Jump to content

Will Tokyo Beat the “Frontrunner Jinx�?


Recommended Posts

I suppose it has been a frontrunner, but not an overwhelmingly strong one ever IMO, and in earlier parts of the campaign I would have put istanbul in that position.

What would be the more remarkable story to me is can Madrid go from clear tail-ender right through most of the campaign to grab the prize at the end?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it has been a frontrunner, but not an overwhelmingly strong one ever IMO, and in earlier parts of the campaign I would have put istanbul in that position.

What would be the more remarkable story to me is can Madrid go from clear tail-ender right through most of the campaign to grab the prize at the end?

You bring up very good points, but when reading American and many European news articles on this years bidding process Tokyo is always labeled as the Front Runner. Also how are the Elections going down under?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You bring up very good points, but when reading American and many European news articles on this years bidding process Tokyo is always labeled as the Front Runner. Also how are the Elections going down under?

The only Down Under election I'm paying attention to is in Argentina.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't find that to be a very enriching editorial. It actually sounded somewhat condescending towards anyone who would hazard a guess about the race or who would attempt to discern the IOC's preference. That seems somewhat ironic considering the source.

It's rather obvious to say the contest will be decided within the voting window. However, the race certainly is not limited to those few minutes. Some members probably decided who they were voting for as soon as the candidates were announced. Others will wait until the last moment. I suspect the majority fall in between.

The whole notion of a "favorite" is not a false idea. If it were, there would be no anticipation, no point in predictions and no audience for the hallowed Bid Index. One would expect the author of that editorial would've considered those points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't find that to be a very enriching editorial. It actually sounded somewhat condescending towards anyone who would hazard a guess about the race or who would attempt to discern the IOC's preference. That seems somewhat ironic considering the source.

It's rather obvious to say the contest will be decided within the voting window. However, the race certainly is not limited to those few minutes. Some members probably decided who they were voting for as soon as the candidates were announced. Others will wait until the last moment. I suspect the majority fall in between.

The whole notion of a "favorite" is not a false idea. If it were, there would be no anticipation, no point in predictions and no audience for the hallowed Bid Index. One would expect the author of that editorial would've considered those points.

I understand your points, but the race can still maintain the same excitement and people can wager on the winner. The point trying to be made is that so often, the final vote doesn't reflect the concerns during the campaign. The bid conduct two campaigns really, one for the IOC members and the other to the media and domestic population to try to control the story the IOC members hear. The real race happens within the minds and hearts of the members.

So-called favorites lose as often as they win - so how can you rely on that?

BidIndex is based on past decisions of members, and the comparison to them - that's why it was designed that way.

I'll admit - the notion of who's winning is important for the media to report - another reason why BidIndex was developed.

But - the reality still is - the IOC members decide and they rarely reveal in advance where their votes are going.

The point of the piece was to inform those who may not be familiar with the process to understand this reality and take all predictions for what they are - including BidIndex.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am from The Netherlands. I am a tolerant person who advocates for tolerant games in a city that is not prone to instability. Having said that, Istanbul would perhaps not be a good choice.

But my gut feeling says that Istanbul will win. Why? Realistically all three candidate cities can organize the games at this stage. But during the very final voting procedure, emotions will be very decisive for the final outcome. And I do think Istanbul has the best chance to win it then. Why?

--> First Olympics in a predominantly muslim country = more sympathy from IOC

--> First Olympics on the border of two continents: Europe and Asia = bridging feeling

--> First Olympics in Turkey ever = sympathy and willingness to let 'them' have it

--> Istanbul tried it three times in a row (!!) = trying to get the Games in 2004, 2008 and 2012

Tokyo I think will be 2nd. They perhaps have the best total package = most compact games, nicest amount of investment money. But my question then will be: Why do you wanna organize again after the 1964 Olympics and 1998 Winter Olympics? And....does your prosperous nation really need it?

Madrid will be 3rd. So many disadvantages. Public opinion on the whole is very low, especially in Catalunya and Basque Country. Unemployment in Spain will most likely be 20% or higher in the upcoming 6 years. Prime Minister Rajoy and his Partido Popular have been accused so many times of fraud. And there is Barcelona 1992.

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...