BR2028 Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 Did you have a bad experience in Paris or something, since you're always quite adamant to stick the fly in the ointment when it comes to it. And/or is it because when Durban is discussed on these boards, many people here (although I'm certainly not one of them) down play it's chances simply because it's not South Africa's premier city. I prefer Rome myself. Seems more majestic & romantic to me. But Paris is still the second most visited city in the world by international tourists, right behind London. So not too shabby I say, for a 'terribly, over-hyped city'. Rome was crap last time I went. Paris was so much more exciting and beautiful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 To each their own then. Rome may be more rustic & not as polished as Paris, due to its one of the oldest cities in the world , but that's what makes it more unique to me than Paris. Not to mention Paris seems to me so hoite toite & pompous sometimes that it gets a bit annoying. But that doesn't mean that I can't appreciate it as a still beautiful city, bcuz it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 To each their own then. Rome may be more rustic & not as polished as Paris, due to its one of the oldest cities in the world , but that's what makes it more unique to me than Paris. Not to mention Paris seems to me so hoite toite & pompous sometimes that it gets a bit annoying. But that doesn't mean that I can't appreciate it as a still beautiful city, bcuz it is. Funny thing, I've been to both pretty recently. I was in Paris for the first time a couple of years ago. And I was in Rome.. last weekend (I did a whole trip through Italy which ended with 3 days in Rome). Rome is a nice city. Definitely is rich in history and has a lot of energy to it. That said, doesn't feel like a city where I'd want to see the Olympics. In comparison to Paris which has a much more modern public transportation system and sections of the city built up, Rome just has the 2 metro lines (I know a 3rd is coming), the existing trains are covered with graffiti, and it just seems like a city where there's a disconnect between its ancient history and it's modern face. I wasn't so enthralled with Paris other than the brand name, but I agree it's a very beautiful city with a lot more to offer in terms of its ability to host a Summer Olympics. Add to that the fact the country hasn't hosted a Summer Olympics in a century and I think it's the place I'd want to see 2024. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JO2024 Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 It is indeed not a good thing to compare those two cities. Comparing Paris & Rome is like comparing Tokyo & New York...I love Rome, it's quite a pretty city, and I hate that it could have been a completely different city had Mussoline not destroyed half of its Antique parts. But I have to agree on the transportation system which is definitely not the best in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger87 Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 Rome and Paris are beautiful cities in their own way. But for personal preference, I love more Paris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted July 31, 2015 Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 I've been to both Rome and Paris many times and love both, however, it's unquestionable that the Parisian infrastructure seems more able to cope with an Olympics than the Roman. btw ... I really don't see 2024 being the US's time. Try 2028/32 .... and try with a well planned and central New York bid ... give the world what it wants!!!! It worked for China, Britain, Brazil and Japan, and I'm sure it's about to work for France ... give the world what they want! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2015 Nothing compares to Paris, TX. btw ... I really don't see 2024 being the US's time. It worked for China, Britain, Brazil and Japan, and I'm sure it's about to work for France ... give the world what they want! It's the USOC leadership. Apparently, they need THREE bops on the head to knock some sense into them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Funny thing, I've been to both pretty recently. I was in Paris for the first time a couple of years ago. And I was in Rome.. last weekend (I did a whole trip through Italy which ended with 3 days in Rome). Rome is a nice city. Definitely is rich in history and has a lot of energy to it. That said, doesn't feel like a city where I'd want to see the Olympics. In comparison to Paris which has a much more modern public transportation system and sections of the city built up, Rome just has the 2 metro lines (I know a 3rd is coming), the existing trains are covered with graffiti, and it just seems like a city where there's a disconnect between its ancient history and it's modern face. I wasn't so enthralled with Paris other than the brand name, but I agree it's a very beautiful city with a lot more to offer in terms of its ability to host a Summer Olympics. Add to that the fact the country hasn't hosted a Summer Olympics in a century and I think it's the place I'd want to see 2024. On point. I spent a month between Italy, France, and Germany this past summer. Paris was the best city we stayed in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 I'm coming out of retirement to say one thing: The USOC were idiots for choosing Boston. They've shot themselves in the foot and it would be foolhardy to try again with another city (presumably LA). They will lose. Even if they had chosen LA from the outset they would've lost. 2024 is going to Paris. This is not a race no matter how much GB or the IOC wants it to be. That is all, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dakooo Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Sorry athensfan, but it is still a race. Although even I believe that Paris has the best chances, it's never over until we all know it's over. I don't believe Paris has already won, and I'm sure many other people believe the same thing. Therefore, by my (*insert adjective here*) logic, the race is not over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord David Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Go for a 2026 Olympic Winter Games bid with Lake Placid. https://www.facebook.com/lakeplacid2026?fref=ts Time to show the world that another Olympics in perspective can happen. Get cities to start wanting to host a Winter Olympics again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Usa2024olympics Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Haha lake placid can barely host a YOG, maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 I'm coming out of retirement to say one thing: The USOC were idiots for choosing Boston. They've shot themselves in the foot and it would be foolhardy to try again with another city (presumably LA). They will lose. Even if they had chosen LA from the outset they would've lost. 2024 is going to Paris. This is not a race no matter how much GB or the IOC wants it to be. That is all, Welcome back (if ever so briefly). The word 'idiot' doesn't do justice to how bad of a decision it was by the USOC to pick Boston. As much as those of us here figured that was a bad move, I don't think too many of us could have envisioned just how badly that would turn out. Of course, you're right that it's probably a moot point anyway, but this was certainly worse than simply making it to the vote and losing. As for Paris.. it's not a done deal. No question they are the front-runner and this is their race to lose, but there's a lot that could change between now and 2 years from now that would end with a different winner. Because all of it hinges on Paris merely staying in the race and putting forth their bid. Far from impossible that they would pull out. And considering how little the IOC seemed to care when the 2022 race was down to 3 cities and Oslo was they only sensible option left, I doubt they're going to do what they need to keep Paris around if they were wavering at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Go for a 2026 Olympic Winter Games bid with Lake Placid. https://www.facebook.com/lakeplacid2026?fref=ts Time to show the world that another Olympics in perspective can happen. Get cities to start wanting to host a Winter Olympics again. You're never gonna let this go, are you. No matter how insensible it really is. An unofficial facebook page hardly qualifies, either. Lake Placid's time has come & gone & will never come back. They barely were able to handle the 1980 Winter Games, let alone a much bigger 21st century-style Winter Olympics. So let it go already, for Pete's sake. I don't believe Paris has already won, and I'm sure many other people believe the same thing. Of course Paris hasn't already won, cuz Bach hasn't said so (yet). :-D But seriously, unless the French decide not to bid (which seems unlikely at this point, after they've come so far to declare that they'll actually bid after years of dubious intention whether they'd try again after 2012), the ball is very much in their court. Unlike the USOC (which have made an entire debacle of their whole 2024 attempt), France has come out of the playing strong, with full political & apparently good citizenry support. Again, that's quite a feat considering just even a year ago the French were lukewarm at best about another run. The IOC I'm sure has taken notice of that, & must certainly welcome it after the mass European exodus from the 2022 Winter race. Even if the USOC were to still run with Los Angeles, the damage has already been done with the whole Boston mess. The 2024 race woulda been an uphill battle TBW no matter who they picked as their 2024 U.S. nominee, considering how Europe is lining up nicely for this cycle. The geopolitics are pointing in that direction. So while, yes, "the race is not over 'til it's over", if one is being truly being objective here, the general consensus is that this is Paris' to lose. And the only other people that "believe" otherwise are mostly people who support another city that is thinking or wanting to bid for 2024. So those people's POV's are hardly ones that are being fair & impartial to start off with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Go for a 2026 Olympic Winter Games bid with Lake Placid. https://www.facebook.com/lakeplacid2026?fref=ts Time to show the world that another Olympics in perspective can happen. Get cities to start wanting to host a Winter Olympics again. Nope. Just.. nope. But no, please tell us more about how their high school could serve the world's media in the 21st century where live streaming video of every minute of Olympic action is beyond essential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarpedReality Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Welcome back (if ever so briefly). The word 'idiot' doesn't do justice to how bad of a decision it was by the USOC to pick Boston. As much as those of us here figured that was a bad move, I don't think too many of us could have envisioned just how badly that would turn out. Of course, you're right that it's probably a moot point anyway, but this was certainly worse than simply making it to the vote and losing. At least it did not cost as much money for Boston's ship to sink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 What a bizarre way to take solace in all of this. I'm sure you wouldn't be saying that had the USOC not pulled the plug yet. The funny thing is, it's been mentioned all along that no matter who the USOC picked for 2024, the U.S. was very unlikely to get those Games. So nothing from the last page was all the revelating, & the USOC is still wasting time & money nontheless, including Boston's, even though it's not as much as it could've been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Nope. Just.. nope. But no, please tell us more about how their high school could serve the world's media in the 21st century where live streaming video of every minute of Olympic action is beyond essential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryker Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Regarding San Francisco and its stadium issue, could San Francisco use Memorial Stadium and put a platform track in, the so-called Glasgow solution? The stadium has an oval shape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 San Francisco has more than just the stadium issue to deal with. A very spread-out venue plan, a tumultuous political landscape & a nimby culture that would make Boston 2024 look like a cakewalk in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted August 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Re SF, I don't know that anything's going to happen with Oakland's COliseum City; and even the new Warriors Arena slated for SF, is running into strong headwinds there...despite SF not really having a great big, state-of-the-art indoor arena; and the Warriors being the NBC champion this year. Even UC-SF has given its OK, but persistent NIMBYs have vowed to press on the fight at that location. If only I was a bonafide ISIS bomb-maker, I'd blow up those NIMBY's hqtrs!! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord David Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 Nope. Just.. nope. But no, please tell us more about how their high school could serve the world's media in the 21st century where live streaming video of every minute of Olympic action is beyond essential. Just as the Main Press Center. It would need expanding to serve that purpose. The International Broadcast Center will be a new temporary building near the ceremonies site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiejie Posted August 5, 2015 Report Share Posted August 5, 2015 I vote no. The vast majority of ANY USA city's residents are no longer interested in hosting an event which sucks up increasingly scarce resources, is a pain in the quality-of-life azz for many weeks/months/years, and in the end benefits relatively few. I don't think that attitude is going to change in 2015 or in the future. Relatively few Americans feel any sort of warm fuzzies for the Olympic Games and even less feel anything for the IOC or USOC. If more Americans even knew who Thomas Bach is, they'd likely tell him to go pound sand. IMO, far better to be a visitor and let somebody else foot the bill, than to be a host of what's become an overblown, outlandish extravaganza with too many sports and which costs way more than it should. Probably an unpopular opinion on a forum such as this, but would-be hosts should be dictating to the IOC what they are willing to spend and willing to provide, not the other way around. I don't see evidence that the IOC seriously wants to rein their big event (SOG) in to a more manageable and appealing level befitting a leaner and meaner 21st century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.