Los Angeles 2028

[FYI]

$300 for that?! PASS! 

The jacket is not even attractive. Looks like something that you can easily pick up at the Gap, Aeropostale or even Walmart. So talk about a ralph lauren fail. Not to mention the emblem is not that inspiring, either.

[Bear]

Well considering what is currently happening, I hope LA28 is drafting up emergency plans for the possibility of a hurricane / tropical storm arriving during the Paralympics...

[Olympian1010]

2 hours ago, Bear said:

Well considering what is currently happening, I hope LA28 is drafting up emergency plans for the possibility of a hurricane / tropical storm arriving during the Paralympics...

It really isn’t a common occurrence, although we’ve certainly had our share of “super storms” in recent years.

LA28 should prepare for all potential disasters and emergencies of course, so hopefully someone’s taking notes on storms like this.

[Quaker2001]

19 minutes ago, Olympian1010 said:

It really isn’t a common occurrence, although we’ve certainly had our share of “super storms” in recent years.

LA28 should prepare for all potential disasters and emergencies of course, so hopefully someone’s taking notes on storms like this.

Any responsible organizing committee will have contingency plans for foreseeable situations (as opposed to a once-in-a-century pandemic).  I doubt they'll suddenly realize that a major weather event is something they need to be concerned about.  I'm sure it was already under consideration

[FYI]

I'd be much more concerned about the potential of a triple-digit heatwave, or a relatively nearby huge wildfire smoking out L.A. during the Games (much like the Quebuc wildfires did to New York, Boston, D.C. Chicago & Toronto a couple of months ago) than any other potential weather-related issue.

The summers lately just about everywhere appear to be getting worse & worse as the years goes by. Pretty soon, the IOC will have to abadon their rule of only hosting the Summer Olympics during July/Aug, just to avoid such summer extremes in the future, if this keeps up.  

[baron-pierreIV]

On 8/20/2023 at 11:55 AM, FYI said:

The summers lately just about everywhere appear to be getting worse & worse as the years goes by. Pretty soon, the IOC will have to abadon their rule of only hosting the Summer Olympics during July/Aug, just to avoid such summer extremes in the future, if this keeps up.  

Easier said than done.  July-August is also when the IOC's biggest tele-markets (USA, Europe and Japan) have space for and can use "summer" Olympic games programming.  So, like shifting the last men's World Cup to November - December will be problematic for the likes of NBC, EBU and whichever Japanese network bids for the Games' coverage.  Athletes are secondary; they get fame and some metal trinkets in exchange.  

It's more those extended Summer Torch Relays I am worried about.  Why do they have to run them for 3 months?  But the odd Paris 2024 games seems to be putting a curb on those over-done relays.  

Edited August 23, 2023 by baron-pierreIV
x

[Quaker2001]

On 8/20/2023 at 2:55 PM, FYI said:

I'd be much more concerned about the potential of a triple-digit heatwave, or a relatively nearby huge wildfire smoking out L.A. during the Games (much like the Quebuc wildfires did to New York, Boston, D.C. Chicago & Toronto a couple of months ago) than any other potential weather-related issue.

The summers lately just about everywhere appear to be getting worse & worse as the years goes by. Pretty soon, the IOC will have to abadon their rule of only hosting the Summer Olympics during July/Aug, just to avoid such summer extremes in the future, if this keeps up.  

The IOC is still first and foremost a business.  If they get the most money in conjunction with the media rights holders and the sports federations by insisting on that window, it's going to continue.  If we get to the point where we can't have major sports events in the summer because of climate change, then we have much more serious problems on this planet.

[FYI]

No kidding that the IOC is still a business. However, don't think that 'this planet' will take that into consideration when mother nature comes a-knockin', though. 

In case anyone hasn't noticed, but we're already seeing many things/activities in many parts of the world being altered, delayed, cancelled, etc. due to the extreme heat just from this (hottest on record) summer alone. And it's not going to get better anytime soon. On the contrary, it can only get worse. 

Can you see Texas, for example, ever hosting a future Summer Olympics in the current July/August time-frame in these current, extreme summer conditions? Those triple-digit days would make even "Hot"-lanta 1996 seem like a pool party in comparison. It will be interesting to see, though, how those United 2026 matches in Texas will pan out with the excessive heat (maybe they should move those matches to Nov/Dec, too )!

And it's not just the Summer Olympics, but the Winter Olympics are also in danger due to changing weather patterns. If there's hardly a winter environment in many places where there use to be plenty of snow, then regardless of how much of a business the IOC is, the winter show can't go on. And if on the other end of the spectrum fewer places, as we go forward, are able to host in the IOC's preferred July/Aug time-frame, then how much money they can get in conjunction with media rights & the sports federations within that time-window won't matter anyway. Mother earth dictates all.

[Quaker2001]

27 minutes ago, FYI said:

No kidding that the IOC is still a business. However, don't think that 'this planet' will take that into consideration when mother nature comes a-knockin', though. 

In case anyone hasn't noticed, but we're already seeing many things/activities in many parts of the world being altered, delayed, cancelled, etc. due to the extreme heat just from this (hottest on record) summer alone. And it's not going to get better anytime soon. On the contrary, it can only get worse. 

Can you see Texas, for example, ever hosting a future Summer Olympics in the current July/August time-frame in these current, extreme summer conditions? Those triple-digit days would make even "Hot"-lanta 1996 seem like a pool party in comparison. It will be interesting to see, though, how those United 2026 matches in Texas will pan out with the excessive heat (maybe they should move those matches to Nov/Dec, too )!

And it's not just the Summer Olympics, but the Winter Olympics are also in danger due to changing weather patterns. If there's hardly a winter environment in many places where there use to be plenty of snow, then regardless of how much of a business the IOC is, the winter show can't go on. And if on the other end of the spectrum fewer places, as we go forward, are able to host in the IOC's preferred July/Aug time-frame, then how much money they can get in conjunction with media rights & the sports federations within that time-window won't matter anyway. Mother earth dictates all.

We noticed.  There's a world athletics championships going on right now in Budapest.  Extremely hot and humid, but the event is still going on.  Would they still hold the event if it were to "get worse"?  You know they would.  They did move it elsewhere on the calendar 1 year to accommodate Doha.  The 2025 event in Tokyo is in September.  But they're flexible that way.  The IOC has shown very little interest in recent years to be flexible and why should they be?

Sure, some places are not suitable to host an even like the Olympics in July and August.  Speaking of Doha, for all the times they've pursued the Olympics, has the IOC ever seriously entertained the notion of putting it in September or October for their benefit?  Not really, and why should they have to.  How many times over have we said that all the IOC needs is for 1 city/country to give them what they want and they're good to go.  Yes, we know that's becoming a problem on the winter side of things, although there's no calendar fix that would solve that issue.  Might it happen someday on the summer side?  Perhaps, but that's not an imminent danger.  Not with all those "interested cities" we know are out there for 2036! 

As for United 2026.. I'm sure the citizens of Texas appreciate your concern for their safety, but you probably forgot that both stadiums there are climate controlled.  So the heat will not be something the teams or the spectators have to deal with

[FYI]

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

We noticed.  There's a world athletics championships going on right now in Budapest.  Extremely hot and humid, but the event is still going on. 

Well, apparently not everyone. Since weather which would seem to be typical summer weather going on in Budapest at the moment (similar to Atlanta's), is still quite different from the triple-digit temps that have literally been baking Texas, Greece, Rome & other parts of the world already this summer. And also, last I checked, a world championship event is not the Olympics. So easier to manage any logistical challenges that may arise at smaller events.

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Sure, some places are not suitable to host an even like the Olympics in July and August.  Speaking of Doha, for all the times they've pursued the Olympics, has the IOC ever seriously entertained the notion of putting it in September or October for their benefit?  Not really, and why should they have to. How many times over have we said that all the IOC needs is for 1 city/country to give them what they want and they're good to go.

Oh, come on. Stop being so disingenuous. You know damn well that had absolutely nothing to do with their weather, but other geopolitical reasons that the IOC couldn't just really come out & say. The extreme heat was just the convenient smokescreen that they could use against them. If it was anywhere geopolitically attractive for the IOC to go to Doha-ha (like China or Brazil was), you know that they absolutely would've. July/Aug time-frame or not. They'd make an exception, one-off, whatever to go there regardless.  

But even putting that aside for a moment, the IOC is already having a challenging time to find that one city/country to give them what they want. And climate change going forward is most likely going to make it even that much more challenging, & that's the point. It may not be an 'imminent danger' right now, but for a mega event that only happens once every fours years, it very well can be a danger later on. We're already starting to see too many extremes.

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

As for United 2026.. I'm sure the citizens of Texas appreciate your concern for their safety, but you probably forgot that both stadiums there are climate controlled.  So the heat will not be something the teams or the spectators have to deal with

Well, as you like to say around here; "good for them"!  But what about all "the citizens" in the 'fan zones' that aren't going to be as fortunate to be inside those climate-controlled stadia? Or the other hot spot venues like Hard Rock & Estadio BBVA which all they have are "canopies" to protect from all that heat & humidity. Maybe just those elements can be moved to Nov/Dec then. 

[Quaker2001]

3 hours ago, FYI said:

Well, apparently not everyone. Since weather which would seem to be typical summer weather going on in Budapest at the moment (similar to Atlanta's), is still quite different from the triple-digit temps that have literally been baking Texas, Greece, Rome & other parts of the world already this summer. And also, last I checked, a world championship event is not the Olympics. So easier to manage any logistical challenges that may arise at smaller events.

As you like to say even more than I do.. good for Texas, Greece, and Rome.  None of those places are in the running to host an Olympics, so who cares what the temperature is there as opposed to Budapest, speaking of a city that might some day have Olympic aspirations.  Climate change has put more of a focus on extreme weather, and events like wildfires have become more common.  But still, it's not like extreme heat is something new.  It's certainly something that OOC's are going to be more aware of and likely plan for.  It's not something where in the near term the IOC is going to have to re-think the calendar.  We know why FIFA did what they did with the World Cup in Qatar.

3 hours ago, FYI said:

Oh, come on. Stop being so disingenuous. You know damn well that had absolutely nothing to do with their weather, but other geopolitical reasons that the IOC couldn't just really come out & say. The extreme heat was just the convenient smokescreen that they could use against them. If it was anywhere geopolitically attractive for the IOC to go to Doha-ha (like China or Brazil was), you know that they absolutely would've. July/Aug time-frame or not. They'd make an exception, one-off, whatever to go there regardless.  

Would they actually do that?  FIFA handed the rights to the 2026 World Cup to Fox on a silver platter as a "we're sorry, please don't sue us" make up for Qatar and that's without a specific timeline to stick to.  You're right, there are plenty of reasons the IOC doesn't want to do business with Qatar.  The calendar is more than just a convenient excuse though.  It's a bad business decision on the part of the IOC for that reason.  They have a specific time window for a reason.  At this point, it's not some sort of general guideline they'll easily toss aside.

4 hours ago, FYI said:

But even putting that aside for a moment, the IOC is already having a challenging time to find that one city/country to give them what they want. And climate change going forward is most likely going to make it even that much more challenging, & that's the point. It may not be an 'imminent danger' right now, but for a mega event that only happens once every fours years, it very well can be a danger later on. We're already starting to see too many extremes.

For the Winter Olympics, yes.  For the Summer Olympics?  Didn't seem like much of a challenge when they awarded Brisbane 2032 well ahead of schedule without a contest.  We may poke fun at AF for all the "interested cities" discussion, but there's probably a serious candidate out there who will absolutely go in that July-August window, even if that's not necessarily their first preference.

Your original premise is that the IOC is going to have to consider going outside of their preferred window to find a candidate.  "later on" and "pretty soon" is not exactly the next cycle or 2.  It's probably a couple of decades down the road.

4 hours ago, FYI said:

Well, as you like to say around here; "good for them"!  But what about all "the citizens" in the 'fan zones' that aren't going to be as fortunate to be inside those climate-controlled stadia? Or the other hot spot venues like Hard Rock & Estadio BBVA which all they have are "canopies" to protect from all that heat & humidity. Maybe just those elements can be moved to Nov/Dec then. 

Highs were in the 90s in Atlanta throughout much of the Olympics in 1996.  Dealing with heat is not something the Olympics and other sports events are new to.  Would it be better weather-wise to have the World Cup in the fall?  Sure.  But that's bad for business and for TV (not to mention it conflicts with NFL season when all the stadiums won't be available).  So they'll play it in July, despite the weather.  Why?  Because it's good for business.  And FIFA isn't going to make the same dumb move twice.

[FYI]

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

As you like to say even more than I do.. good for Texas, Greece, and Rome.  None of those places are in the running to host an Olympics, so who cares what the temperature is there as opposed to Budapest, speaking of a city that might some day have Olympic aspirations.  

Well, I'm sure the citizens of Texas (& Greece & Rome for that matter) appreciate your 'lack' of concern for their safety. But how do you know that Texas & Rome still don't have aspirations themselves for hosting an(other) Olympics, since they have in the past, just like Budapest? So don't think that can be said with any level of confidence at this point, especially when the next available summer spot is still 13 years away.

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Would they actually do that?  FIFA handed the rights to the 2026 World Cup to Fox on a silver platter as a "we're sorry, please don't sue us" make up for Qatar and that's without a specific timeline to stick to.  You're right, there are plenty of reasons the IOC doesn't want to do business with Qatar.  The calendar is more than just a convenient excuse though.  It's a bad business decision on the part of the IOC for that reason.  They have a specific time window for a reason.  At this point, it's not some sort of general guideline they'll easily toss aside.

At this point no, but considering NBC's current deal with the IOC ends after 2032, who knows. ITG had an interesting article just the other day about broadcast rights might not be as lucrative to the IOC going forward after the way that other avenues of how people consume media nowadays is rapidly changing. So by the time climate change does start to become an issue for the Summer Olympics, the so-called time-window rule may become a thing of the past as well. 

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

For the Winter Olympics, yes.  For the Summer Olympics?  Didn't seem like much of a challenge when they awarded Brisbane 2032 well ahead of schedule without a contest. 

This is another disingenuous point, since most of us here know exactly why the IOC rushed (in the middle of a pandemic, too) to award 2032, & it had absolutely nothing to do because Brisbane was an ideal candidate within the July/Aug time-frame. That just happened to be the cherry-on-top.

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Your original premise is that the IOC is going to have to consider going outside of their preferred window to find a candidate.  "later on" and "pretty soon" is not exactly the next cycle or 2.  It's probably a couple of decades down the road.

"Pretty soon or later on" are relatively terms when it comes to the Olympics, since each edition happens once every four years. So of course I didn't mean the next cycle or two, cause those are already slotted for Paris & Los Angeles, & then Brisbane. So then obviously that would mean when the next time the IOC would have to make their next Summer Olympic picks, which by then would be for the 2036 & 2040 Olympics. And which by then, climate change would seriously start to become an overwhelming issue if the planet keeps getting even warmer by then.

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Highs were in the 90s in Atlanta throughout much of the Olympics in 1996.  Dealing with heat is not something the Olympics and other sports events are new to.  Would it be better weather-wise to have the World Cup in the fall?  Sure.  But that's bad for business and for TV (not to mention it conflicts with NFL season when all the stadiums won't be available).  So they'll play it in July, despite the weather.  Why?  Because it's good for business.  And FIFA isn't going to make the same dumb move twice.

Again, high's in the 90's is not high's into the triple-digits. 90's would seem like a cool-front in comparison. The planet is getting hotter, & places that have never experienced triple-digit heat before are now (places that could be interested in an Olympics in the future), there's no argument among most scientists about that. And "pretty soon/later on", again relatively speaking, the IOC (& anyone else) will have to start dealing with that reality if this extreme pattern persists. 

And I don't know where you're getting that I'm advocating that the 2026 WC be moved to the fall. I made a comment in jest & you just seem to be running away with that now.  

[Quaker2001]

36 minutes ago, FYI said:

Well, I'm sure the citizens of Texas (& Greece & Rome for that matter) appreciate your 'lack' of concern for their safety. But how do you know that Texas & Rome still don't have aspirations themselves for hosting an(other) Olympics, since they have in the past, just like Budapest? So don't think that can be said with any level of confidence at this point, especially when the next available summer spot is still 13 years away.

I thought this was about the logistical challenges of hosting a large scale sporting event (even larger than the World Athletics Championships), not so much about safety?  No, I think it can be said with a great deal of confidence that none of those 3 places - 2 of which are in countries that already have a future Olympics on the calendar - currently have Olympic aspirations themselves for hosting another Olympics. And I don't think you disagree with that at the moment.  Could that all change 20 years from now?  Sure.  So let's have that conversation 20 years from now when they might actually be thinking about it and probably have to deal with an increasingly worsening climate.

49 minutes ago, FYI said:

At this point no, but considering NBC's current deal with the IOC ends after 2032, who knows. ITG had an interesting article just the other day about broadcast rights might not be as lucrative to the IOC going forward after the way that other avenues of how people consume media nowadays is rapidly changing. So by the time climate change does start to become an issue for the Summer Olympics, the so-called time-window rule may become a thing of the past as well. 

Why the Summer Olympics are held in July, August despite heat

There's nothing so called about the time window.  It's not official policy, but prospective host cities know how the game is played, particularly Japan and Australia which previously hosted Olympics outside that window but are adhering to it this time.  It's not just for the benefit of NBC but other broadcast outlets and sports federations as well.  They just don't have the singular investment that NBC puts on the table.  Even if rights fees for the Olympics drop (other sports leagues are seeing increases even with all they're up against in this day and age), that doesn't change the paradigm about when the best time to host is. 

The IOC knows it's better to go in the summer, before kids are back to school and fall sports start up again.  The World Cup could make November/December work from a TV standpoint because the games were all in the morning/afternoon.  They're not trying to get primetime up against the NFL.  That would be a massive disaster and if the IOC were to try and sell TV rights to an event in September or October, then you would see just how much less lucrative those rights would be.

1 hour ago, FYI said:

This is another disingenuous point, since most of us here know exactly why the IOC rushed (in the middle of a pandemic, too) to award 2032, & it had absolutely nothing to do because Brisbane was an ideal candidate within the July/Aug time-frame. That just happened to be the cherry-on-top.

They wanted a candidate who would give them that window.  And they got one.  The only way the IOC reconsiders this one is if they don't get what they want.  All they need is 1 city.

1 hour ago, FYI said:

"Pretty soon or later on" are relatively terms when it comes to the Olympics, since each edition happens once every four years. So of course I didn't mean the next cycle or two, cause those are already slotted for Paris & Los Angeles, & then Brisbane. So then obviously that would mean when the next time the IOC would have to make their next Summer Olympic picks, which by then would be for the 2036 & 2040 Olympics. And which by then, climate change would seriously start to become an overwhelming issue if the planet keeps getting even warmer by then.

See previous comment.  All they need is 1 and you know as well as I do that if 2 equal candidates both presented themselves and 1 said July-August and the other was looking at September that the calendar would become a factor.  Maybe Seoul can get 2036, would continue a trend after Tokyo and Brisbane of countries having previously hosted an Olympics outside of the preferred window now hosting an Olympics within it.  Because they're playing the game the way the IOC wants them to.

1 hour ago, FYI said:

Again, high's in the 90's is not high's into the triple-digits. 90's would seem like a cool-front in comparison. The planet is getting hotter, & places that have never experienced triple-digit heat before are now (places that could be interested in an Olympics in the future), there's no argument among most scientists about that. And "pretty soon/later on", again relatively speaking, the IOC (& anyone else) will have to start dealing with that reality if this extreme pattern persists. 

The IOC is barely dealing with the reality of what's happening with the Winter Olympics.  They'll only have to deal with it on the Summer side if cities aren't bidding.  And there are still plenty of places on the planet who aren't dealing with triple digit temps.  Even the ones that are may not be deterred.  

[FYI]

On 8/24/2023 at 12:15 AM, Quaker2001 said:

No, I think it can be said with a great deal of confidence that none of those 3 places - 2 of which are in countries that already have a future Olympics on the calendar - currently have Olympic aspirations themselves for hosting another Olympics. And I don't think you disagree with that at the moment.  Could that all change 20 years from now?  Sure.  So let's have that conversation 20 years from now when they might actually be thinking about it and probably have to deal with an increasingly worsening climate.

Actually, I do disagree with it cause this is also another disingenuous point. Yes, the U.S. & Italy both have Games already slated on the calendar, but each of those are for different seasonal edition of the Games. But that's not stopping SLC to go after 2034, only six years after L.A. 2028. And that's not stopping all the speculation of France going after 2030 despite being just six years after Paris 2024. So Rome could be well positioned for 2036 even after Milan 2026. And while 2036 might be pushing it for the U.S., I can see the USOC perhaps wanting to go after 2040 & will be on the lookout for a *willing partner* U.S. city. 

The IOC is also already discussing 2036 & even 2040 for that matter. They're not waiting 20 years to have that discussion. The "new norm" allows them to talk about whatever Games whenever they want. Heck, they're even discussing about having a 'permanent rotating pool of hosts' for the Winter Games. They're not waiting around anymore to have any kind of discussion for their long-term objectives.

On 8/24/2023 at 12:15 AM, Quaker2001 said:

The IOC knows it's better to go in the summer, before kids are back to school and fall sports start up again. 

The former seems to be becoming more & more of a moot point as the years go by. I'm sure you remember growing up when school usually started back up right after the Labor Day weekend. School is starting these days (at least in the U.S. anyway) earlier & earlier each year, with now with a starting date of early-to-mid August. Pretty soon (& again, not meaning next year or the year after by that, but relatively speaking a decade from now) it will seem that school around here will be starting as early as July. 

On 8/24/2023 at 12:15 AM, Quaker2001 said:

They wanted a candidate who would give them that window.  And they got one.  The only way the IOC reconsiders this one is if they don't get what they want.  All they need is 1 city.

 By they, you mean Coates. But considering July/Aug. is technically Australia's winter, heat was the least of their concern there. On the contrary, Melbourne was overlooked simply because of it's much cooler weather during the IOC's preferred time-window.

On 8/24/2023 at 12:15 AM, Quaker2001 said:

All they need is 1 and you know as well as I do that if 2 equal candidates both presented themselves and 1 said July-August and the other was looking at September that the calendar would become a factor.  Maybe Seoul can get 2036, would continue a trend after Tokyo and Brisbane of countries having previously hosted an Olympics outside of the preferred window now hosting an Olympics within it.  Because they're playing the game the way the IOC wants them to.

Tokyo 2020 was selected back in 2013, at a time when warming global temperatures didn't seem that much of a concern. Then comes the 2019 heatwave where temps in Tokyo soared & the Tokyo 2020 Olympics get a much closer look in terms of heat mitigation. It's why the marathon got moved from Tokyo to Sapporo to help offset that concern.

Again, the point is, at some point, the IOC isn't going to have the game played how they want, cause challenges beyond their control can start to dictate things for them (see Coronavirus). 

On 8/24/2023 at 12:15 AM, Quaker2001 said:

The IOC is barely dealing with the reality of what's happening with the Winter Olympics.  

True, they won't deal with a problem until it's starring them right in the face. And even then, they're in a state of denial. So of course can't expect them to be proactive about anything, cause as with most 'businesses', it's business as usual with them.  

On 8/24/2023 at 12:15 AM, Quaker2001 said:

And there are still plenty of places on the planet who aren't dealing with triple digit temps.  Even the ones that are may not be deterred.  

For now, anyway. But what about 10-15 years from now, & that's the point. Even the Midwest is baking right now (speaking of a region that's not use to those type of extreme triple-digit heat temps before).

At some point if this keeps up, even business as usual is not going to be as easily obtainable, even for the ones that may not be deterred with those extreme challenges. But anyway, I digress now. Since this is the Los Angeles 2028 thread & not the Climate Change thread.

[Quaker2001]

40 minutes ago, FYI said:

Actually, I do disagree with it cause this is also another disingenuous point. Yes, the U.S. & Italy both have Games already slated on the calendar, but each of those are for different seasonal edition of the Games. But that's not stopping SLC to go after 2034, only six years after L.A. 2028. And that's not stopping all the speculation of France going after 2030 despite being just six years after Paris 2024. So Rome could be well positioned for 2036 even after Milan 2026. And while 2036 might be pushing it for the U.S., I can see the USOC perhaps wanting to go after 2040 & will be on the lookout for a *willing partner* U.S. city. 

Wow, talk about disingenuous arguments.  The USOPC is focused on LA and Salt Lake right now.  After 2028, maybe they're looking at the next Summer Olympics they might be interested in, but that's a future hypothetical, not something they're entertaining right now.  Likewise with Italy, they've had some struggles in trying to put together all the pieces for the 2026 games.  Another total hypothetical saying Rome could be in position for 2036.  Right now, there is no interest there.  If that's incorrect, feel free to prove me wrong.  Otherwise, spare us the "could be" arguments as if we have to imagine every possible future in the current moment.

47 minutes ago, FYI said:

The IOC is also already discussing 2036 & even 2040 for that matter. They're not waiting 20 years to have that discussion. The "new norm" allows them to talk about whatever Games whenever they want. Heck, they're even discussing about having a 'permanent rotating pool of hosts' for the Winter Games. They're not waiting around anymore to have any kind of discussion for their long-term objectives.

Yes, the way the IOC operates now gives them the freedom to look more long term than they have in the past.  That said, that freedom to do whatever they please somewhat nullifies the "the IOC will have to abandon their rule" argument as if they won't have any other options.

49 minutes ago, FYI said:

The former seems to be becoming more & more of a moot point as the years go by. I'm sure you remember growing up when school usually started back up right after the Labor Day weekend. School is starting these days (at least in the U.S. anyway) earlier & earlier each year, with now with a starting date of early-to-mid August. Pretty soon (& again, not meaning next year or the year after by that, but relatively speaking a decade from now) it will seem that school around here will be starting as early as July. 

It already starts in July in parts of the country... ‘Back to school’ means anytime from late July to after Labor Day, depending on where in the U.S. you live

But that's not a new phenomenon.  I'm used to the Northeast calendar were school doesn't start until after Labor Day.  That still hasn't moved.  A lot of other places have been earlier than that for years.  It's not some sort of massive creep up where the things are likely to change.  Of course, that doesn't stop you from making another "pretty soon" hypothetical.  Maybe that's your new thing? 

59 minutes ago, FYI said:

Tokyo 2020 was selected back in 2013, at a time when warming global temperatures didn't seem that much of a concern. Then comes the 2019 heatwave where temps in Tokyo soared & the Tokyo 2020 Olympics get a much closer look in terms of heat mitigation. It's why the marathon got moved from Tokyo to Sapporo to help offset that concern.

Again, the point is, at some point, the IOC isn't going to have the game played how they want, cause challenges beyond their control can start to dictate things for them (see Coronavirus). 

Another disingenuous point.  A vague generalization with no timeline, so this feels like another "pretty soon" argument.

Remember after 9/11 how security costs for the Olympics skyrocketed?  Did that challenge change how the IOC or host cities operate other than to deal with that cost?  Not really, although terrorism is hardly something the IOC wasn't aware of before then for obvious reasons.  If you want to argue that turned off some prospective cities from hosting, I'll totally give you that.  But it's not an example of the IOC not being able to play the game how they want.  Much like COVID isn't do that either.  Just another element - yes, along with the effects of climate change - that they need to think about and that other cities need to factor into the equation.

1 hour ago, FYI said:

For now, anyway. But what about 10-15 years from now, & that's the point. Even the Midwest is baking right now (speaking of a region that's not use to those type of extreme triple-digit heat temps before).

At some point if this keeps up, even business as usual is not going to be as easily obtainable, even for the ones that may not be deterred with those extreme challenges. But anyway, I digress now. Since this is the Los Angeles 2028 thread & not the Climate Change thread.

Well la dee freakin' da for the Midwest.  Let me know when Chicago - a city that's not even a World Cup venue for 2026 - gets interested in the Olympics again and they have to take the hear into consideration.

So "at some point" or "pretty soon" is that narrative not as easily obtainable?  Or is it not obtainable at all?  Once again, all the IOC needs is 1 willing partner to give them what they want.  And you're right, they're a business, so that business sense will likely dictate the same window.  Until there are 0 willing partners for July-August, they have little to worry about in terms of finding a future Summer host (Winter is different, as we both have acknowledged)

[FYI]

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

Wow, talk about disingenuous arguments.  The USOPC is focused on LA and Salt Lake right now.  After 2028, maybe they're looking at the next Summer Olympics they might be interested in, but that's a future hypothetical, not something they're entertaining right now.  Likewise with Italy, they've had some struggles in trying to put together all the pieces for the 2026 games.  Another total hypothetical saying Rome could be in position for 2036.  Right now, there is no interest there.  If that's incorrect, feel free to prove me wrong.  

No more disingenuous than your talking points. So in other words, you're saying that after 2028, that's it? The USOC isn't going to bid for another Summer Olympics simply because they're not entertaining it "right now"? No sh!t that they're not "right now". But come 2029, you can bet your last dollar that they will. That's not a future "hypothetical" but a virtual certainty.

Same with Rome, since 2036 would be Europe's to lose. Yeah, Milan is having some issues (mostly from their own doing, though), but what previous Olympic hosts haven't. Doesn't mean that we totally write them off for the future over some past challenges, unless they totally mess up, which I don't see the Italians in doing. 

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

Otherwise, spare us the "could be" arguments as if we have to imagine every possible future in the current moment.

But isn't that what you're doing, but in the opposite context. That we can't think of anything about the future because of the current "right now" moment. 

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

But that's not a new phenomenon.  I'm used to the Northeast calendar were school doesn't start until after Labor Day.  That still hasn't moved.  A lot of other places have been earlier than that for years.  It's not some sort of massive creep up where the things are likely to change.  Of course, that doesn't stop you from making another "pretty soon" hypothetical.  Maybe that's your new thing? 

"Well, la dee freakin' ('good for you') da" that you're use to the northeast calendar. Maybe next time I'll just take what Q is suppose to be use to, or not use to, into consideration then. 

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

Another disingenuous point.  A vague generalization with no timeline, so this feels like another "pretty soon" argument.

Remember after 9/11 how security costs for the Olympics skyrocketed?  Did that challenge change how the IOC or host cities operate other than to deal with that cost?  Not really, although terrorism is hardly something the IOC wasn't aware of before then for obvious reasons.  If you want to argue that turned off some prospective cities from hosting, I'll totally give you that.  But it's not an example of the IOC not being able to play the game how they want.  Much like COVID isn't do that either.  Just another element - yes, along with the effects of climate change - that they need to think about and that other cities need to factor into the equation.

Something tells me that this is another situation where you're totally misinterpreting what I'm saying, because at no point am I advocating that cities won't bid because of the time window, but when does that time window really start to become an issue for some of these cities, as far as climate change is concerned, where it starts to become a very real concern & problem.

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

Well la dee freakin' da for the Midwest.  Let me know when Chicago - a city that's not even a World Cup venue for 2026 - gets interested in the Olympics again and they have to take the hear into consideration.

So "at some point" or "pretty soon" is that narrative not as easily obtainable?  Or is it not obtainable at all?  Once again, all the IOC needs is 1 willing partner to give them what they want.  And you're right, they're a business, so that business sense will likely dictate the same window.  Until there are 0 willing partners for July-August, they have little to worry about in terms of finding a future Summer host (Winter is different, as we both have acknowledged)

Speaking of WC venues in the Midwest, will be interesting how KC will mitigate the triple-digit heat, since Arrowhead is not a "climate controlled" stadium, nor do they even have a canopy to protect from the heat.

Considering that less & less cities are interested in the Olympics these days, as you delicately put in, & that's even before climate change is even part of the equation, that "one" willing partner will start to become harder & harder to find as time, & the climate, goes on. But once again, I digress because of the thread drift.

[Quaker2001]

2 hours ago, FYI said:

No more disingenuous than your talking points. So in other words, you're saying that after 2028, that's it? The USOC isn't going to bid for another Summer Olympics simply because they're not entertaining it "right now"? No sh!t that they're not "right now". But come 2029, you can bet your last dollar that they will. That's not a future "hypothetical" but a virtual certainty.

I'm not saying that and you know that's not what I'm saying, so if you're going to intentionally twist my words, do a better job of it.  Of course the USOPC is going to pursue another Olympics at some point.  Are they going to start that pursuit in 2029?  Far from a guarantee, so I wouldn't go betting the farm.  But that said, your initial response about Texas and Greece and Rome was "So don't think that can be said with any level of confidence at this point".  I'm not ruling out those cities for the rest of time.  I'm saying they're not interested right now.  If they become interested later on, that's a different story.  You can't bring future hypotheticals into the equation and pretend like any city or country that might be interested later on is interested now.  Not that it's going to stop you from doing that.

2 hours ago, FYI said:

Same with Rome, since 2036 would be Europe's to lose. Yeah, Milan is having some issues (mostly from their own doing, though), but what previous Olympic hosts haven't. Doesn't mean that we totally write them off for the future over some past challenges, unless they totally mess up, which I don't see the Italians in doing. 

2022 was supposed to be Europe's to lose.  How did that work out for them?  The notion of what continent is preferred for an Olympics doesn't hold as much water as it used to.  In an ideal world, sure.  But the IOC may not get ideal.

Even more disingenuous arguments, because I feel like you don't really believe in minimizing Milan's issues into something previous Olympic hosts haven't had to deal with.  But you'll make that argument here so that you can make a case for Rome just to refute me.  Go find AF and ask him about his list of interested cities.  If Rome pops up there later on, great.  But they are not there right now.  So once again, is it too much to ask to listen to the points I'm making, not to argue against the ones you think I'm making just because they're the opposite of what you're saying?

3 hours ago, FYI said:

But isn't that what you're doing, but in the opposite context. That we can't think of anything about the future because of the current "right now" moment. 

Well yea, I guess I'm dealing with actual reality, not speculation about what might be coming "pretty soon."  Of course you can think about the future.  This site would be pretty boring if you couldn't.  But let's be smart enough than to blur the lines between "right now" and "at some point" to pretend like some future hypothetical is happening at the moment and we need to treat it as such.

3 hours ago, FYI said:

Something tells me that this is another situation where you're totally misinterpreting what I'm saying, because at no point am I advocating that cities won't bid because of the time window, but when does that time window really start to become an issue for some of these cities, as far as climate change is concerned, where it starts to become a very real concern & problem.

No, I get what you're aruging.  Would I be correct in saying that you believe "at some point" that certain cities that might otherwise bid in the July-August window will tell the IOC they only want to bid later in the calendar due to the weather?  If there are 6 interested cities in the Olympics and 5 want to bid in September and 1 wants to bid in August, it's not a very real problem.  If the number that want to bid in August is 0, then yes it's a problem.  But I don't think we're headed in that direction.  Not in the next 20 years.  50 years down the line?  Well let's all pray that somehow the planet has managed to get things under control by then or again, when the Olympics are held might seem pretty trivial.

3 hours ago, FYI said:

Considering that less & less cities are interested in the Olympics these days, as you delicately put in, & that's even before climate change is even part of the equation, that "one" willing partner will start to become harder & harder to find as time, & the climate, goes on. But once again, I digress because of the thread drift.

Oooh, don't let AF here you say that!  Them's fightin' words! 

We're seeing that theory play out on the Winter side.  I think we're much further away than you seem to want to believe from it happening on the summer side.

[baron-pierreIV]

God, you 2.  Please get a room!!  

[Sir Rols]

Interesting ITG article pertinent to the @Quaker2001/ @FYI “convo”

The heat is on for sport after World Athletics Championships in cauldron of Budapest

 

[Quaker2001]

5 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Interesting ITG article pertinent to the @Quaker2001/ @FYI “convo”

The heat is on for sport after World Athletics Championships in cauldron of Budapest

 

Normally their window is similar to the Olympics where it's held in August.  2019 in Doha was an exception, that one was in late September/early October and some of those events, most notably the marathons, were held at Midnight in order to avoid the heat.  

The next World Championships is in Tokyo and that one is in mid-September for better weather.  I may need to attend that one in person since Japan is now high up on my list of countries I want to visit!

This may be what we see more of going forward.. event start times avoiding the hottest parts of the day, but events still conforming to the traditional calendar.  The 2027 event has 5 suitors (supposedly), including Istanbul and Beijing.  Seb Coe has said they'll listen to places like Saudi Arabia, but.. World Athletics pledges to put crowds before cash at world championships

[yoshi]

Being after Asia, and after not having a great experience with Eugene, I'd have thought Europe would be favourite again - I'm quite surprised it's not been in Barcelona yet. Either that or this is the one when they finally go for Nairobi, but I'd have thought we'd have heard about that by now if they were in the race. 

(Although if it's still the turn of the Americas, has Kingston tried to host it yet? Couldn't be many places better than Jamaica)

Edited August 28, 2023 by yoshi

[Quaker2001]

11 minutes ago, yoshi said:

Being after Asia, and after not having a great experience with Eugene, I'd have thought Europe would be favourite again - I'm quite surprised it's not been in Barcelona yet. Either that or this is the one when they finally go for Nairobi, but I'd have thought we'd have heard about that by now if they were in the race. 

(Although if it's still the turn of the Americas, has Kingston tried to host it yet? Couldn't be many places better than Jamaica)

There's no "turn" with these things.  That's a myth.  As big of an event as this is, the prestige level is well below that of the Olympics.  That's why certain places - particularly the United States - haven't been as eager to bid for the event.  Track and Field in the Olympics is a different story which is why there is little doubt that the Coliseum will be packed through late July in 2028.

[FYI]

11 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Interesting ITG article pertinent to the @Quaker2001/ @FYI “convo”

The heat is on for sport after World Athletics Championships in cauldron of Budapest

 

"Well, well, well. And what do have we here"?! An ITG's article, quoting Olympic & sports officials, touching upon many of the points I made here, but was very chastised for it. 

The fact that one of them went on to say that sooner or later (not 50 years from now) a major event is going to be faced with the prospect of it being postponed or even cancelled, speaks to the seriousness of this issue. And that at some point sooner, rather than later the "traditional calendar" will have to be adjusted. Because yeah, like I mentioned earlier, mother nature ultimately dictates these things & not executives at NBC or whatever other broadcasting companies, nor sports federations. At some point, if this GLOBAL issue isn't curtailed, sooner rather than later, mother earth is going to start saying enough is enough.

I remember back for the 2004 race how many of the athletes were endorsing Stockholm over it's rivals due to it's moderate summer climate. And that was over 25 years ago. Now it's gotta be even more of an issue for them. Cause even adjusting the start times of many of these events 'til later doesn't really matter if the evenings are still sweltering in the 90's. No amount of heat mitigation can make much of a difference anymore when the summer conditions are too extreme. When you can still walk out the door at 10 or 11PM & still be hit with a blast of hot air & humidity, what person in their right mind would want to compete (or do much of anything) in those kind of miserable, extreme warm conditions. 

 

[Bear]

LA will host the 2026 Pan Pacific Championships - no venue or dates have been confirmed yet though

https://apnews.com/article/swimming-pan-pacific-championships-fdddf83984f050c84a476850fb75fedf

[baron-pierreIV]

On 11/3/2023 at 9:07 PM, Bear said:

LA will host the 2026 Pan Pacific Championships - no venue or dates have been confirmed yet though

https://apnews.com/article/swimming-pan-pacific-championships-fdddf83984f050c84a476850fb75fedf

If not USC, then probably UC Irvine.  It'll happen when they can clear out enough dorm beds for the athletes.