Jump to content

The GamesBids 2036 Olympic Games Poll  

22 members have voted

  1. 1. Which city/country will the IOC choose to stage the 2036 Summer Olympic Games?

    • Germany (Rene-Ruhr/Munich, Hamburg/Berlin)
    • India (Ahmedabad)
    • Doha, Qatar
    • Spain (Madrid)
    • Indonesia (Nusantara)
    • Budapest, Hungary
      0
    • United Kingdom (London/nortth)
      0
    • South Korea (Seoul/Busan)
      0
    • China (Beijing/Shanghai)
    • Mexico (Mexic City/Guadalajara/Monterey)
      0
    • Egypt (Cairo)
    • Warsaw, Poland
      0
    • Rome, Italy
    • Russia (Moscow, St Petersburg, Kazan)
      0
    • Santiago, Chile
      0
    • Canada (Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver)
      0
    • Istanbul, Turkey
    • Other (post your ideas/suggestion)
  2. 2. When will the IOC name the host for the 2036 Smmer Olympic Games?



Recommended Posts

Quote

melbourne is nowhere near india is what i said.

That may have been what you meant, but it's not exactly what you said. You mentioned Melbourne after that statement.

Besides, IDK what's so imperialistic about the Indian ocean having so much territory, when the Pacific & Atlantic oceans are even bigger. But I guess if you have so much trouble with just the name part of it, then yeah, go petition the UN about it. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

I like to respond "oh yeah?  Show me Hungary on this map, you have 10 seconds".  Then they clam up into a ball lol

I've always loved those type of skits when they've done them on the Tonight Show. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Guilga said:

Lovely that amazing chain started because of my mistake.

It's not the first time, though, nor will it be the last, that a lovely, amazing chain has happened because of what someone else has said on GB's! :lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, iceman530 said:

I like to respond "oh yeah?  Show me Hungary on this map, you have 10 seconds".  Then they clam up into a ball lol

 

1 hour ago, FYI said:

I've always loved those type of skits when they've done them on the Tonight Show. lol

Okay, I just had to do one! :lol:
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2024 at 6:17 PM, Sir Rols said:

Yeah, that’s when it starts getting messy. I remember many long moons ago having an argument with another member @Faster on whether the Adriatic was considered part of the Mediterranean. GamesBids seems to draw in a lot of geography fans.

 Hydrologic differentiation are the what constitutes different bodies of water from a geographic point. The best example I can think of is that Lake Michigan and Lake Huron (and by extension Georgian Bay) are hydrologically the same body of water. But politically and by convention are 2 separate lakes with one unique bay feature. 

as for what ocean laps the southern coast of Australia? It is hard to say because there is still considerable debate regarding what constitutes the 'Southern Ocean'.

But me personally? If I was standing at the 12 Apostles and was looking out at the water, I would not consider that having been in the Indian Ocean. 

Edited by Faster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we think the whole “Alpha only” era of the Olympics is over, with only those traditional “alpha” or “alpha+” cities of countries hosting? The Sydney, Athens, Beijing, London, Rio, Tokyo, Paris, Los Angeles was a great run of cities I feel truly made the Olympic movement relevant and at least on the surface seem powerful and strong as an international institution because of the truly global weight of the cities it was being held at. It also coincidently follows the pattern of Europe (Moscow 1980, London 2012), americas (LA 1984, Rio 2016), Asia (seoul 1988, Tokyo 2020), Europe (Barcelona 1992, Paris 2024), Americas (Atlanta 1996, La 2028), Oceania (Sydney 2000, Brisbane 2032). But that’s besides the point. I know Brisbane 2032 is only happening because of Coates, but I feel as if we’re already running out of global cities that fit a specific type of international powerful brand that benefits the Olympic movement. Is this just me who feels this way about certain cities being attached to the Olympic brand? How do we think it will all pan out? I’d love to see either Germany 2036, Madrid 2036, or Istanbul 2036. I think those can help add some more international recognition for the Olympic brand. Do we see those global cities continuing to host or will the IOC settle for some lesser known ones? I feel those lesser known ones could host amazing games, but not add as much prestige for the Olympic brand. India or Africa, in the far future not 2036, would be huge for the Olympics (Not Ahmedabad though, but I guess that’s the way it’s all going to turn out). 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, venuedesignlover said:

Do we think the whole “Alpha only” era of the Olympics is over, with only those traditional “alpha” or “alpha+” cities of countries hosting? The Sydney, Athens, Beijing, London, Rio, Tokyo, Paris, Los Angeles was a great run of cities I feel truly made the Olympic movement relevant and at least on the surface seem powerful and strong as an international institution because of the truly global weight of the cities it was being held at. It also coincidently follows the pattern of Europe (Moscow 1980, London 2012), americas (LA 1984, Rio 2016), Asia (seoul 1988, Tokyo 2020), Europe (Barcelona 1992, Paris 2024), Americas (Atlanta 1996, La 2028), Oceania (Sydney 2000, Brisbane 2032). But that’s besides the point. I know Brisbane 2032 is only happening because of Coates, but I feel as if we’re already running out of global cities that fit a specific type of international powerful brand that benefits the Olympic movement. Is this just me who feels this way about certain cities being attached to the Olympic brand? How do we think it will all pan out? I’d love to see either Germany 2036, Madrid 2036, or Istanbul 2036. I think those can help add some more international recognition for the Olympic brand. Do we see those global cities continuing to host or will the IOC settle for some lesser known ones? I feel those lesser known ones could host amazing games, but not add as much prestige for the Olympic brand. India or Africa, in the far future not 2036, would be huge for the Olympics (Not Ahmedabad though, but I guess that’s the way it’s all going to turn out). 

There’s a lot to unpack in that. 

First, I’d say what cities are considered “exciting” as hosts depends a lot on individual preferences - like when you expressed a lack of enthusiasm for Budapest, yet other expressed how they’d find that prospect very attractive and enticing.

Second, the IOC can only choose from locations that are interested at any particular time. The amount, and “quality”, of those cities will always depend on how popular and attractive the Olympics seem to be in popular opinion at that point, and that depends on lots of things - costs, world viewership, social attitudes etc. The challenges the Olympics face over the coming decades from things like global warming, international relations, the effects of generational change and digital and emerging media on public entertainment tastes etc will affect how attractive a proposition hosting the games will be in the future. As long as the IOC can successfully navigate those challenges, and adapt where needed to suit the times, and people still find the games popular to watch, there will always be cities and countries wanting to host them.

in short, I just believe one we shouldn’t try to over-think hosts and hosting too far into the future. As fans, we should just hope the whole concept of the Games maintains its popular appeal. As long as it does, things will always tend to work out. 

Edited by Sir Rols
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

First, I’d say what cities are considered “exciting” as hosts depends a lot on individual preferences - like when you expressed a lack of enthusiasm for Budapest, yet other expressed how they’d find that prospect very attractive and enticing.

Very true. I was wondering whether you and others think that Budapest, not being that global "alpha" city, would help the Olympic movement as much as say Shanghai, Berlin, or Madrid. Budapest may have a good technical bid and I think it would make for one of those niche games, but will attaching cities like Budapest to the Summer Olympic Brand only serve to damage it further? I know you said much of this is based on future changes in preferences but just entertain me here...do you think the future of Olympic hosts is moving away from that "alpha" city to more modest cities? Would not attaching that big name just decrease Olympic prestige and lead to the Olympic's decline from relevance?

 

42 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

As fans, we should just hope the whole concept of the Games maintains its popular appeal. As long as it does, things will always tend to work out. 

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, venuedesignlover said:

Very true. I was wondering whether you and others think that Budapest, not being that global "alpha" city, would help the Olympic movement as much as say Shanghai, Berlin, or Madrid. Budapest may have a good technical bid and I think it would make for one of those niche games, but will attaching cities like Budapest to the Summer Olympic Brand only serve to damage it further? I know you said much of this is based on future changes in preferences but just entertain me here...do you think the future of Olympic hosts is moving away from that "alpha" city to more modest cities?

Which just goes again to illustrate our different tastes and perceptions. The attractiveness of Budapest to me is not in any technical elements. And certainly not the politics. It’s mainly the location and significance itself. I don’t see a “beta” city, I see an Eastern European cultural alpha, a beautiful jewel on the Danube. A location every bit as attractive and glamorous as, say, Barcelona would have seemed in the 1980s.

It’s a little like discussions here about the 2022 host race. For many people, Almaty was “Yuck! A sh!thole in sh!thole ex-Soviet Kazakhstan. Borat-vllle”. For many others (including me) it was “why would the IIOC bypass such a beautiful, exotic, mountainside Silk Road jewel in favour of huge, dirty, grey, totalitarian non-Winter destination Beijing?”

Nobody is or was right or wrong. Just different perceptions and preferences.

Anyway, I don’t think there’s any dangers or fears of running out of “alpha” cities. You mention some yourself - Shanghai, Berlin, Madrid. You could add Rome, Toronto, New York, Istanbul and more. By the time all, or any at all, of them where exhausted, London, Paris, LA, Tokyo etc etc would be distant enough to look attractive, and possible again. And in the meantime, if some “B cities also fall in some hosting gaps, isn’t that a good thing? Shouldn’t we be wanting more potential hosts?

And who is to say what cities will rise to become new political, economic or cultural alphas in coming decades? I mentioned Barcelona earlier. When I was young, it was more known as a punchline in Fawlty Towers rather than the glamour designation it is today. Seoul was considered as little more than a beta city in a beta country. Today it’s an east Asian alpha and Korean culture’s being more vibrantly recognised and embraced in the west.

And finally, are so-called “alpha” hosts the be-all and end-all anyway? I think it’s fair to say opinions are divided on whether Rio left a positive or negative legacy for the Olympics. I’m not sure whether Beijing (either time) was ultimately positive for the Games. Tokyo, unfortunately through circumstances, didn’t really fulfil the hopes and potential many had for it.  

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The shift away from Alpha only cities can only be a good thing - I just think the process that has led to Brisbane, and Brisbane's own infrastructure deficits - isn't the best example of it in action. 

I still think there is a place or the Durban, Manchester, Baku, or even Vancouver (as a SOG host) - if they are able to demonstrate a sustainable and well thought out plan. 

Olympic history until the 2000s was full of very successful non-Alpha cities that have left their mark: Helsinki, Melbourne, Munich, Montreal, Barcelona, Atlanta, etc... we just haven't had any recently.

Brisbane will hopefully be the first of a new era of non-Alpha host cities (mixed in with some big names like Rome, Istanbul, etc) to keep up the variety. 

The one issue I have with the those Tier 1 Alphas is that they are unaffected by the Olympics. Its a blip on their identities and profiles. Paris will still be Paris after the Olympics. It wont be changed forever like Barcelona, Atlanta, and Sydney were. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Australian Kiwi said:

The one issue I have with the those Tier 1 Alphas is that they are unaffected by the Olympics. Its a blip on their identities and profiles. Paris will still be Paris after the Olympics. It wont be changed forever like Barcelona, Atlanta, and Sydney were. 

If the IOC pushes cities hard in the direction of no-risk, minimal spend (mostly for the benefit of its own reputation management) - as it's doing with Brisbane - then I can't see many future Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney transformations. It's in fact very arguable that the Olympics had a greater impact on London than it will on Brisbane.

I know we have intangibles like international profile to take into account, and on that I agree with your point that cities with huge international profiles aren't going to get as big a boost. But how long does such a boost really last in people's minds? Was Barcelona the last one that really had a huge lasting impact, 32 years ago?

I also think it's good to have a mix of smaller and bigger cities, but I wonder if we're moving into an era of smaller risk, smaller reward.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

“why would the IIOC bypass such a beautiful, exotic, mountainside Silk Road jewel in favour of huge, dirty, grey, totalitarian non-Winter destination Beijing?”

Completely agree. The IOC missed an opportunity to bring the games to an amazing winter sports location with so much of the existing infrastructure already there. Out of all WOG locations, I think Almaty is truly up there as one of the best because of its connections to actual mountains and a present winter sports culture. It really is a winter haven. It is important to note, however, that many IOC members chose Beijing because they believed it would bring prestige and reliability back to the Olympics. That "prestige" comes because of China's global image. I personally disagree because Winter Olympic Games should focus on actual technical elements, and Almaty would have been perfect for that. Also, especially for the Winter games, where stakes are admittedly lower, new frontiers are always amazing. But the point still stands- will giving the Olympics to "beta" cities decrease Olympic popularity and general power among the populous, common person, non Olympic fanatic demographic? Are "alpha cities" better for Olympic global image? Perhaps they do not care.

 

14 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Seoul was considered as little more than a beta city in a beta country. Today it’s an east Asian alpha and Korean culture’s being more vibrantly recognised and embraced in the west.

Good point. Seoul hosting again in the near future would be amazing for Olympic movement I believe. Would definitely help the Olympic's global image. It's also not that I have a bias against Budapest, but I cannot help but think that its hosting would decrease the Olympics reputation. Seoul did not, so I guess Budapest would not either. Those Budapest 2024 renderings looked amazing, though. If it does get to host, hopefully it can be a Barcelona 2.0. But that would require heavy, heavy investment, and a truly wholistic revitalization of the city, which targets key legacy and goals needed to bring Budapest to that Barcelona level. In that case, I fully support Budapest. It's also hosting the Olympic qualifier this year along with Shanghai !

 

14 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Tokyo, unfortunately through circumstances, didn’t really fulfill the hopes and potential many had for it.  

So, so, so sad. Tokyo put a lot of effort into hosting a truly great games, including venue design, legacy, and overall amazing organization. It's also a perfect host city in my opinion. Hopefully, the IOC will give it its time to shine in the (near) future. Tokyo 2020 was going to be an amazing games, I just know it. Amazing city, venues, organization, atmosphere, legacy. Would have brought the Olympics "back" after 2016. Oh well...hopefully Paris 2024 brings the Olympics "back". Looking like a great games. 

8 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Brisbane will hopefully be the first of a new era of non-Alpha host cities (mixed in with some big names like Rome, Istanbul, etc) to keep up the variety. 

I might have some bias, but Brisbane (and the Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast) will probably be one of the most picturesque games, with a Rio type feel (only in beach, sunshine, weather aesthetics hopefully). I just do not want to see Durban, Manchester, Budapest, Baku type cities to host in successions, right after another. I think that that would damage Olympic image internationally. I'm all for beta cities, as long as on the whole, big names are elected frequently, so that beta cities are not left to host in succession. 

 

6 hours ago, Rob2012 said:

If the IOC pushes cities hard in the direction of no-risk, minimal spend (mostly for the benefit of its own reputation management) - as it's doing with Brisbane - then I can't see many future Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney transformations. It's in fact very arguable that the Olympics had a greater impact on London than it will on Brisbane.

Precisely my point in this thread. This "new norm" is sacrificing temporary venues over legacy that truly works for a city. In Brisbane's case, it's building that athletic stadium or that Gabba rebuild. Those type of plans are needed for transformations and for the New Norm to work with local development goals in the way it claims it does. Hopefully that independent Olympics authority (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-17/olympic-inquiry-hearing-2032-brisbane-games-bill-parliament/103733018) sorts things out the right way. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Olympic history until the 2000s was full of very successful non-Alpha cities that have left their mark: Helsinki, Melbourne, Munich, Montreal, Barcelona, Atlanta, etc... we just haven't had any recently.

I guess that also depends on one's view as "very successful", cause many would not categorize Munich, Montreal & Atlanta in that sort of group. Not like the only glaring exception in that list, which was Barcelona.

That group also needs to be put into more context as to why they were selected, & it didn't really have much to do because they were non-Alpha cities. As the saying goes, the IOC can only choose with what's in front of them. Much like the example of Seoul 1988 which was given. The IOC only had them or Nagoya to choose from for those Games. So, it's not like the alternative for 1988 was some sort glamor capital, either, at the time.

9 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

The one issue I have with the those Tier 1 Alphas is that they are unaffected by the Olympics. Its a blip on their identities and profiles. Paris will still be Paris after the Olympics. It wont be changed forever like Barcelona, Atlanta, and Sydney were. 

I remember when the IOC insisted on Alpha cities. Pretty much telling the BOA (after their losses with Birmingham 1992 & Manchester 1996 & 2000) that if they want to win an Olympic bid, that they have to do it with London & none other. And voila - what did we have afterwards? London 2012!

Cause it only made sense from their POV, with their branding image, & really, those are the type of cities that can more easily handle the Olympics than the lesser-known ones that basically would have a lot more work to do, not only in infrastructure construction but in the marketing dept. too. Can only imagine once 2032 starts getting closer, that many people will be scratching their heads about Brisbane (thinking that it's in "western" Australia instead, for example :lol:)!

8 hours ago, Rob2012 said:

If the IOC pushes cities hard in the direction of no-risk, minimal spend (mostly for the benefit of its own reputation management) - as it's doing with Brisbane - then I can't see many future Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney transformations. It's in fact very arguable that the Olympics had a greater impact on London than it will on Brisbane.

Don't think we can categorize Atlanta having had a great transformation because of the Olympics. Not on the same level of Barcelona or even Sydney, that is. Other than Centennial Park, there really isn't much more that I would say "transformed" Atlanta into any beacon of Olympic transformation. Especially since they've already torn the Georgia Dome several years ago.

8 hours ago, Rob2012 said:

I know we have intangibles like international profile to take into account, and on that I agree with your point that cities with huge international profiles aren't going to get as big a boost. But how long does such a boost really last in people's minds? Was Barcelona the last one that really had a huge lasting impact, 32 years ago?

Yeah, exactly. Atlanta is also a good example here. Sure, many of the locals will probably tell you about "when the Olympics came to town", but for people in general, especially outside of the U.S. & especially outside of a niche site like this, most won't be able to tell you how many cities have been transformed greatly by the Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TorchbearerSydney said:

Q: only in beach, sunshine, weather aesthetics hopefully

Brisbane will be one of the coldest Games in history- its mid winter is not like Rio's mid winter. 

And Brisbane, although 'tropical' is nothing like Rio...very few cities are!

LOL...the one thing you quoted from my whole response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, FYI said:

I guess that also depends on one's view as "very successful", cause many would not categorize Munich, Montreal & Atlanta in that sort of group. Not like the only glaring exception in that list, which was Barcelona.

 

In terms of city transformation, Munich was a huge success. The effects are still clear over 50 years later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StefanMUC said:

In terms of city transformation, Munich was a huge success. The effects are still clear over 50 years later.

Agree. Its by far my favourite Olympic Park of any I have seen in person.

I also think if it werent for the attacks it would have been remembered in a similar way to Barcelona 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are two distinct matters anyway. It always a matter of perception. And unfortunately, Munich 1972 will always be remembered for the attack rather than it's Olympic park. Just like Tokyo 202One, even with overcoming the greatest (unforeseen) challenge of any Olympic host city ever, will (unfairly) always be remembered as the "covid-Games".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, StefanMUC said:

In terms of city transformation, Munich was a huge success. The effects are still clear over 50 years later.

Also, as has just been discussed in the typography thread, Munich also set the design template for almost every Olympics for the rest of the 20th century. It’s hard overestimate the legacy it left on Olympic design.

I agree with Aussie Kiwi - until the attacks, it was well on course to being one of the best and most influential games of all time, and even after the attacks it’s influence was still stamped on successive games for decades.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, FYI said:

Those are two distinct matters anyway. It always a matter of perception. And unfortunately, Munich 1972 will always be remembered for the attack rather than it's Olympic park. Just like Tokyo 202One, even with overcoming the greatest (unforeseen) challenge of any Olympic host city ever, will (unfairly) always be remembered as the "covid-Games".

 

6 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Also, as has just been discussed in the typography thread, Munich also set the design template for almost every Olympics for the rest of the 20th century. It’s hard overestimate the legacy it left on Olympic design.

I agree with Aussie Kiwi - until the attacks, it was well on course to being one of the best and most influential games of all time, and even after the attacks it’s influence was still stamped on successive games for decades.

Agreed on both. Going back to what I was saying before, what do we think are some of most influential games of our era, starting I’d say around 1992. For me it’s definitely Barcelona, Sydney, London. Do we see those beta cities also having this much influence/hosting truly memorable games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@krow also, Sydney is not a beta city due to its international brand and relevance. When most international folks think Australia, they think Sydney. This global prestige and recognition was present pre-Olympics. Sure, it may not the up to par with Tokyo or London, but it is Australia’s most famous city internationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...