Jump to content
GBModerator

IOC Session Approves Significant Changes To The Olympic Bid Process

Recommended Posts

Reporting from Geneva, Switzerland – International Olympic Committee (IOC) members voted Wednesday to unanimously approve proposed changes to the Olympic bid process that will make the timing flexible, allow joint-city projects and put more control into the hands of new Summer and Winter Future Host Commissions. Devised by Australian IOC Vice President John Coates and […]

The post IOC Session Approves Significant Changes To The Olympic Bid Process appeared first on GamesBids.com.

View the full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With this they mean a summer Olympic could spread out on multiple cities as long as all athletes can stay in the main Olympic village, if they want to. 

As i understand the article. 

But how many would du that do you think? if there contest has a 2-3 hour journey? For the opening ceremony and you don´t have to compete the next day, perhaps, but after that? i´m doubt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if your discipline takes place on say day 6 one can head to the main village afterwards.

What about that comment on double awardings, though? Might they already be working on SLC 2030 - Sapporo 2034? Or Brisbane and a European bid (probably Rhine-Ruhr) for 2032/36?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can certainly imagine they’d be working on the former if both cities are interested - then they can get stuck into a massive reform/PR campaign to get Norway back on side for 38. Or by then enough time might’ve passed to let France host again - if Milan/Cortina is a winnable combo then Lyon/Chamonix certainly is.

But unless the IOC are really desperate for Europe in 2034 (or really confident in getting a strong field for a competition at least) then if SLC & Sapporo both really want the Games, the IOC would be mad not to do a double - just like the 24/28 situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that this feels sour now, but the IOC would arguably gain from approaching Sweden seeking a reconfigured bid. I'm surprised that Gothenburg was not considered instead of Stockholm: it has three ice arenas, a speed skating oval, a nearby world cup cross-country course, and is about the same distance from Lillehammer as from Falun. If they tried not to build anything new except the Olympic Village they may have a concept. The IOC after these reforms has a choice about becoming more like FIFA or continuing the openness begun after the Salt Lake City scandal. I don't think Salt Lake is a sure thing for 2030, and this might just work if the Swedes were willing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, yoshi said:

I can certainly imagine they’d be working on the former if both cities are interested - then they can get stuck into a massive reform/PR campaign to get Norway back on side for 38. Or by then enough time might’ve passed to let France host again - if Milan/Cortina is a winnable combo then Lyon/Chamonix certainly is.

But unless the IOC are really desperate for Europe in 2034 (or really confident in getting a strong field for a competition at least) then if SLC & Sapporo both really want the Games, the IOC would be mad not to do a double - just like the 24/28 situation. 

I could say, this can happen sooner considering the good WOG bids are scarse. Also Lyon has a feud with Paris for living in the shadows :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, I would say this also helps Brisbane/Gold Coast and a potential Istanbul/Marmara (Or Izmir) bids to spread the games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my, so much DOUBLE TALK here! Yet Big Q thinks that I’m the one with the “double fetish”!! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roger87 said:

Now, I would say this also helps Brisbane/Gold Coast 

So, Roger. Can you please explain how this would help Brisbane? Especially when it’s been cited by their own feasibility study (& also a couple of Aussies here) that much work & construction would be needed for a Brisbane bid to justify it post-Games? And that there’s also quite a shortage of hotel rooms to accommodate the Games. Doesn’t really sound too Agenda 2020 friendly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, FYI said:

So, Roger. Can you please explain how this would help Brisbane? Especially when it’s been cited by their own feasibility study (& also a couple of Aussies here) that much work & construction would be needed for a Brisbane bid to justify it post-Games? And that there’s also quite a shortage of hotel rooms to accommodate the Games. Doesn’t really sound too Agenda 2020 friendly. 

Tbh, I made that comment before reading the study atm. I'm retracted that. I though Brisbane was in better shape, considering the results of Gold Coast 2018, the prior development of Queensland government in key infrastructure and roads (I had the prior notices of these projects but wasn't there live) and the interest per Aussie National Committee.

However, it will need a lot of effort to pull a compelling bid. One would say there's a silver linings of Brisbane is related to time, but in highsight, this is a lot of money and reconfiguration of the city to make Brisbane as proper SOG host city of XXI century. Also, considering the same Australia has Melbourne (A cosmopolitan city with prospective 5 millions, becoming the cultural and sports hub of Australia and stealing the shadow of Sydney by then) on the right side, it would be like the Germans choosing Leipzig over Munich/Hamburg. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Roger87 said:

However, it will need a lot of effort to pull a compelling bid. One would say there's a silver linings of Brisbane is related to time, but in highsight, this is a lot of money and reconfiguration of the city to make Brisbane as proper SOG host city of XXI century. Also, considering the same Australia has Melbourne (A cosmopolitan city with prospective 5 millions, becoming the cultural and sports hub of Australia and stealing the shadow of Sydney by then) on the right side, it would be like the Germans choosing Leipzig over Munich/Hamburg. 

Yes, it’s been noted that Brisbane’s main (& really only) plus is their weather during the Summer Games-time window. But that alone doesn’t justify the means to make it happen. Yes, Melbourne would be the smarter, much more Agenda 2020 compatible city, but there seems to be internal politics working against them, since John Coates is all too gung-ho for Brisbane for whatever his reasons.

And of course don’t say that in the Brisbane thread, cuz there’s a certain element over there that is a lot like a certain you-know-who was about L.A. in the L.A. thread! :lol:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Roger87 said:

Now, I would say this also helps [...] a potential Istanbul/Marmara (Or Izmir) bids to spread the games.

How come Turkey is suddenly a thing again? Their border to Syria, the collapse of their currency plus social, political and economic issues basically rule them out for several cycles to come, nothing has changed on that, let alone Erdogan presumably ruling ever more authoritarian now that he actually has to fight for his power.

5 hours ago, FYI said:

 Yes, it’s been noted that Brisbane’s main (& really only) plus is their weather during the Summer Games-time window. But that alone doesn’t justify the means to make it happen. Yes, Melbourne would be the smarter, much more Agenda 2020 compatible city, but there seems to be internal politics working against them, since John Coates is all too gung-ho for Brisbane for whatever his reasons.

Is it though? Most of us probably agree on Melbourne being the smarter choice for an Olympics. That is independent of Agenda 2020, however. When it comes to Agenda 2020, going regional and spreading out is what turns daydreaming into an actual feasible thing for Brisbane. Perhaps this is why Brisbane is being pushed as it is now - they need the Gold Coast and the Agenda to get the games, so they wanna get it while its possible. Who knows if such regional concepts will stand a chance in 20 or 30 years' time? Melbourne might host the next Australian games, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its fin that they pick the city a bit more than 7 years before, especially reagarding planning and building infrastructure etc takes many years and so. But now talking about 2034? Perhaps we should also wait a bit and see whats happening in the world. Who knows how the world looks in 2025. Perhaps there has been big weather catastrofic incidents and others which make a early descision stupid, or wars? We have had many wars over the years, also in Europe in what we now call peacefull countries, but who knows hot et looks in the future. Maxium 9-10 years before i Think. But for summer games I also think 7 years is a bit to short. 8-9 years must be the best. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the Winter Games it would be the best to award the games 7 years out unless if we have another Sochi 2014 case but Sochi Russia 2014 is a once in a lifetime event type games where they built every single thing for the games, Summer Games I agree with awarding the games 9 years out from the games, So both the 2030 Winter Games and the 2032 Summer Games will be picked at the same IOC session in 2023 so 1 day for the Winter Olympic host city election then the next day for the Summer Olympic host city election.

From the Press conference the IOC President said he is open to the flexibility for the dates for the Games so the 2032 Summer Games could be the last games with dates restrictions it happens to be the dry season for Jakarta is held in from July to September so Jakarta Indonesia will not have any issues with the dates for the games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2019 at 11:08 PM, FYI said:

Oh my, so much DOUBLE TALK here! Yet Big Q thinks that I’m the one with the “double fetish”!! :lol:

There's literally 1 and only 1 mention of the word "double" in that article.  And that people are talking about it here.. how'd that work out for 2026 when much of the same crowd was suggesting the same thing that it would happen for 2026-2030?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Right, but with the confirmation of the changes to the Olympic Charter this week in regards to future bids, who to says then (besides you of course :P) that it can’t be implemented again? Just cuz the “circumstances” weren’t right this time around, like they were for 24/28, doesn’t automatically mean that there can’t/won’t be another instance where they could be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, FYI said:

^Right, but with the confirmation of the changes to the Olympic Charter this week in regards to future bids, who to says then (besides you of course :P) that it can’t be implemented again? Just cuz the “circumstances” weren’t right this time around, like they were for 24/28, doesn’t automatically mean that there can’t/won’t be another instance where they could be.

My goodness, how many times are we going to have to do this?  I am not and have never permanently shot down that a double could ever happen again.  But you brought up the key word... circumstances.  Maybe we should figure out what those circumstances are that would lead to a double rather than (to use one of my expressions which I know you've become a fan of) throwing darts at a dart board.  Because some people here are really really shitty at doing that, particularly the ones trying to predict the next 7 Olympic hosts in 1 post.  And the only "circumstance" that comes into play for them is 'well it happened last time, so that's a thing now, let's be morons and assume it's going to happen again.'  The question shouldn't be why can't/won't it happen.  The question should be what can and would make it happen?

Rarely do you have a sensible answer for that.  You're smarter than some of the rest of the dart throwers around here.  You usually have enough forethought to think about how it might come to pass.  But how realistic are any of those "possibilities," especially where all hell DIDN'T break loose for 2026.  You like to poke fun at me sometimes how I bring up that 2024/2028 set itself up perfect to where the double "made sense" for the IOC.  Just because there is the potential for some unorthodox thinking and approaches to bidding (which is hard to predict at this point what that will give us) shouldn't lead us to think that's going to happen again just because it happened once.  Could it?  Sure.  Will it?  Probably not and you know that.  I'm saying I don't think there's going to be a double (NOT that there *can't* be a double.. get the argument straight) and I'm sticking with it because I don't see that scenario presenting itself, just like I thought with 2026.  So what's the point of constantly trying to fight me on this as if you're only trying to take a position to oppose me that you barely believe in yourself.  You do realize what that's very literally the definition of.  Except I'll rename it for you because it fits perfectly.  You are playing Double's Advocate!! :D:D:D:P:P:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

My goodness, how many times are we going to have to do this?  I am not and have never permanently shot down that a double could ever happen again. 

Lmfao - this reminds me of when you like to “poke fun” at me about saying - “I never said that it was definitely going to happen”.. now here you are dramatically saying what you’ve never claimed to have said otherwise. Go figure lol.

8 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

The question shouldn't be why can't/won't it happen.  The question should be what can and would make it happen?

Uh huh. The potential circumstances were given. But as usual, you know everything, & heaven help any of us who don’t necessarily agree with your almighty opinion. 

8 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

So what's the point of constantly trying to fight me on this as if you're only trying to take a position to oppose me that you barely believe in yourself.  You do realize what that's very literally the definition of.  

Is it the definition of, like that (once upon a time) newbie said to you, being argumentative for the same of being argumentative. 

But wow, can you be anymore full of yourself, Q?? :rolleyes:  But I know, I know, “you have not and have never permanently shot down that a double could ever happen again”, right? How convenient of you now that the Charter has been changed to allow for that kind of scenario to happen again. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, FYI said:

Lmfao - this reminds me of when you like to “poke fun” at me about saying - “I never said that it was definitely going to happen”.. now here you are dramatically saying what you’ve never claimed to have said otherwise. Go figure lol.

That's not poking fun.  That's me acknowledging I understand your position.  Whereas you misrepresent mine constantly.  That's why I have to keep repeating it.

21 minutes ago, FYI said:

Uh huh. The potential circumstances were given. But as usual, you know everything, & heaven help any of us who don’t necessarily agree with your almighty opinion. 

LOL.. my opinion was that there wouldn't be a double and that none of the potential scenarios had any realistic shot of happening.  So.. WTF are we even arguing about here then?  I said to you (and you know I said to you) that if both Milan and Stockholm dropped out, then that could create some predictable scenarios.  That didn't happen though.  Salt Lake never actually made their way into the conversation.  Sapporo was never discussed as part of another allocation.  If you're going to play the "Quaker thinks he knows everything" line, maybe save it for something I actually got wrong and not where everyone else who had a different opinion didn't get it right.

40 minutes ago, FYI said:

Is it the definition of, like that (once upon a time) newbie said to you, being argumentative for the same of being argumentative. 

But wow, can you be anymore full of yourself, Q?? :rolleyes:  But I know, I know, “you have not and have never permanently shot down that a double could ever happen again”, right? How convenient of you now that the Charter has been changed to allow for that kind of scenario to happen again. :P

Holy projections, Batman.  You're going to talk about being argumentative in the process of doing just that?  Here's the thing about the charter.  It was amended to allow for bi-national bids.  Guess what.. that already happened before it was in the charter.  Just like it's being discussed here about another double.  If the charter says anything about it, what does that say about the double that already happened when it wasn't in the charter?

Stop playing Double's Advocate just because you want to oppose my position, which you continue to twist to suit your own narrative.  If a realistic scenario comes up in the future where a double "makes sense" and the "circumstances" are right, I can assure you I will acknowledge it.  Until then, it's more fantasy talk than reality, which sadly has become par for the course for this site too often.  My advice to you.. get over yourself and stop trying to do the whole "oooh, Quaker is so full of himself, I need to take him down a peg" routine.  You were the one who goaded me into this argument here in this thread.  Remember that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol here we go with the “memes” again. I was wondering how long it was gonna take for you to do that lmfao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

That's not poking fun.  That's me acknowledging I understand your position.  Whereas you misrepresent mine constantly.  That's why I have to keep repeating it.

Right, cuz you never misrepresent any of my positions. :rolleyes:

20 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

If you're going to play the "Quaker thinks he knows everything" line, maybe save it for something I actually got wrong and not where everyone else who had a different opinion didn't get it right.

See, here’s the thing; you didn’t get anything “right” whereas everyone else got it “wong” (especially on an a totally unpredictable organization like the IOC). But that right there, it totally the definition of someone ‘thinking’ that they know everything.

23 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Holy projections, Batman. You're going to talk about being argumentative in the process of doing just that?  

Look who’s talking?! And then you follow that with more of your redundant, argumentative rhetoric. Go figure.

26 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Stop playing Double's Advocate just because you want to oppose my position, which you continue to twist to suit your own narrative.  

Lmfao - talk about more pot/kettle accusations! :lol:

28 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Until then, it's more fantasy talk than reality, which sadly has become par for the course for this site too often.  

Yet you still enjoy coming on here on a daily basis. Go f’n figure. “My advice to you” is to don’t do that if you’re all too smart for the rest of us. :rolleyes:

29 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

My advice to you.. get over yourself and stop trying to do the whole "oooh, Quaker is so full of himself, I need to take him down a peg" routine.  You were the one who goaded me into this argument here in this thread.  Remember that.

So I tell you to get over youself, & your comeback to me is to get over myself. “How original” & argumentative. 

And I don’t need to “goad” you into anything, since you always love to put in your cheap two cents into anything, anyone ever says around here, regardless of how “wrong” they are & how “right” you are. “Remember that”. :P

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

×