Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hektor

And then there were Five...

Recommended Posts

I don't see a dilemma at all. Geopolitically, I see this as Europe's to lose, & Paris in particular (as the overwhelming favorite), with Hamburg, Rome & Los Angeles all fighting it out to be the distant second-favored contender.

And Budapest should be thanking their lucky stars that Baku (which I'm kinda surprised that they finally got the hint) didn't submit a bid like they were planning to. Now I see the Hungarians being included in everything from now until Lima just for sh!ts & giggles.

I'm also kinda surprised that Istanbul refrained too, since Erdogan pledged an "even stronger" 2024 bid right after their 2020 loss. But they really do have some serious domestic issues to deal with ATM. And Madrid finally took the hint as well. They said they weren't going for a fourth bid & stuck to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Madrid no surprise there. They now have a far left/Podemos mayor, Manuela Carmena. For these green, far-left and altermondialist guys, the IOC and the Olympics are the embodiment of evil.

In Madrid they are also trying to eliminate bullfighting, which is a far more difficult endeavour than not bidding for the SOG.

Edited by hektor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best part of all this: no Doha or Baku!!!

Yeah where did that come from? Thought Doha said they'd just keep bidding and bidding?!

Seeing this as Paris v L.A.

My heart desperately wants Paris to win but can the IOC deny the USA for a 3rd time? Will they get fed up? Especially after how long it took to get cities to say they're interested then have Boston and that failing...

Could be 28 years between 2 American games, wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit surprised Baku didn't bid for the games, specially after the European Games and how eager they seemed to be to do the Olympics. A bit sad Toronto had to leave, though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah where did that come from? Thought Doha said they'd just keep bidding and bidding?!

Seeing this as Paris v L.A.

My heart desperately wants Paris to win but can the IOC deny the USA for a 3rd time? Will they get fed up? Especially after how long it took to get cities to say they're interested then have Boston and that failing...

Could be 28 years between 2 American games, wow.

Can the IOC deny France for a 4th time?

Could be 100 years between 2 French games, wow.

Anyway. Good luck to those 5 cities and...que le meilleur gagne!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be fair that Paris gets 2024 and 2028 is in the US. But reality is not always fair.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's the very most likely scenario anyway. Of the five official cities now, Paris is the only one on the list that's the most iconic, & is one of the three most iconic cities in the world.

For all the talk that the Olympics should go to the most recognizable, most iconic cities of the world, & how the IOC tends to prefer these type of Alpha cities, you can't get much better than that on this go-around than Paris.

So unless the IOC wants a B-class European city for 2028, Los Angeles is going to have to bid again, where in the following cycle, North America would really be in a much favored position.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm disappointed that Baku sits it out. I love Azerbaijan.

The best part of all this: no Doha or Baku!!!

I'm a bit surprised Baku didn't bid for the games, specially after the European Games and how eager they seemed to be to do the Olympics.

Well, well. It looks like the IOC (Bach) nipped that one right in the butt right from the get go this time around, according to this:

http://gamesbids.com/eng/featured/ioc-olympic-bid-short-listing-remains-twice-cloaked-in-new-ioc-process/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gamesbidsrss+%28GamesBids.com+Headlines%29

Citing that Baku should wait until the 2028 race when they're "better prepared". Right, yet Budapest couldn't have been saved the trouble as well?

Although, this also cites how the IOC will still have a form of elimination process as the 2024 race goes on. Maybe the Hungarians will still be shown the door in one of those two "new" removal procedures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So four EU nations vs the USA, for the third Summer Olympiad following the last EU one, aka the first North American Summer Olympiad of the millennium. A dilemma there for the IOC, I suspect.

Coming on the heels of the 2022 bid where their choices were Almaty and Beijing, the IOC should be thrilled to have such a dilemma.

That said, saying "first North American Summer Olympid of the millennium" ignores that the last Olympics of the previous millennium was in North America. So you're essentially setting the cut-off exactly at the point where the most recent Olympics before it was in North America. Even still, this feels like a cycle where the IOC wants Europe. So all they need is 1 good option and LA is probably looking at 2nd place. Either way, at least this should be a lot more interesting than that dumpster fire that was the 2022 bids.

Well, well. It looks like the IOC (Bach) nipped that one right in the butt right from the get go this time around, according to this:

http://gamesbids.com/eng/featured/ioc-olympic-bid-short-listing-remains-twice-cloaked-in-new-ioc-process/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gamesbidsrss+%28GamesBids.com+Headlines%29

Citing that Baku should wait until the 2028 race when they're "better prepared". Right, yet Budapest couldn't have been saved the trouble as well?

Although, this also cites how the IOC will still have a form of elimination process as the 2024 race goes on. Maybe the Hungarians will still be shown the door in one of those two "new" removal procedures.

For all that we've talked about Agenda 2020 and what it's going to look like.. perhaps we are starting to see what it's all about. We'll learn more as the 2024 bid cycle progresses, but this certainly looks encouraging that they openly told Baku to piss off, at least for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming on the heels of the 2022 bid where their choices were Almaty and Beijing, the IOC should be thrilled to have such a dilemma.

That said, saying "first North American Summer Olympid of the millennium" ignores that the last Olympics of the previous millennium was in North America.

Actually, the last games of the last millennium was in Sydney. The old millennium officially ended December 31st, 2000 and the new one began January 1st, 2001. I know most people will disagree, but scientifically those are the correct dates.

The-more-you-know.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't understand how these games are "Europe's to lose". If I remember correctly, Since the USA (or North America) last hosted the Summer Olympics, Europe has hosted twice. If anything, this should be LA's to loose. Especially considering the Agenda 2020, and that Los Angeles/Southern California have an abundance of venues that can used for the games, and only needs to build a few, such as velodrome, aquatics center and white water course. The only downside that I see is that it'll be difficult to make LA's bid compact like the past decade of bids. But if they focus on being cost effective and reusing venues, LA could win easily. Basically the same concept as the 1984 Games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, as much as Paris is the frontrunner, I'm not ready to give it the honors already. I would not count LA out by a longshot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't understand how these games are "Europe's to lose". If I remember correctly, Since the USA (or North America) last hosted the Summer Olympics, Europe has hosted twice. If anything, this should be LA's to loose. Especially considering the Agenda 2020, and that Los Angeles/Southern California have an abundance of venues that can used for the games, and only needs to build a few, such as velodrome, aquatics center and white water course. The only downside that I see is that it'll be difficult to make LA's bid compact like the past decade of bids. But if they focus on being cost effective and reusing venues, LA could win easily. Basically the same concept as the 1984 Games.

But you seem to forget that the USA is a country, not a continent. You cannot compare both. The USA don't have to host every other three Summer Olympics. How would you feel if China was hosting every 14 years ( ;) )? No offense, but it would get a bit boring. It's nice to see what a new, different county has to offer regarding Summer Games. We've seen what the US could do in the 80's, 90's and even early 2000's. Everyone should have their go at it. And don't worry, the US will get either 2028 or 2032. Just be a little bit more patient. It's not like you waited a century....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't understand how these games are "Europe's to lose". If I remember correctly, Since the USA (or North America) last hosted the Summer Olympics, Europe has hosted twice. If anything, this should be LA's to loose.

So how does a city that's hosted twice already, & as recent as 1984 "theirs to lose" either? Europe has never gone more than two cycles without a Summer Olympics, & France in particular would have an entire CENTURY by the time 2024 comes around, & given the sloth of very capable European cities (barring Budapest) in this race, it's not like the IOC has lack of choices in that dept this go around. Not to mention how Europe literally pulled out of the 2022 race & leaving the IOC in sh!t river, & now the IOC is literally blessed with European options. So it's a no-brainer I'd say.

Especially considering the Agenda 2020, and that Los Angeles/Southern California have an abundance of venues that can used for the games, and only needs to build a few, such as velodrome, aquatics center and white water course. The only downside that I see is that it'll be difficult to make LA's bid compact like the past decade of bids. But if they focus on being cost effective and reusing venues, LA could win easily. Basically the same concept as the 1984 Games.

So does Paris. So if your argument is "agenda 2020" that doesn't put Los Angeles in any edge whatsoever over Paris since the French capital also has an abundance of venues that can be used for the Games & would have to build very few as well.

And don't worry, the US will get either 2028 or 2032. Just be a little bit more patient. It's not like you waited a century....

Lmfao, exactly!

And also don't the IOC consider the Americas to be united anyway - so 2016 counts as an American Games?

Yep - whether right or wrong, that seems to be their old world view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And don't worry, the US will get either 2028 or 2032. Just be a little bit more patient. It's not like you waited a century....

No, no. Don't put that on anyone but yourselves. It's Paris' own fault that they waited so long to host again. In between the last time they hosted (1924) and the bid for the 1992 Olympics, Paris showed absolutely no interest in hosting the SOG. The only other time France bid for a Summer games was for the 1968 Olympics, and they lost to Mexico City. If Paris would have smartened up it would have put in a bid over Lyon and more than likely won over Mexico City. And before those games and the ones after they would have had a great shot at getting the games again. So no, you waiting 100 years to get the games means absolutely nothing when you crapped around over 60 years of those 100 and did nothing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Gee, could it have been that at the time that France (in what, 1962 for the 1968 Summer Games), wanted to try with ANOTHER city, since Paris had already hosted twice by even that time? Not to mention that Mexico City was the "new frontier" bid at the time, so I'm not so sure if a third Paris attempt so soon (relatively speaking) could've done the job either. Let's also not forget that up & coming Detroit (at the time) was also seen as a formidable opponent.

So I wouldn't call it "crapping around" for 60 outta those 100 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And also don't the IOC consider the Americas to be united anyway - so 2016 counts as an American Games?

It's a gray area. In some respects, North America and South America are separate. In other cases, they are 1 entity. As it pertains to Olympic bidding, it could go either way. But certainly a case can be made that some would consider LA 2024 as being from the same continent as Rio 2016, even though we all know that's not entirely accurate (less Rio be stripped of the distinction of the first city from their continent to host an Olympics)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×