Jump to content

Which city has the best chances to host 2024 and 2028 Olympics


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I wouldn't rule Europe out of 2024 at all.

whomever thinks Gotham City is going to host any time soon is crazy, the bat-timezone is totally inconvenient for Narnia. 3 words. The Capitol, Panem .....they have more games experience than any o

Not much need for a large athlete's village after the first day or so. Score!

Please stop doing that.

He just wanted to clarify that it is not Denver, England

Maybe to return to the initial question of this thread (spelling mistake notwithstanding)...the answer is: whichever city Tony and GCL agree on having no chance at all.

Milan

Los Angles

San Francisco

Houston

Toronto

....the list goes on, but this is all I can think of for right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Tony E Loves Architecture

Thank You. I might disagree with Your predictions of Hosts, but I agree that Geopolitics play a major role. Hence why:

I think you may be too reliant on geopolitics just for the sole purpose of Europe hosting 50% of the next 12 games whilst the other 6 4 continents snag for desperately for 6 spots

2024 = Europe. With Rome because the IOC won't have 3 Summer Olympics in a row outside of Europe.

k. Let's all not care that Paris is having her Olympic centennial and that Rome has a terrible plan (theoretically speaking). Europe (or more specificly, Rome) HAS to host!

2026 = North America. Because the IOC doesn't have much choice and Denver, United States Of America will probably Host.

I see. Please elaborate.

2030 = Europe. Because Krakow will probably present a strong Bid, if they Bid.

Do you think you're making this fair by creating a 'Europe Europe Not Not' pattern?

2032 = Europe. Because the IOC won't have 2 Summer Olympics in a row outside of Europe for a while, with Berlin, Germany Hosting.

But they have

2034 = Asia. Beijing will Win this, because of a lack of Bidders.

Why are you assuming the lack of interest will still remain low?

2036 = North America. Because the IOC will probably want to take the Summer Olympics to New York City, United States Of America.

How many years has that been since 1996? 40?

How many years since London [to the nearest summer games in which Europe will host]? 12.

2038 = Europe. Stockholm, Sweden will present a strong Bid, with a lack of Bidders.

Again with the lack of interest thing. It seems the hosts you are predicting are not restoring faith in the Olympic movement.

2040 = Europe. Every other Summer Olympics will be in Europe for a while IMO, with Paris, France Hosting.

Yes, grand Europe with perfect geopolitics and economy. Now where does South America and Australia fall into this list?

2042 = North America. With Quebec City, Canada Hosting maybe, with a lack of Bidders?

Wow. This trend is lasting quite long. The interest drought has effected both the Summer and Winter games. I'm surprised the Olympics/IOC hasn't collapsed yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sia. The IOC will want to revisit Asia, probably with Shanghai, China or Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

IT DOESN'T EVEN USE THE RULE OF EIGHTS AND FOUR IS A VERY UNLUCKY NUMBER IN SOME ASIAN CULTURES!!!!!

I know. It's crazy and far into the future. I'm just predicting and this Time, trying to give some reasons aswell. I don't want insults thrown at Me, just a nice discussion. I think it's Good and Healthy that we all have different opinions and predictions.

Yes, but some of your predictions are/can_be as crazy as GCL.

2024 = Rome (Will Host) VS Berlin VS Paris VS Durban VS Los Angeles. (Baku, Doha and Istanbul will miss out on being a Candidate City).

Unfortunately, Rome was one of the many cities that failed to create an Olympics that recreated interest, so the IOC will be returning to Europe ["every other Summer Olympics will be in Europe for a while IMO], oh wait! Rome is in Europe! Why Rome, Tony? Why!

*Asia

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank You. I might disagree with Your predictions of Hosts, but I agree that Geopolitics play a major role. Hence why:

(...)

2030 = Europe. Because Krakow will probably present a strong Bid, if they Bid.

(...)

I would really like to see that, but that won't happen.

Any connection to Olympics movement is considered as some kind of a "death kiss" here.

Krakow's mayor is sucking up to those "Krakow against Olympics" group. Jagna Marczułajtis already said that she is out of politics.

KRAKOW IS OUT!

Zakopane's Mayor has some delusional dreams about joint Zakopane-Silesian bid, but this is plainly stupid for so many reasons...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would really like to see that, but that won't happen.

Any connection to Olympics movement is considered as some kind of a "death kiss" here.

Krakow's mayor is sucking up to those "Krakow against Olympics" group. Jagna Marczułajtis already said that she is out of politics.

KRAKOW IS OUT!

Zakopane's Mayor has some delusional dreams about joint Zakopane-Silesian bid, but this is plainly stupid for so many reasons...

Mayor terms don't usually last from now till 2020-ish, right?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, surely by time the 2030 Winter Olympics and Paralympics Bidding starts, Krakow MIGHT have a different Mayor?

I think the Future is going to be interesting for the Olympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, surely by time the 2030 Winter Olympics and Paralympics Bidding starts, Krakow MIGHT have a different Mayor?

I think the Future is going to be interesting for the Olympics.

As far as I know, it was not the Mayor who opposed the bit, but it got rejected in a referendum. So unless the population of Kraków changes drastically in the next eight years, your whole idea of Kraków bidding is certainly unrealistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, it was not the Mayor who opposed the bit, but it got rejected in a referendum. So unless the population of Kraków changes drastically in the next eight years, your whole idea of Kraków bidding is certainly unrealistic.

Exactly. The mayor repeatedly said he supported the bid (at least that's what he said publicly), but felt the citizens needed a voice and that's why they held the referendum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. The mayor repeatedly said he supported the bid (at least that's what he said publicly), but felt the citizens needed a voice and that's why they held the referendum.

Not to speak for our Polish posters here, but my gut tells me part of the citizens' response to a potential Olympic bid was soured by Sochi with the cost overruns and everything else. I think in time, the citizens might come around on the idea if they believe it makes sense for them, but I think that may take awhile. I think they need to see another city host a Winter Olympics in a manner that shows it can make sense for them before they get behind the idea. And sadly, that may not happen until 2026 at the earliest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait - are we considering Oslo as out of 22 now? Everybody seems to have anointed Beijing as a sure fire bet but AFAIK Oslo is still in. That's not to say there's no possibility of the IOC picking Beijing over Oslo though...they can't shoot themselves like that surely...can they? :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to speak for our Polish posters here, but my gut tells me part of the citizens' response to a potential Olympic bid was soured by Sochi with the cost overruns and everything else. I think in time, the citizens might come around on the idea if they believe it makes sense for them, but I think that may take awhile. I think they need to see another city host a Winter Olympics in a manner that shows it can make sense for them before they get behind the idea. And sadly, that may not happen until 2026 at the earliest.

Agreed. I think Sochi deserves a lot of the blame for Krakow's exit and others. Of course Russia is responsible in an entirely different way for Lviv's departure.

The Russians have hosted 2 Olympics and in both cases the Olympic movement took a hit and was in bad shape afterwards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. I think Sochi deserves a lot of the blame for Krakow's exit and others. Of course Russia is responsible in an entirely different way for Lviv's departure.

The Russians have hosted 2 Olympics and in both cases the Olympic movement took a hit and was in bad shape afterwards.

Some people never learn...especially the IOC.

I say ban Russia from the Olympics...but that's me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hosting, they always f*ck it up. Plus it will take them at least fifty years to have a good reputation, and even then I doubt it will be good.

Well, they stage the Games well enough. That's all they owe the IOC. It's their off-the-court actions that gum up the works. And that is entirely out of the hands of the IOC or FIFA or whatever. But the fact that "sports is above politics" then merely allows govt's like Putin's to act the way that they want. To my mind, "sport is NOT above politics." We don't need sports; but people certainly need to eat; a roof over their heads, an army to protect them. Winning medals and see a few able-bodies carry the flag is merely a wish; not a necessity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they stage the Games well enough. That's all they owe the IOC. It's their off-the-court actions that gum up the works. And that is entirely out of the hands of the IOC or FIFA or whatever. But the fact that "sports is above politics" then merely allows govt's like Putin's to act the way that they want. To my mind, "sport is NOT above politics." We don't need sports; but people certainly need to eat; a roof over their heads, an army to protect them. Winning medals and see a few able-bodies carry the flag is merely a wish; not a necessity.

While I agree with a lot of that, I do think IOC ir FIFA should know by now how certain regimes will act "off court" and that it might be better not to reward them. Not that the IOC could have stopped the Crimea annexion, but it could - if it had wanted - surely watched a lot mire closely on the expenditure in the build up to the Games, what was declared as Games-related or not, how tenders were done etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with a lot of that, I do think IOC ir FIFA should know by now how certain regimes will act "off court" and that it might be better not to reward them. Not that the IOC could have stopped the Crimea annexion, but it could - if it had wanted - surely watched a lot mire closely on the expenditure in the build up to the Games, what was declared as Games-related or not, how tenders were done etc.

OK, but how do you say to a host - no, don't put in a bullet train between X and Y; don't build a high-speed train to the mountain resort? Or don't build the world's fanciest airport to welcome us -- just a hangar will do? Or don't put the world's largest jumbotron screen up there? How do you draw the line? All of that is really up to the host. But now, FIFA can surely rescind the 2018 award and that will be a big loss of face for Putin to his people; and will certainly give him pause for thought in his international adventures. But Blatter and Bach putting their heads in the sand and this B/S 'let's not make the athletes suffer' is just pure B/S. They can go find work like everybody else; they don't have to be subsidized.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they stage the Games well enough. That's all they owe the IOC. It's their off-the-court actions that gum up the works. And that is entirely out of the hands of the IOC or FIFA or whatever. But the fact that "sports is above politics" then merely allows govt's like Putin's to act the way that they want. To my mind, "sport is NOT above politics." We don't need sports; but people certainly need to eat; a roof over their heads, an army to protect them. Winning medals and see a few able-bodies carry the flag is merely a wish; not a necessity.

Really, Russia 'owes' the IOC a 50 billion dollar games? A price tag that has turned of 80% of all potential bidders?

The IOC had the opportunity to deny Russia the spot light, but instead they let them have a 50 billion dollar one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really not fair to count all the roads, resorts and development they did as solely Olympic expense; right or wrong it seemed much larger than the games. Sochi is now a more international known and more nationally used all season resort region that is up and running. The area is very unique and not improper to build up and I see it as a large country using the games to kick start and premier a larger regional development.

Edited by paul
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, Russia 'owes' the IOC a 50 billion dollar games? A price tag that has turned of 80% of all potential bidders?

The IOC had the opportunity to deny Russia the spot light, but instead they let them have a 50 billion dollar one.

In all fairness, I don't think the IOC can predict the Future. In 2007, they didn't think, Russia are going to spend 50 Billion Pounds on a Winter Olympics, let's not give it to them just in case. Now they can think that, because it has happened. Russia doesn't have any realistic chance in the Future for a Summer Olympics anyway. I can't see a possible St Petersburg Bid being better then a Rome, Berlin, Paris, Los Angeles, Durban or Toronto Bid. Also, if Russia is apparently putting off Bidders, surely Beijing is aswell, after the Build Up to the 2008 Summer Olympics and Paralympics. I'm not sticking up for Russia, I actually feel Russia is acting out of line, they went over the top and they shouldn't Host. But if Russia is going to be criticised for the Build Up to the 2014 Winter Olympics and Paralympics, then Beijing should do too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really not fair to count all the roads, resorts and development they did as solely Olympic expense; right or wrong it seemed much larger than the games. Sochi is now a more international known and more nationally used all season resort region that is up and running. The area is very unique and not improper to build up and I see it as a large country using the games to kick start and premier a larger regional development.

It's not so much the regional development as such (though why one of the warmest cities of Russia should be picked for Winter Games could still be debated after all those years...), but who was benefitting from this development - the companies owned quite often by people connected to Putin. The IOC let it all happen - they're watching closely what's going on in Rio, but they didn't interfere at all with Sochi, it seems. If they had wanted to, they could have demanded a few changes here and there to make it all less gigantomanic.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

By all accounts, the IOC views Sochi as a wildly successful and profitable games.

They don't think the same way gamesbids posters think.

You mean GB posters don't actually think the same way as the IOC bigwigs do? Never would have guessed that!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, Russia 'owes' the IOC a 50 billion dollar games? A price tag that has turned of 80% of all potential bidders?

The IOC had the opportunity to deny Russia the spot light, but instead they let them have a 50 billion dollar one.

Read it again. I DIDN'T say that. Read it again!!

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...