Jump to content

Paris 2024


Recommended Posts

The US and EU are roughly the same size. Both should host roughly the same number of Olympics. Perhaps you subtract 1 from the US to compensate for an inevitable Canadian Games.

The reason the Olympics moves from city to city instead of just being played in Greece is to expose as many people as possible to the Olympic movement. When the Olympics were in London, Parisians could access them after spending a few hours on a train through the Chunnel. When the Olympics were in Atlanta or Los Angeles, Northeastern Americans needed to fly to reach either of those cities.

Now don't get me wrong, I support Paris' bid now that Boston is officially gone. They have a superior technical bid and the city and Continental Europe (excluding the Mediterranean) hasn't hosted the games since Munich in 1972. And besides, they are one of the 4 top cities in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahahah. I meant it, really. London 2012 will have absolutely NO impact on Paris 2024. It is INSANE for me to consider to have countless Olympics in the US because simply it's a big country, but having two Olympics in two (very close but VERY DIFFERENT) countries would be crazy. Are you for real? So, how about we give the next 15 Olympics to China and Russia. They are quite big after all, and I'm sure they could manage to have Olympics in Northern China, Western Russia, Southern China, Northern Russia, Eastern China, Southern Russia... Oops, just realized it actually just did happen. Hmmm....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand London 2012 has no impact on Paris 2024, but that is due to the IOC's pro-Europe bias. As I said, it was much easier for Parisians to attend London 2012 events than it was for New Yorkers to attend Atlanta 1996 events.

As for Russia and China, remember that population is more important than geography. Some of those regions in Russia/China don't have the population to host the games. Namely, they do not have metropolises that at least rank on those lists of "Global Cities". For the same reason, we can be assured the "Great Plains" of the US will never host (to the chagrin of Tulsa).

However, I bet you China will host another Summer Olympics later this century, but it won't be in Beijing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you FYI, what I've been pointing out for a few months now basically is that Italy last last hosted SOG in 1960, Germany in 1972, Canada in 1976, the US in 1996, and France in 1924. Simply look at this, and you'll know exactly why I think Paris, France, should be awarded those 2024 Summer Games. This is no arrogance at all. Thanks guys for understanding. I'm just trying to be as much objective as I can, but of course I'm biased, I'm French, and I've been living in Paris for the last two years (and God only knows how much I love this city).

"1924" is a dumb reason for Paris to host. Paris should host becuase they are a great city and will presumably put together a nice plan.

Once you star arguing that Paris should host because they are "due", you're really there are a lot of places that are even more due.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US and EU are roughly the same size. Both should host roughly the same number of Olympics. Perhaps you subtract 1 from the US to compensate for an inevitable Canadian Games.

Disagree. The U.S. & Canada are merely two countries to choose from. While Europe has over a dozen countries, each with their own NOC, that could technical host the Games. That why since the turn of the century, Europe has hosted four Olympics, while North America has hosted two (& both of those were Winter Games). So it's easily conceivable that Europe hosts at least twice as often as North America does simply due to the fact that Europe is made up of so many different countries that could host the Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI, that is a Eurocentric mindset. It is fitting because the IOC is a Eurocentric organization. There's no "right" answer to this; it's just a fun thing to argue about.

While Europe has over a dozen countries, each with their own NOC, that could technical host the Games.

And the US has over a dozen regions that could technically host the games. The multitude of European NOCs is just an artifact. Tomorrow, the EU could decide to have one gigantic European NOC and it wouldn't change anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"1924" is a dumb reason for Paris to host. Paris should host becuase they are a great city and will presumably put together a nice plan.

Once you star arguing that Paris should host because they are "due", you're really there are a lot of places that are even more due.

Exactly, Paris hasn't hosted since 1924. Whoopdeedoo...Toronto hasn't hosted since...NEVER!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI, that is a Eurocentric mindset. It is fitting because the IOC is a Eurocentric organization. There's no "right" answer to this; it's just a fun thing to argue about.

And the US has over a dozen regions that could technically host the games. The multitude of European NOCs is just an artifact. Tomorrow, the EU could decide to have one gigantic European NOC and it wouldn't change anything.

You're not comparing like with like. If you believe these 12 US regions you talk about are equivilient to European nations, then I take it you wouldn't feel any pride about an athlete from the West Coast winning a gold medal in the same way I have no reason to support a random athlete from Portugal?

The US is not a continent like Europe, so it won't host as often as Europe. No European country is as big or powerful as the US so no European country will host as often as the US.

That's the situation in a nutshell.

You seem to want to host as often as often as Europe and have all the benefits of supporting a team with a talent pool of 300m people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly, Paris hasn't hosted since 1924. Whoopdeedoo...Toronto hasn't hosted since...NEVER!

And yet both Madrid & Istanbul (who also "never" hosted) lost to a repeat host city of Tokyo. If you think it's just as simple as to which city has "never" hosted, then you're in for a rude awakening.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet both Madrid & Istanbul (who also "never" hosted) lost to a repeat host city of Tokyo. If you think it's just as simple as to which city has "never" hosted, then you're in for a rude awakening.

That's not an accurate reiteration of my point. My point was exactly what you mentioned near the end, that Paris not having hosted since 1924 doesn't mean that it should be awarded the games over all other candidates simply because their countries all hosted more recently than France. I mentioned that Paris not having hosted since 1924 is no big deal as other cities clearly haven't even hosted before. One can't pick and choose reasons here, either they're all factored into the equation or none at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you're picking & choosing those same aspects for your convenience. Of course by itself, Paris not hosting since 1924 isn't going to get them the Games, & that's not what I meant. However, it is a factor. The IOC still had on the final ballot two repeat hosts over "new" cities Madrid & New York that never did host. Go figure. Same with Tokyo (repeat host) over "never" hosted Madrid & Istanbul.

Again, simply having never hosted doesn't get you the Games either. But that, along with so many other factors that still would put Paris ahead is what would get them the Games. And in the potential 2024 line-up that we're starting to see, I'd see Paris as the London & Tokyo of their respective race over "new" cities that have never hosted.

*the IOC still had on the final '2012' ballot..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree with you regarding Paris being the most likely winner, they're certainly a formidable and perhaps insurmountable competitor. That being said, I still think we should compete as I will, naturally compete, to further Toronto's case in this open forum. What I wonder is, what you stand to gain from analyzing and debating every point in excruciating semantic detail if you're so sure of a certainty? You like debating for debating's sake?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I wonder is, what you stand to gain from analyzing and debating every point in excruciating semantic detail if you're so sure of a certainty? You like debating for debating's sake?

Umm, no, that's your MO here. You're the one that responded here by saying "that's not an accurate 'reiteration' of my point". And then going on about "one can't pick & choose reasons here, either they're all factored into the equation or none at all."

I've already told you I have no vested interest in this race whatsoever, since I don't see the U.S. winning this either even if the USOC decides to with Los Angeles now. So please spare me the patronizing bombastic, hypocritical rhetoric as your way of conceding your argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly man, that was in response to you jumping over every single one of my posts thus far. It was my way of saying, why the obsessive responding to my posts...if you're going to be snarky and negative every step of the way then feel free to ignore my posts. If you're going to make criticisms of my arguments then I will defend myself if I disagree. I don't know if there's an ignore feature on this forum, but if there is, feel free to use it to ignore my comments so I can continue to debate with others in a more laid-back exchange of ideas and opinions. Nothing personal, probably just a difference in personalities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were the one INITIALLY asking me questions about my posts to start with earlier on. So to say now that I was "jumping over every single one" of your posts is quite an embellishment on your part.

You're conveniently & exaggeratingly trying to play yourself as some kind of victim now. But what you're really doing is projecting. If that's the way you want to play, then fine. I'll have no part of it, though.

However, if you still feel the need to "jump all over my posts", then I'll also defend my views if I also disagree. But your advice can work both ways. If you don't agree with mine, then just move on instead of 'excruciatingly debate every point with semantic detail'. But I'm not going to fall for this by you turning this Into personal attacks because you can't futher engage in a debate. I've seen this type of behavior before throughout the years on these forums from other extremely partial members. So yeah, I'd say it's definitely different types in personalities. But I digress now, because I see exactly where you want to take this, & I'm not going to fall for it any further. So let's just simply agree to disagree here now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US and EU are roughly the same size. Both should host roughly the same number of Olympics. Perhaps you subtract 1 from the US to compensate for an inevitable Canadian Games.

It always has to be about size, hasn't it? Well, you wish...but that's not how it works. The European Olympic Committees gathers 50 Olympic countries. The USOC, just one. So like I said before, since Russia and China are fairly big as well, should they also host as often as Europe? I mean look at Russia, it's even bigger than the US!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe these 12 US regions you talk about are equivilient to European nations, then I take it you wouldn't feel any pride about an athlete from the West Coast winning a gold medal in the same way I have no reason to support a random athlete from Portugal?

I often root for Canadian athletes that I know are from from Quebec or the Maritime Provinces over American Athletes from the West US. But I may be unique in this regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paris should stop its bid. IOC has lost its credibility with Beijing 2022. Boston has chosen the right way...

Thank you for that very objective viewpoint, especially considering we know your feelings on Paris 2024. All of those things have little to do with each other. So if Almaty had won, Paris wouldn't have to stop their bid? And if you're going to reference Boston, they didn't "choose" the right way so much as that they had a terrible plan that didn't come together. It was hardly anything to do with the IOC that killed their Olympic dreams.

Let's put something in perspective though if we're going to look at Paris's willingness to work with the IOC. They lost credibility long before last week's vote. It was when several big name European cities/countries all rejected the IOC that they lost credibility. More than that, don't forget what the numbers were from the vote. 44 for Beijing and 40 for Almaty. Not exactly like it was some unanimous decision where everyone favored Beijing. It was much closer than that. A lot of people did favor Almaty and Beijing just barely won. We can (and will, I'm sure) analyze that one for a while to come, but don't lose sight of what it means. Either way, to react to that and say Paris should stop it's bid.. that's not a very meaningful statement when it comes from you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think democratic countries should stop to bid and boycott WoG and Sog, they should purpose a new kind of games without the IOC. WoG and SoG are totally fake and without consideration for human right or environment, countries cheat to win and pay bribes like Russia, Korea, China etc. Stop it's enough.

People wants something else, something new with more respect for the athletes, environment, human rights and supporters not for money and national prestige. Sochi 2014, PC 2018, Russia 2018, Qatar 2022 and China 2022 are a shame for environment or human rights or the both... Nobody wants these countries excepted some mad men in IOC...

Paris should resign, like Roma, Hamburg and Budapest, it's will be a strong signal for IOC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WoG and SoG are totally fake and without consideration for human right or environment, countries cheat to win and pay bribes like Russia, Korea, China etc. Stop it's enough.

People wants something else, something new with more respect for the athletes, environment, human rights and supporters not for money and national prestige. Sochi 2014, PC 2018, Russia 2018, Qatar 2022 and China 2022 are a shame for environment or human rights or the both..

Right, because Kazahkstan is such a beacon in all of those virtues & they didn't want the Winter Olympics for "national prestige" whatsoever. :rolleyes: Not to mention the $75 Billion national reserve they were pretty much telling the IOC was at their total disposal if need be. Bring on Annecy 2026! :-P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Western nations choosing not to bid as a protest is going to fix the problem of the IOC sometimes choosing dictatorships is it?

I'd love to know how long Tulsa thought this one through before he came to that particular "solution"!

Edited by Rob.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, between two dictatorships / countres with a massive lack of human rights, at least the world would have got to discover a new country (Kazakhstan). China? We all know about it already, how boring. We all know already how those Games will be: Crazy massively impressively huge, crasy massively huge bugdet (who belives those lies about their small bugdget? Who?), **** loads of snow (artificial one of course) and...the best Winter Games EVER (because that's what they all are, each time)! Well done China, thanks for showing your abilities to host Olympics three times (Beijing 2008, Nanjing 2014 and Beijing 2022) and now go get some well deserved nap (like a 100 years one, you can have a chat with Paris if you have issues about it).

I understand how Tulsa would think that. The IOC disgusts me. It disgusts me because it doesn't surprise me anymore, because money is more important than a snowy and compact bid. Beijing is like the WORST bid in Winter Olympics history, and yet they were chosen.

Paris will not drop their bid anyway, so... but knowing that cities with sit loads of money, willing to spend a lot on building new and useless venues for their city, could bid for 2024 (cause they won't be rejected with this new rule), it's definitely not a good thing for Paris. Paris. Oui, Paris. The good old Paris. Not much to spend, because they already have pretty much everything. How is that interesting for the IOC (their Agenda 2020 is bullshit)? Paris would have been great as an Olympic City in the 80's, the 90's, maybe the 2000's. But now? Tssss.

Oh don' get me wrong, I do support the Paris bid for 2024, but I'll never be fully positive and optimist about it until the election of the host city in 2017.

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...