Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GBModerator

Los Angeles To Bid For 2024 Summer Olympics

Recommended Posts

Not to get caught up in semantics here, but the title is a little misleading. Los Angeles has a plan to bid for the Olympics. They do not have a bid. Only the USOC can decide whether or not they have a bid. There's a couple of steps to go before this becomes a bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to get caught up in semantics here, but the title is a little misleading. Los Angeles has a plan to bid for the Olympics. They do not have a bid. Only the USOC can decide whether or not they have a bid. There's a couple of steps to go before this becomes a bid.

Very true.

I have to say though, this preliminary document is one heck of a throw-down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very true.

I have to say though, this preliminary document is one heck of a throw-down.

Without question. It's like we've been saying.. we've been questioning whether or not the USOC should bid for 2024 based on whether or not they had the right city and the right plan. This may be that city and that plan. If this is what LA has to offer, I'd be more than happy to see the USOC put it out there and I'm getting the sense this is as energized about a U.S. Olympic bid as you've been in quite some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an open question on when something becomes a "bid." Is it when a plan is put forth for a city to become its country's applicant city? When it becomes that country's applicant city? When it submits a formal application?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an open question on when something becomes a "bid." Is it when a plan is put forth for a city to become its country's applicant city? When it becomes that country's applicant city? When it submits a formal application?

Again, I know it's semantics, but for me, the difference is that the USOC used to hold a fairly open bidding process. Any city (sort of) who wanted to could submit themselves. So a city could say "here's our bid." Now, we know there's a handful of cities interested, but the USOC is only going to hear a handful of them out and then they pick which one they want. So I don't know if that's so much a "bid" if it's not the same open process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*BIG BUZZER*

Not it an area where:

1. It's even more seismically volatile as ever

2. There's more drought than rain all-year long

3. Risk of gridlock is INSANELY HIGH than it was in 1984

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*BIG BUZZER*

Not it an area where:

1. It's even more seismically volatile as ever

2. There's more drought than rain all-year long

3. Risk of gridlock is INSANELY HIGH than it was in 1984

1 - If you could predict Earthquakes, you'd be 1 of the richest people on the planet. Do you have some sort of evidence to back that up or is it just a preconceived notion?

2 - Again, is that any different than 1984? Not saying it's not an issue, especially the wildfires, but I don't see that as a deterrant

3 - LA 2024 is likely to have a better venue plan and far more public transportation than LA 1984 did. So don't give us this "insanely high" nonsense as if we don't know there's a lot of traffic in LA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 - If you could predict Earthquakes, you'd be 1 of the richest people on the planet. Do you have some sort of evidence to back that up or is it just a preconceived notion?

2 - Again, is that any different than 1984? Not saying it's not an issue, especially the wildfires, but I don't see that as a deterrant

3 - LA 2024 is likely to have a better venue plan and far more public transportation than LA 1984 did. So don't give us this "insanely high" nonsense as if we don't know there's a lot of traffic in LA.

1. We got word that the Pacific plate is getting even more weaker, due to heightened seismic and volcanic activity on the Ring o' fire. Not to mention that the recent 5.1 shakeup comes from a fault that alongside San Andreas fault, I'm sure that LA could be flattened to a sheet of paper in matter of minutes

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/29/us/california-earthquake/index.html

2. With the El niño striking back since 1997, and prolonged presence of high pressure systems above Northern California, in tandem with reckless water consumption, yep you're seeing a dehydrated California

http://news.yahoo.com/totally-parched-100-california-drought-172950132.html;_ylt=AwrBTzo3bFxTph0A4OpXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTBsa3ZzMnBvBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--

3. Forbes was right, nowhere to move freely in LA with your own car. You're stuck there, wasting 65 hours a year

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/10-u-s-cities-with-the-worst-traffic-jams-1393981556-slideshow/;_ylt=AwrBTzyGa1xTxFkAD1BXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByb2h1ajk3BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDOARjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. We got word that the Pacific plate is getting even more weaker, due to heightened seismic and volcanic activity on the Ring o' fire. Not to mention that the recent 5.1 shakeup comes from a fault that alongside San Andreas fault, I'm sure that LA could be flattened to a sheet of paper in matter of minutes

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/29/us/california-earthquake/index.html

Once again, how is that any different than any point in the recorded history of Los Angeles? They've always been fearful of "the big one." Yea, LA could get hit with a devestating earthquake at any point. That's not different now than it was 30 years ago

2. With the El niño striking back since 1997, and prolonged presence of high pressure systems above Northern California, in tandem with reckless water consumption, yep you're seeing a dehydrated California

http://news.yahoo.com/totally-parched-100-california-drought-172950132.html;_ylt=AwrBTzo3bFxTph0A4OpXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTBsa3ZzMnBvBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--

Again, yes there's a drought. Let's give it more than a year before we presume this is a permanent trend. 2024 is still a decade away.

There wasn't traffic in 1984? You think this is some new discovery that wasn't there 30 years ago? They handled the Olympics once. They survived Carmageddon. This is not more of a problem now than it was then. Certainly not some gigantic buzzer that means an Olympics shouldn't be held in this area.

And totally unrelated, but because I've been curious for a while.. what's with the vote totals from the `97 IOC session? Why are you adding up total votes across multiple rounds, including the tiebreaker round, and then putting Stockholm's total votes alongside Buenos' Aires average votes (for which of course you need to manipulate the numbers to have Stockholm in 4th instead of 5th)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*BIG BUZZER*

Not it an area where:

1. It's even more seismically volatile as ever

2. There's more drought than rain all-year long

3. Risk of gridlock is INSANELY HIGH than it was in 1984

Didn't you say this **** in the other thread?

So we should stay away from LA due to the possibility of a cataclysmic earthquake? Guess we better stop holding the games altogether then, since a cataclysmic event could happen anywhere at anytime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And totally unrelated, but because I've been curious for a while.. what's with the vote totals from the `97 IOC session? Why are you adding up total votes across multiple rounds, including the tiebreaker round, and then putting Stockholm's total votes alongside Buenos' Aires average votes (for which of course you need to manipulate the numbers to have Stockholm in 4th instead of 5th)?

He's kind of a weird dude tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't you say this **** in the other thread?

So we should stay away from LA due to the possibility of a cataclysmic earthquake? Guess we better stop holding the games altogether then, since a cataclysmic event could happen anywhere at anytime.

The whole Pacific coastline, the whole Northern Mediterranean coast, Northern India, Mainland China, you name it. I don't even want to forsee a 7.8 tremblor during Tokyo 2020's parade o' nations

Edited by eternalcobi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole Pacific coastline, the whole Northern Mediterranean coast, Northern India, Mainland China, you name it. I don't even want to forsee a 7.8 tremblor during Tokyo 2020's parade o' nations

And yet Tokyo got awarded an Olympics. 2nd time in that city. If you want to tell us there's a risk of an earthquake in Los Angeles, no one is going to disagree with that. But it's not like that's true now when it wasn't true years ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has a point, the fault is unusually active and many sismoligist are predicting that the 'Big One' could come sooner (in the next few years) than they expected. Although, they have said that LA's infrastructure has been vastly improved and only damages to the Highways and weaker buildings would occur. Nothing so major that they could not re-build in ten years, to be honest a massive quake that hits the city, gives them a kick-ass narrative and international sympathy. It honestly could only have positive benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*BIG BUZZER*

Not it an area where:

1. It's even more seismically volatile as ever

2. There's more drought than rain all-year long

3. Risk of gridlock is INSANELY HIGH than it was in 1984

So based on that logic, we should avoid Los Angeles because of earthquakes, wildfires, and droughts; avoid Paris because of floods, avalanches, and droughts; and avoid Durban because of severe weather, floods, and droughts. Heck, we should even cancel Rio2016 because of the floods, mudslides, and droughts that could potentially occur during 2016 purely based on the fact that they've happened in the past 5 years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So based on that logic, we should avoid Los Angeles because of earthquakes, wildfires, and droughts; avoid Paris because of floods, avalanches, and droughts; and avoid Durban because of severe weather, floods, and droughts. Heck, we should even cancel Rio2016 because of the floods, mudslides, and droughts that could potentially occur during 2016 purely based on the fact that they've happened in the past 5 years.

I think what he is saying that unlike those other cities, LA is having abnormal seismic activity. Not that we should avoid every city because of possible dangers, just that currently LA's dangers are more likely to happen then ever before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. We got word that the Pacific plate is getting even more weaker, due to heightened seismic and volcanic activity on the Ring o' fire. Not to mention that the recent 5.1 shakeup comes from a fault that alongside San Andreas fault, I'm sure that LA could be flattened to a sheet of paper in matter of minutes

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/29/us/california-earthquake/index.html

2. With the El niño striking back since 1997, and prolonged presence of high pressure systems above Northern California, in tandem with reckless water consumption, yep you're seeing a dehydrated California

http://news.yahoo.com/totally-parched-100-california-drought-172950132.html;_ylt=AwrBTzo3bFxTph0A4OpXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTBsa3ZzMnBvBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--

3. Forbes was right, nowhere to move freely in LA with your own car. You're stuck there, wasting 65 hours a year

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/10-u-s-cities-with-the-worst-traffic-jams-1393981556-slideshow/;_ylt=AwrBTzyGa1xTxFkAD1BXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByb2h1ajk3BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDOARjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--

If this is the worst people can say about LA, then the city is in GREAT shape. None of the above is a major concern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*BIG BUZZER*

Not it an area where:

1. It's even more seismically volatile as ever

2. There's more drought than rain all-year long

3. Risk of gridlock is INSANELY HIGH than it was in 1984

So Stupid

1.Not really I live in SF haven't felt one for at least a year to 2 I'm serious

2.Nope

3. Olympic Lanes Transport duh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IDK why you guys are even paying any attention to it. He's more than likely just trolling anyway.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IDK why you guys are even paying any attention to it. He's more than likely just trolling anyway.

Unlikely. Most of the time on GB, when it seems like someone is trolling, it's more likely that they're just that ignorant and actually believe their own hype. So too do I believe that to be the case here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody can deny there's a serious earthquake risk for LA.

Then again, using this argument against LA while the latest city selected by the IOC is under the exactly same risk makes it look very hollow. This s obviously not an IOC concern (otherwise Athens, Beijing and Vancouver wouldn't have hosted either, even Sochi).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody can deny there's a serious earthquake risk for LA.

Then again, using this argument against LA while the latest city selected by the IOC is under the exactly same risk makes it look very hollow. This s obviously not an IOC concern (otherwise Athens, Beijing and Vancouver wouldn't have hosted either, even Sochi).

I believe the term is "acceptable risk." And yea, less we forget.. Japan suffered a major earthquake back in 2011. China suffered a major earthquake in 2008. Neither was directly in the Olympic host city in question, but it's not like those cities/countries have been free of natural disasters.

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...