until 2032.  So if Paris wins 2024 (which I think they will, but it's far from a done deal, IMO), then who does that leave for 2028?  Much like 1984, that one may fall right into the USOC's lap and whatever city they put forward is going to be the winner.  Specific to this race though, would a solid bid from San Francisco in this 2024 showdown fare much better than LA?  I don't think they would.

Re: 2024 and SF

No, not against Paris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Aquatic said:

I could see a return to South America if Buenos Aires had a sold bid. Not that they're bidding. My only point being that I don't think Rio would preclude a return to South America in 2028. The Summer games are back in Asia in Tokyo in the same amount of time after they were in Beijing.

Look at what the other options were for 2020 though.  A politically unstable Istanbul or an economically unstable Madrid.  That the Summer Olympics are returning to Asia so soon was less a choice and more a lack of options.  Hard to see a South American city finding themselves in similar circumstances.  And note about Buenoes Aires.. they're slated to host the 2018 Youth Olympics, so they had their eyes on the smaller prize rather than the big one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Look at what the other options were for 2020 though.  A politically unstable Istanbul or an economically unstable Madrid.  That the Summer Olympics are returning to Asia so soon was less a choice and more a lack of options.  Hard to see a South American city finding themselves in similar circumstances.  And note about Buenoes Aires.. they're slated to host the 2018 Youth Olympics, so they had their eyes on the smaller prize rather than the big one.

Or, they are preparing for 2028....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, FYI said:

So at this point, 2028 does seem like the most favorable for North America. 

People argue for or against "continental rotation"; I'm not sure it really factors in, but if it does, I would think 2024 would be North America's turn.

North America hasn't hosted a summer Olympics since 1996; since then, by 2024, we will have had one Australian Games, one South American Games, 2 European Games and 2 Asian Games... apart from a first African Games, and no country from Africa is bidding for '24, doesn't North America seem like it would be next?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aquatic said:

Or, they are preparing for 2028....

I doubt it.  Rio used the Pan Am Games to help further their Olympic efforts much like South Africa is doing with the Commonwealth games.  Less we forget, Buenos Aires did bid for the 2004 Olympics (as did Rio, who failed to make the short list), yet their next foray into Olympic bidding comes in the form of the Youth Olympics.  I think they're more than content with that one knowing that an Olympic bid is a longshot at best for a while to come because of Rio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ejaycat said:

People argue for or against "continental rotation"; I'm not sure it really factors in, but if it does, I would think 2024 would be North America's turn.

North America hasn't hosted a summer Olympics since 1996; since then, by 2024, we will have had one Australian Games, one South American Games, 2 European Games and 2 Asian Games... apart from a first African Games, and no country from Africa is bidding for '24, doesn't North America seem like it would be next?  

Not when Paris, and France, who have waited 100 years for a summer games are bidding. The U.S. has had PLENTY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ejaycat said:

People argue for or against "continental rotation"; I'm not sure it really factors in, but if it does, I would think 2024 would be North America's turn.

North America hasn't hosted a summer Olympics since 1996; since then, by 2024, we will have had one Australian Games, one South American Games, 2 European Games and 2 Asian Games... apart from a first African Games, and no country from Africa is bidding for '24, doesn't North America seem like it would be next?  

It's something to take into consideration, but it requires context.  It's more about geopolitical factors than simply looking at which continent or country has gone the longest with hosting.  There's no such thing as a continent's "turn," but there are factors that could favor or hurt a certain city's/country's chances.  Remember also that North America really only has 3 viable countries to host an Olympics (and at the moment, Mexico barely qualifies and Canada recently had a Winter Olympics).  Europe has a lot more than that, so aside from the IOC being a Euro-centric organization, it's not an imbalance for that continent to get more Olympics than this one when there are fewer options here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Aquatic said:

Re: 2024 and SF

No, not against Paris.

Why not?  You've played it up otherwise.

San Francisco has never hosted an Olympics before; if it had a very solid bid backed by 98% of the population (whichever Bay Area counties would be included in the poll), you don't think it could beat Paris?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Aquatic said:

From 1932 until 2002. a space of 70 years, the USA hosted 7 times (both Summer and Winter), and were awarded the games 8 times (those Denver idiots).

Los Angeles

Lake Placid

Squaw Valley

(Denver)

Lake Placid

Los Angeles

Atlanta

Salt Lake City

5 minutes ago, Aquatic said:

Not when Paris, and France, who have waited 100 years for a summer games are bidding. The U.S. has had PLENTY.

We saw that logic play out for 2012 and 2016.  Not sure it's as strong here.  Yes, the U.S. has had more than their share of Olympics (as has Canada, especially relative to their population), but 3 of those wins came unopposed.  Atlanta had no business winning and blame the rest of the world for not having a worthy candidate then.  Salt Lake nearly won a vote less than a year after Atlanta won theirs.  There may or may not still be anti-American sentiment within the IOC that makes it tough for a US bid to win, but between 2024 and 2028, they're more than likely going to get 1.  Much like with `96, that's a matter of favorable circumstances that you can't fault the USOC for going after as opposed to sitting it out and letting another city have a chance for the sake of letting another city have a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ejaycat said:

Why not?  You've played it up otherwise.

San Francisco has never hosted an Olympics before; if it had a very solid bid backed by 98% of the population (whichever Bay Area counties would be included in the poll), you don't think it could beat Paris?  

The only thing a solid, viable, supported bid from San Francisco for 2024 might have done is make Paris wait until 2028. They originally weren't going to go for 2024, and then, Anne Hidalgo...

 

If Paris did that in the face of a 2024 SF bid, then SF would have a very, very high chance. But head to head with Paris. No. 

Rio > Tokyo > Paris > San Francisco has a nice ring to it though...

The four cities passing the torch from one to the next in that order is kind of poetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

We saw that logic play out for 2012 and 2016.  Not sure it's as strong here.  Yes, the U.S. has had more than their share of Olympics (as has Canada, especially relative to their population), but 3 of those wins came unopposed.  Atlanta had no business winning and blame the rest of the world for not having a worthy candidate then.  Salt Lake nearly won a vote less than a year after Atlanta won theirs.  There may or may not still be anti-American sentiment within the IOC that makes it tough for a US bid to win, but between 2024 and 2028, they're more than likely going to get 1.  Much like with `96, that's a matter of favorable circumstances that you can't fault the USOC for going after as opposed to sitting it out and letting another city have a chance for the sake of letting another city have a chance.

What was wrong with Toronto in 1996?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Yes, the U.S. has had more than their share of Olympics (as has Canada, especially relative to their population), but 3 of those wins came unopposed.

Wasn't it 4?  I thought Lake Placid was a default winner in 1932 and 1980.  

As an aside, France has hosted more Olympics than any other country apart from the US.  

If Canada put in a bid for 2024, I think it could have had a chance, despite winter 2010.  Maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aquatic said:

What was wrong with Toronto in 1996?

Other than Calgary having hosted in 1988 and Montreal having hosted in 1976.  If 1 of the arguments against the United States' Olympic hosting history is that they've hosted too many Olympics, wouldn't that same logic apply to a country the size of Canada hosting two Summer Olympics 20 years apart, with a Winter Olympics in between?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ejaycat said:

People argue for or against "continental rotation"; I'm not sure it really factors in, but if it does, I would think 2024 would be North America's turn.

North America hasn't hosted a summer Olympics since 1996; since then, by 2024, we will have had one Australian Games, one South American Games, 2 European Games and 2 Asian Games... apart from a first African Games, and no country from Africa is bidding for '24, doesn't North America seem like it would be next?  

Well, you can't just look at it as simply 'continental rotation', but as geopolitical factors as well. Yeah, Europe has hosted twice since the last time North America has hosted, but that's conveniently not taking into account that the last time North America hosted it was in the USA. The U.S. is again bidding with a 2024 bid against a country that hasn't seen a Summer Olympics in 100 years by the time 2024 rolls around. So, who really should benefit from that when all other things are more or less equal?

Not only that, but as been mentioned by another poster, Europe has many more countries that can realistically host the Olympics VS North America. And when you also factor in that Europe hasn't gone more than two cycles without a Summer Games & the euro-centric IOC is having trouble in their home continent with support as of late (i.e. Hamburg withdrawal & now Rome.

Not to mention the total European bailout on the 2022 Winter Olympic race), they need to make inroads there again sooner rather than later. Especially when the IOC still has a very SOLID fourth Paris 2024 attempt on the table, that would not only create those inroads, but will also give them an iconic setting to do it in (ala London 2012). And we all know that the IOC is all about image. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ejaycat said:

Wasn't it 4?  I thought Lake Placid was a default winner in 1932 and 1980.  

As an aside, France has hosted more Olympics than any other country apart from the US.  

If Canada put in a bid for 2024, I think it could have had a chance, despite winter 2010.  Maybe.

I doubt it.  What could they offer that would be so compelling to beat out Paris?  That's why the theory remains that timing is almost as important, if not more important than the strength of your bid.  Hence all the intangibles that you can't quantify, but we all know exist and go a long way towards determining a winner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Aquatic said:

But head to head with Paris. No. 

You're still not giving your reasons as to why you don't think San Francisco would beat Paris if they were both bidding for the same Olympics.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aquatic said:

There's no way in hell the IOC would choose L.A. over Paris. If I'm wrong when the time comes, I'll eat my words and say that I was wrong, but, I don't belive I am.

If South Africa bids, for 2028, they will beat L.A. If San Francisco had a sold bid, they would beat L.A. If Chicago came back, they'd beat L.A. Anyone can beat L.A. L.A. only wins when A) There's no other choice or B ) No other viable choice.

Also, I'm not sure why the USOC has such desire to host anyway. To me, even the USOC seems desperate. The USA has had so many olympic games (summer and winter) in such a short timespan (in terms of Olympic years). Sit down and wait a hundred years like Paris has. So greedy.

At this point, it's clear you are either a troll or a moron. Does it matter which?

No way in the IOC would choose LA over Paris??? Nobody who understands the IOC and their votes would say that. Paris will probably be the favorite to win. But LA's got a much better chance than "no way in hell"

"If South Africa Bids for 2028"?? Apparently you haven't been paying any attention to what South Africa has been saying, or the feeling of the IOC towards risky cities. 

You keep saying SF/Chicago/etc. would beat LA with absolute certainty. Serious question - did somebody from LA steal your teddybear when you were a little kid?

And if you don't understand why the USOC wants to host anyway.... essentially, you know nothing. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

We saw that logic play out for 2012 and 2016.  Not sure it's as strong here.  

What are you trying to say here? 

13 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

I doubt it.  What could they offer that would be so compelling to beat out Paris?  

The Canadians on here would vehemently say otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Other than Calgary having hosted in 1988 and Montreal having hosted in 1976.  If 1 of the arguments against the United States' Olympic hosting history is that they've hosted too many Olympics, wouldn't that same logic apply to a country the size of Canada hosting two Summer Olympics 20 years apart, with a Winter Olympics in between?

No. Atlanta happened 12 years after Los Angeles, and Salt Lake City 6 years after that. Population size is irrelevant. That's not a law written anywhere.

8 minutes ago, zekekelso said:

Didn't offer big enough bribes?

That's what I was thinking. You're also incredibly rude and not worth responding to. You're going on the Ignore list.

26 minutes ago, FYI said:

...but will also give them an iconic setting to do it in (ala London 2012). And we all know that the IOC is all about image. 

Ding ding ding. That's what I said in my first post in the other forum. That's what Imsaid SF would give the IOC, and they'd like that.

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...