Jump to content

Beijing/Zhangjiakou 2022


Recommended Posts

I'm not saying the bid is weak because they don't have financial commitments yet (no, really, go back and read what I wrote).

I'm saying the "bid" has far to go..... Get USOC blessing, get public support, get financing and government guarantees, etc. Right now we have a leaked PDF; that's not the same thing as a strong bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never said it weakens the bid. I'm not quite to zeke's level of "all they have is a plan they leaked by accident, what's so impressive about that." Which is to say, zekeyla is not impressed..

mckayla_20120809073732_320_240.JPG

I believe in the convictions of the LA folks that they're serious about this. but there is some natural skepticism that comes along with any endeavor of this size, particularly when they've gotten scared off by the prospect of it. It's not a feeling that's specific towards LA. Like you said, this is true of any bid. That said, if the whole point of this process on the part of the USOC is to vet out these candidates and determine who is serious, I don't think it's unfair to question their seriousness. After all, as we've said so many times before, the end result of this need not be that a city is put up for bid, so the USOC better make sure they're in this to win it. I still believe that the USOC will put forth a bid and that bid will come from Los Angeles. Everything we've seen so far points in that direction. But what you're saying is still educated guesswork. You're making assumptions. While I believe that your assumptions will wind up being correct, don't put the cart before the horse quite yet. The nearly 3 years we have to go before the vote makes the day of reckoning a long ways off.

By those standards, you should be questioning every bid.

I'm not arguing LA is a sure thing. Nor do I think they're a hair's breadth from total collapse.

I can't help but feel you're playing ME now: "Well, we can't really know for sure. Let's wait and see."

Fine. Wait and see. I think all three other American contenders are more likely to implode than LA. I think Paris is looking dicey. I think any German bid has a big mountain to climb. I think Istanbul missed the boat. I think Durban seems pretty shaky and touch and go.

As of this moment, LA is not a sure thing, but I'd be hard pressed to think of any city that looks stronger or more solid right now. Sure that can change. I just think it's odd to start seriously questioning LA when nobody else seems any more secure or stable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think all three other American contenders are more likely to implode than LA. I think Paris is looking dicey. I think any German bid has a big mountain to climb. I think Istanbul missed the boat. I think Durban seems pretty shaky and touch and go.

Ah, right. This is a 2024 thread. I'd read a couple of pages and thought, "How the heck is LA expecting to host a Winter Olympics?".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By those standards, you should be questioning every bid.

I'm not arguing LA is a sure thing. Nor do I think they're a hair's breadth from total collapse.

I can't help but feel you're playing ME now: "Well, we can't really know for sure. Let's wait and see."

Fine. Wait and see. I think all three other American contenders are more likely to implode than LA. I think Paris is looking dicey. I think any German bid has a big mountain to climb. I think Istanbul missed the boat. I think Durban seems pretty shaky and touch and go.

As of this moment, LA is not a sure thing, but I'd be hard pressed to think of any city that looks stronger or more solid right now. Sure that can change. I just think it's odd to start seriously questioning LA when nobody else seems any more secure or stable.

So this is what it looks like when the shoe is on the other foot! :P

Yes, at this point in the game, you should be questioning every bid. That's not an indictment against an LA or whoever else we might scrutinize. Think of it like a political campaign.. sometimes it's difficult to tell this far out who will emerge as your candidate. Where zeke has the right idea IMO is that there is a lot left to play out. LA may very well stand the test of time. The 'evidence' we've seen so far is a good indication that yes, they will be able to deliver. But like we say of all candidates, what LA has right now is not a bid. They have the makings of a bid and yes, more than likely they're going to emerge as the USOC's candidate (if the USOC decides to put forth a candidate). Even still, don't assume LA is stronger or more secure than they actually are simply because you have no one else to compare them against. Where you say a German bid has a big mountain to climb.. LA is not without their challenges either.

I think you and I are largely on the same page on this one. Where we differ you seem to be looking at this more from the perspective of now whereas I'm projecting ahead a little more to 2017 when the vote actually takes place. I don't think of that as a 'wait and see' attitude so much as this all has to play itself out. if you believe LA is going to emerge as a strong candidate based on what you've seen, I'm not questioning that, but I'm not as convinced simply because it's how things look "as of this moment."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just about opposition. It costs billions of dollars to host an Olympics. Again, it's easy to say you're on board with that. It's another entirely to actually put up the money. I don't doubt that they can get the financial and political backing they need, but I don't think it's a given simply because they have a workable plan. That plan gives them a good chance to succeed, but just because we're impressed here doesn't make it automatic they can execute it.

The important point here is that it's easy to say you support the bid . . . until you have to decide where the money is coming from. Are they going to vote for increased taxes? Are they going to cut thousands of government jobs? It's at that point that the billions of dollars become real.

I think one reason people in Los Angeles are more favorable towards the Olympics is that they think California won't have to pay for it. My relatives in Orange County believe that the federal government and sponsors will pay for the whole thing. Once it becomes clear that the Olympics (and the federal budget) have changed dramatically since '84 I think there will be sticker shock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, right. This is a 2024 thread. I'd read a couple of pages and thought, "How the heck is LA expecting to host a Winter Olympics?".

All threads on these forums are about 2024, and more specifically, U.S. bids for 2024. No one told you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this is the thread to talk about LA 2024, here's evidence that LA has *the* best fans. I'm leaning towards giving them the games just for this guy:

http://deadspin.com/large-half-naked-dodgers-fan-is-living-the-motherfucki-1630290237

I think LA 2024 has their mascot! Does somewhat shatter the image of LA as an athletic, sports-crazed city though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think LA 2024 has their mascot! Does somewhat shatter the image of LA as an athletic, sports-crazed city though

Yes, well all Angelenos look EXACTLY like that.

In fact, for a split second I thought it might be me in that photo, but then I'd had to acknowledge to myself that I've put on a few pounds lately. This guy's obviously been hitting the gym HARD. Well, I guess we all need a goal. Thanks for the motivation, fellas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The fact of the matter is (other than maybe the exception of Sochi. But even there, big Putin was promising the world), no extremely poor rated short-listed bid has ever made it to win the whole thing. Even Annecy 2018 rated a bit higher. Let's face it, if there had been more quality bidders, like initially expected, Almaty wouldn't have made this cut. GCL has the wool over his eyes if he thinks they'd be 'practical', considering their very poor marks.

That may be the case with the Winter Olympics, but so far that's not the case in the Summer Olympics. Rio was rated the lowest for the 2016 Olympic shortlist, and it won. Beijing may not have been rated the worst in the shortlist for the 2008 Olympics, but it placed behind high-rated Paris and Toronto, and maybe even Osaka, but it won as well. But then again those were during the years of Juan Samaranch and Jacques Rogge, where they cared more about moving to new territories rather than hosting more believable or less PR-tarnished olympic games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the way the IOC is awarding Olympic Games. If the US hosted 2022, there would likely be AT LEAST a 20 year gap before American Summer Games -- meaning 2044. If you think they'd come any sooner, you're deluding yourself. A 48-year gap between Sumner Games in the US would have a huge negative impact on the popularity of the Games in this country and on the US' role in the Olympic Movement.

The US must host Summer Games first. Then they can come back for the under contested Winter Games a few cycles later. Reverse that order and the US will be in for a VERY long wait that could be much more than 20 years.

People who think the US could grab both 2022 and 2032 are really clueless, IMO.

You are clueless for thinking that it couldn't happen. We hosted the games in Lake placid, NY for the 1980 Winter Games, and then we hosted the 1984 Summer games in Los Angeles, and that was only 4 years apart. We hosted the Summer games again only 12 years after that. And 6 years after that we hosted the Salt Lake City Winter games in 2002. Sure those were different times and under different circumstances, like no one else wanting to host the 1980 winter games and the 1984 summer games, but that doesn't mean that it is less plausible of it happening today.

Had we resolved the broadcasting rights issue in time, we very well could have been a strong candidate for the 2020 Summer Olympics. Madrid with their financial crisis and doping scandals, Istanbul with their civil rights issues and terrorist threats, and Tokyo with environmental concerns with the nuclear plant and the potential of earthquakes. A strong American bid could easily have won the right to host the 2020 Summer Olympics. And with the current bids of the 2022 Winter Olympics and the likelihood of the current favorite Oslo dropping out, another bid for Salt Lake City to host again, or finally a Denver bid, would have been the second favorite over frivolous Beijing and risky Almaty.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are clueless for thinking that it couldn't happen. We hosted the games in Lake placid, NY for the 1980 Winter Games, and then we hosted the 1984 Summer games in Los Angeles, and that was only 4 years apart. We hosted the Summer games again only 12 years after that. And 6 years after that we hosted the Salt Lake City Winter games in 2002. Sure those were different times and under different circumstances, like no one else wanting to host the 1980 winter games and the 1984 summer games, but that doesn't mean that it is less plausible of it happening today.

Had we resolved the broadcasting rights issue in time, we very well could have been a strong candidate for the 2020 Summer Olympics. Madrid with their financial crisis and doping scandals, Istanbul with their civil rights issues and terrorist threats, and Tokyo with environmental concerns with the nuclear plant and the potential of earthquakes. A strong American bid could easily have won the right to host the 2020 Summer Olympics. And with the current bids of the 2022 Winter Olympics and the likelihood of the current favorite Oslo dropping out, another bid for Salt Lake City to host again, or finally a Denver bid, would have been the second favorite over frivolous Beijing and risky Almaty.

Lake Placid- only bidder

LA- only bidder

Salt Lake- corruption

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lake Placid- only bidder

LA- only bidder

Salt Lake- corruption

I already mentioned that no one else wanted the games in 1980 and 1984. That's another way of saying that no one else bid for the games.

And I think even without the bribes, SLC still had the strongest bid in the roster and would have won, but with a more narrow win of course. The bribes really helped more for Nagano in 1998 and Sydney in 2000 than they did for SLC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the case with the Winter Olympics, but so far that's not the case in the Summer Olympics. Rio was rated the lowest for the 2016 Olympic shortlist, and it won. Beijing may not have been rated the worst in the shortlist for the 2008 Olympics, but it placed behind high-rated Paris and Toronto, and maybe even Osaka, but it won as well. But then again those were during the years of Juan Samaranch and Jacques Rogge, where they cared more about moving to new territories rather than hosting more believable or less PR-tarnished olympic games.

You can't really compare Beijing's successful Bid for the 2008 Summer Olympics and Paralympics and Rio De Janeiro's successful Bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics and Paralympics, with an unrealistic, weak Almaty 2022 Winter Olympics and Paralympics Bid.

Beijing might not have had the Highest Score, but they Won because it was China's first Olympics. China is the most populated Country in the World and have a Strong Economy. Rio De Janeiro offered to take the Olympics to a New Continent, with South America. Almaty hasn't got any of that to offer. The Almaty 2022 Bid is finished. No one (Except GCL and Olympic Fan Darcy) wants an Almaty 2022 Winter Olympics and Paralympics. The IOC doesn't want it, most of us don't want it and some of the Almaty Public doesn't want it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the case with the Winter Olympics, but so far that's not the case in the Summer Olympics. Rio was rated the lowest for the 2016 Olympic shortlist, and it won. Beijing may not have been rated the worst in the shortlist for the 2008 Olympics, but it placed behind high-rated Paris and Toronto, and maybe even Osaka, but it won as well. But then again those were during the years of Juan Samaranch and Jacques Rogge, where they cared more about moving to new territories rather than hosting more believable or less PR-tarnished olympic games.

You're looking at it very black-&-white here, though. Beijing & Rio were/are compelling new territories that had/have a lot more to offer for the Summer Olympics than Almaty ever could for the Winter Games. Not to mention the sporting prowess of the Chinese at the Summer Games (& to a lesser extent the Brazilians as well). Kazakhstan is barely a blip at the Winter Games.

Not to mention that Beijing & Rio still meet the minimal benchmark requirements very comfortably in a pool of bigger applicants to choose from. For 2022, the IOC has literally scrapped the bottom of the barrel to come up with its short-list. Again, had there been more applicants for 2022, we wouldn't even be discussing this. There absolutely no comaparison whatsoever to be drawn between Beijing, Rio & Almaty. None.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for repeating that for the 100th time :D

I know, Sorry, I was just replying to someones comment.

Hey, I'd take Almaty over Beijing. So it's more than two people :P

Why? Almaty has nothing Good to offer. It's supported by People who cannot see reality. Beijing is a much more secure option over Almaty.

You're looking at it very black-&-white here, though. Beijing & Rio were/are compelling new territories that had/have a lot more to offer for the Summer Olympics than Almaty ever could for the Winter Games. Not to mention the sporting prowess of the Chinese at the Summer Games (& to a lesser extent the Brazilians as well). Kazakhstan is barely a blip at the Winter Games.

Not to mention that Beijing & Rio still meet the minimal benchmark requirements very comfortably in a pool of bigger applicants to choose from. For 2022, the IOC has literally scrapped the bottom of the barrel to come up with its short-list. Again, had there been more applicants for 2022, we wouldn't even be discussing this. There absolutely no comaparison whatsoever to be drawn between Beijing, Rio & Almaty. None.

Exactly. @FYI, at least We know the IOC won't go to Almaty, so let's let these unrealistic People Dream of Almaty 2022 which won't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are clueless for thinking that it couldn't happen. We hosted the games in Lake placid, NY for the 1980 Winter Games, and then we hosted the 1984 Summer games in Los Angeles, and that was only 4 years apart. We hosted the Summer games again only 12 years after that. And 6 years after that we hosted the Salt Lake City Winter games in 2002. Sure those were different times and under different circumstances, like no one else wanting to host the 1980 winter games and the 1984 summer games, but that doesn't mean that it is less plausible of it happening today.

Had we resolved the broadcasting rights issue in time, we very well could have been a strong candidate for the 2020 Summer Olympics. Madrid with their financial crisis and doping scandals, Istanbul with their civil rights issues and terrorist threats, and Tokyo with environmental concerns with the nuclear plant and the potential of earthquakes. A strong American bid could easily have won the right to host the 2020 Summer Olympics. And with the current bids of the 2022 Winter Olympics and the likelihood of the current favorite Oslo dropping out, another bid for Salt Lake City to host again, or finally a Denver bid, would have been the second favorite over frivolous Beijing and risky Almaty.

No you are clueless for failing to recognize that the 80's were another era. The US hosted five Olympic Games between 1980 and 2002. That was a gross anomaly and will not happen again. It is foolhardy to expect that it will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm officially jumping on the Almaty bandwagon.


No you are clueless for failing to recognize that the 80's were another era. The US hosted five Olympic Games between 1980 and 2002. That was a gross anomaly and will not happen again. It is foolhardy to expect that it will.

Because in the past, that was OK. Then something happend, and it wasn't OK.

What exactly happened, and when?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are clueless for thinking that it couldn't happen. We hosted the games in Lake placid, NY for the 1980 Winter Games, and then we hosted the 1984 Summer games in Los Angeles, and that was only 4 years apart. We hosted the Summer games again only 12 years after that. And 6 years after that we hosted the Salt Lake City Winter games in 2002. Sure those were different times and under different circumstances, like no one else wanting to host the 1980 winter games and the 1984 summer games, but that doesn't mean that it is less plausible of it happening today.

Had we resolved the broadcasting rights issue in time, we very well could have been a strong candidate for the 2020 Summer Olympics. Madrid with their financial crisis and doping scandals, Istanbul with their civil rights issues and terrorist threats, and Tokyo with environmental concerns with the nuclear plant and the potential of earthquakes. A strong American bid could easily have won the right to host the 2020 Summer Olympics. And with the current bids of the 2022 Winter Olympics and the likelihood of the current favorite Oslo dropping out, another bid for Salt Lake City to host again, or finally a Denver bid, would have been the second favorite over frivolous Beijing and risky Almaty.

You lost the argument right there. No, it is much less plausible of it happening today. Could it happen? Sure, but certain circumstances came together in the right time and place for it to happen. The odds of similar circumstances presenting themselves these days (and for it to happen twice in a relatively short timespan) are not good. Now could a United States bid have made a run for 2020 given the lack of competition? Possibly, but considering Chicago had fewer votes for 2016 than Tokyo, I wouldn't count on it. Could the USOC have put Salt Lake forward for 2022 and possibly won that? Perhaps, but Athens is probably right that it might hurt the case for a summer bid. And to land a Summer Olympics after a Winter Olympics is a lot hard than the other way around.

To be fair, yes we're potentially looking at China hosting 2 Olympics within 14 years of each other. Suffice it to say, we probably wouldn't be talking about this if the competition were any stronger for 2022. But it's only happening because of favorable circumstances. Beijing wouldn't be a viable option for 2022 without them.

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...