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

I really think you’re over-thinking this @venuedesignlover. Plenty of beta hosts have shone and dazzled, and some alpha hosts have been lacklustre, and often the difference is only in the eye of the beholder. What lifts a games higher is organisation, flair and a bit of luck - it’s like capturing lightning in a bottle. It’s not the size or importance of the host city, it’s what they make of it. I don’t think the majority of people watch an Olympics specifically for the host. They’re there for the occasion, and if the host can add some local pizzazz to proceedings, that’s a bonus.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that it makes absolutely no sense to think in Beta city, Alpha city, etc. If I look at the Wikipedia list, Dubai is considered an Alpha city while Berlin is a Beta city; let's be honest, there are perhaps objective reasons for this (financial power?) but it still seems absurd.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sebastien1214 said:

I find that it makes absolutely no sense to think in Beta city, Alpha city, etc. If I look at the Wikipedia list, Dubai is considered an Alpha city while Berlin is a Beta city; let's be honest, there are perhaps objective reasons for this (financial power?) but it still seems absurd.

Exactly. What are such rankings based on. Political clout? Financial strength? Cultural influence? Liveability? Tourism attractiveness? Population size? It’s all just a melange of undefinable that are often just subjective anyway. Ditto for what makes a successful Olympic host or not.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, venuedesignlover said:

@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.

if it's "not up to par with tokyo or london" then it's not an alpha city just because it's australia's most famous city. dili is east timor's most famous city....

irrational delusion for personal preference, as always, on gamesbids.com.

it's a really good thing i grew up in NYC or i too would have to spend all my time hyping up some third rate fishing village to convince internet strangers to validate my desperate insecurity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Exactly. What are such rankings based on. Political clout? Financial strength? Cultural influence? Liveability? Tourism attractiveness? Population size? It’s all just a melange of undefinable that are often just subjective anyway. Ditto for what makes a successful Olympic host or not.

Especially since the organization of the Olympic Games is less a question of cities than of countries. The more the costs of organizing it increase, the more the host country will have a preponderant place in decision-making in relation to the cities. In France, Paris 2024 is financed by the French State (on the public money part). Not the Ile-de-France region or the city of Paris. And it will be the same thing for the French Alps 2030, and it would have been the same thing if it was for example Lyon 2024; although Lyon is obviously less “important” economically speaking than Paris.

There are only a very small handful of countries left where this is not yet the case, federal states within countries which have a solid economy; United States of course, certainly Australia.

We should not ask ourselves "which city do we think could host the Olympic Games", but rather "which city a potential host country might want to highlight". This is the logic that pushed Russia to organize the Winter Olympics in Sochi, because Putin had the ambition to develop this area of the country. This is the logic that pushes India to propose Ahmedabad in 2036, because it is Modi's city. This is the logic that pushes Indonesia to also propose Nusantara for 2036, because it will be their future capital, and it would be a great opportunity for them to showcase their new capital and turn the page on Jakarta, while for at the moment T, in 2024, it makes much more sense, if we want to be rational, that Indonesia is proposing Jakarta quite simply because... there is nothing in Nusantara.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

I don’t think the majority of people watch an Olympics specifically for the host. 

 

6 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

What are such rankings based on. Political clout? Financial strength? Cultural influence? Liveability? Tourism attractiveness? Population size? It’s all just a melange of undefinable that are often just subjective anyway. 

All of the above. It's irrefutable though, that the top Alpha, creme-de-la-creme cities of the world, based on what you just laid out, are London, Paris, New York & Tokyo. And yes, the further down the list one goes, the less clear, undefinable & subjective it can get.

The first point seems a bit murky, cause the allure of the Olympics ITFP is it's "traveling circus" nature. While I wouldn't deny myself watching an Olympics simply because it's not somewhere I don't really care for that much, the enthusiasm would definitely be less if the host city is a ho-hum one.

Case in point, the next three Summer Olympics for me go down in level of excitement the further down the list we go. And you yourself still haven't even been able to bring yourself to watch the Beijing 2022 OC :P, while the Paris 2024 handover in Tokyo you've watched how many times already you say?! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, FYI said:

Case in point, the next three Summer Olympics for me go down in level of excitement the further down the list we go. And you yourself still haven't even been able to bring yourself to watch the Beijing 2022 OC :P, while the Paris 2024 handover in Tokyo you've watched how many times already you say?! :D

My private boycott of the 2022 ceremonies was driven solely by my personal political and moral misgivings at the anticipation of a propaganda show being staged by a regime approaching the peak of wolf warrior and anti human rights nastiness. If China had followed a more liberal path over the past decade or so, my feelings would have been totally different. And my boycott was solely on the propaganda aspects - I still devoured the following 16 days of sports avidly. It was in a peak viewing time zone for me.

Paris, yes, I’m highly excited by. And I’m admittedly a Francophile. I found the handover stirring as a beautifully crafted bit of theatre. And a lot of my heightened expectations of Paris have been fed by my personal positive reactions to the teasers they have thrown our way so far - the logo, look, pictograms and plans for a new kind of ceremony and such. If I thought those were ho-hum and we’d be tuning into a Stade de France opening, my excitement wouldn’t be as heightened. Possibly more like the Baron, another admitted Francophile, who hasn’t liked them and done nothing but complain and kvetch in the lead-up. And the time zone is likely to curtail my ability to watch as much as I’d like.

Anyway, we’re GamesBids Olympic fans. We’re not typical fans or viewers. That’s what we do. Rate the ceremonies and looks, and compare games, and argue the merits and rankings of cities and predict future hosts and argue the merits of our favourites. We’re a small, obsessed minority. A huge majority of the world likely have no idea the Olympics are taking place in Paris this year, and won’t until they tune in the first Saturday, much less where they’re going to be held in 4 or 8 years time. Broadcast ratings will more likely be driven by time zones, and how well your local team is performing this year, or whether Generation Y is into this whole nationalistic competitive sports thing, more than which monument is this sport being performed in front of.

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

and plans for a new kind of ceremony and such. If I thought those were ho-hum and we’d be tuning into a Stade de France opening, my excitement wouldn’t be as heightened. Possibly more like the Baron, another admitted Francophile, who hasn’t liked them and done nothing but complain and kvetch in the lead-up. 

And see, to me that doesn't really matter as much. And to some others, as we've seen here, are not that excited about that new kind of ceremony plan, calling it pretty much 'bad project management' because it's so untested & we won't know the final results until it's actually all said & done.

Either way, though, to me, the fact that it's Paris, whether the opening is on the Seine or at the Stade de France, makes little difference for the level of personal excitement (& as you say, most of the world probably doesn't even know that the Olympics are taking place in Paris this year anyway, much less know about their plans for the Opening). Maybe in person it would be different, but since most of the world watches the Olympics from their TV, or computer/tablet/phone these days, it probably won't be as impactful for most watching from abroad. 

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

Broadcast ratings will more likely be driven by time zones, and how well your local team is performing this year, or whether Generation Y is into this whole nationalistic competitive sports thing, more than which monument is this sport being performed in front of.

Speaking of broadcasters, it's interesting how many big names NBC is sending this year to Paris for the Olympics. I can't recall any other recent Olympics having so many network gurus being part of the broadcasts. Before, it was always Tara Lipinski, Johnny Weir, Mike Tirico, Savannah Guthrie, etc but this year we'll have so many new network faces (& celebrities) broadcasting from the City of Lights.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, FYI said:

And see, to me that doesn't really matter as much. And to some others, as we've seen here, are not that excited about that new kind of ceremony plan, calling it pretty much 'bad project management' because it's so untested & we won't know the final results until it's actually all said & done.

Either way, though, to me, the fact that it's Paris, whether the opening is on the Seine or at the Stade de France, makes little difference for the level of personal excitement (& as you say, most of the world probably doesn't even know that the Olympics are taking place in Paris this year anyway, much less know about their plans for the Opening). Maybe in person it would be different, but since most of the world watches the Olympics from their TV, or computer/tablet/phone these days, it probably won't be as impactful for most watching from abroad. 

And all that indicates is firstly we have different anticipations and enthusiasms and secondly, that we are a particular, narrow, subset of fans who care about such things (or not - there’s plenty of members who couldn’t care less about the ceremonies or the look). The majority of the world will tune in for the spectacle of an Olympic opening ceremony, and be pleasantly surprised if it goes well and Paris makes a good backdrop impression or underwhelmed if it all goes tits up (we’ll be hurriedly posting out ratings however it goes). And those that follow Olympic sports or cheer on their national team’s chances at gold will tune in whether it’s in front of the Eiffel Tower or in some sports hall in Lille. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

And all that indicates is firstly we have different anticipations and enthusiasms and secondly, that we are a particular, narrow, subset of fans who care about such things (or not - there’s plenty of members who couldn’t care less about the ceremonies or the look). The majority of the world will tune in for the spectacle of an Olympic opening ceremony, and be pleasantly surprised if it goes well and Paris makes a good backdrop impression or underwhelmed if it all goes tits up (we’ll be hurriedly posting out ratings however it goes). And those that follow Olympic sports or cheer on their national team’s chances at gold will tune in whether it’s in front of the Eiffel Tower or in some sports hall in Lille. 

I think the average public is not very interested in the host city; but on the other hand the broadcasters will care much more about it to try to sell their product better. NBC is a good example, Paris is certainly more dreamy than Brisbane and sending lots of stars to Paris can make sense. Afterwards, the average public will be mainly concerned about the time zone. An average Japanese person will probably follow Brisbane more than Paris, quite simply because the Brisbane time zone is much more advantageous for them; However, Brisbane is less dreamy than Paris (sorry). Afterwards, for the possible impact that the opening ceremony in Paris will have, it has simply never been done in this form, we will have to see afterwards. That said, I remember the one in London, and even though it was in a stadium, so the classic format, it was such a success that it contributed quite a bit to increasing the media coverage of the games in France. But it really has to be an exceptional ceremony and there are very few that can fit into this category: London, Beijing, maybe Sochi and that's it? (I'm too young to have any idea of Sydney, Athens and the impact it had)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, sebastien1214 said:

I think the average public is not very interested in the host city; but on the other hand the broadcasters will care much more about it to try to sell their product better. NBC is a good example, Paris is certainly more dreamy than Brisbane and sending lots of stars to Paris can make sense

I’m not sure if sending more “stars” this year is a result of the location, or more that NBC is showing more live coverage this year and having to do more to counter changing viewership patterns in this age of streaming - they have to build up the hype more when their competition is Netflix et al. Plus, they likely want to “blood” a few new faces and personalities ahead of their home town games in 2028, which will be a much bigger deal for them by orders of magnitude.

interesting question whether the “quality” of the opening has much affect on viewership of the rest of the games. It certainly would affect overall perceptions here on GamsBids, but we’re not the average audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

And those that follow Olympic sports or cheer on their national team’s chances at gold will tune in whether it’s in front of the Eiffel Tower or in some sports hall in Lille. 

Of course. I don’t think that anyone is arguing otherwise. Afterall, the Olympics are a sporting-spectacle. 

That said, though, how many times have we noted that the Olympics also have a knack (& that’s what makes them special TBW) for bringing out the most cache of an audience. Spectators that only watch the most obscure of sports only when the Olympics are on.

As a paying spectator though, I’d much rather watch beach volley in front of the Eiffel Tower than some obscure sport in a closed venue all the way up in Lille.

29 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

I’m not sure if sending more “stars” this year is a result of the location, or more that NBC is showing more live coverage this year and having to do more to counter changing viewership patterns in this age of streaming - they have to build up the hype more when their competition is Netflix et al. Plus, they likely want to “blood” a few new faces and personalities ahead of their home town games in 2028, which will be a much bigger deal for them by orders of magnitude.

Probably a little bit of both. I mean Jimmy Fallon is only going cause Mike Tirico pretty much asked him to. But he probably didn’t have to twist jimmy’s arm that much, cause I mean it’s Paris! If it was any other lower-tier Olympic locale, it probably would’ve been a harder sell. 

Kelly Clarkson seems like another one that they most likely didn’t have to coax that much. And Snoop Dogg just seems thrilled as can be that he’s going to be “reporting all the action Live from Paris!” Even Dolly Parton is going to be there!

I doubt all that celebrity action would be happening if the Olympics this year were in say Doh-a, Ahmedabad or dare I say Brisbane! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, FYI said:

 

I doubt all that celebrity action would be happening if the Olympics this year were in say Doh-a, Ahmedabad or dare I say Brisbane! 

And I wouldn’t be too sure about that. For al that Qatar was a reviled host in so many quarters in the lead-up and during its World Cup, it ended up being the most watched ever. 

I really old style broadcasters like NBC know they have to pull out all stops to compete in the media landscape today. Events like the OIlympics are among the few showstoppers they can pull out to hold their own against streaming. I still say it’s the event (and tme scheduling) more than the host. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, krow said:

if it's "not up to par with tokyo or london" then it's not an alpha city just because it's australia's most famous city. dili is east timor's most famous city....

irrational delusion for personal preference, as always, on gamesbids.com.

it's a really good thing i grew up in NYC or i too would have to spend all my time hyping up some third rate fishing village to convince internet strangers to validate my desperate insecurity. 

First of all, this is a little bit unnecessary and unproductive to discussion. We can all be mature around here. No reason to call me "delusional".  Not even going to deal with that insecurity comment that is so incredibly unnecessary. Secondly, you completely mischaracterize my argument about "global cities" by bringing up Dili in East Timor. You fall into the "straw-man" logical fallacy where you think just because I argue that Sydney was an alpha city because it was Australia's most famous city even if it was not up to par with Tokyo or London, then all country's most famous cities must be alpha cities. My argument is not that a country's most famous city must be an alpha city. My argument is that Sydney's international presence and relevance made it an alpha city. Dili cannot compare to that international presence, and that's why its not an alpha city. The creators of this "alpha, beta city" (The Globalization and World Cities Research Network) system back me up on this when they say that even in the year 2000, the year of the Sydney olympics, Sydney was still an alpha city. Just take a look here: https://www.lboro.ac.uk/microsites/geography/gawc/world2000t.html. Sydney was considered an alpha city back then, the evidence is plain and simple. As for your second point that, just because Sydney is not up to par with Tokyo or London, it cannot be an alpha city, that's also false. Cities like Sydney can hold their international weight very well, and do not have to aspire to be anything Tokyo or London-like to uphold that weight well. In fact, Tokyo and London belong to categories above typical "alpha" cities. Tokyo belongs to Alpha+ and London belongs to Alpha++, meaning that they are in their own truly unique echelons that Sydney does not need to belong to in order still hold that coveted and distinguished "Alpha" sport. I agree a lot of this is up to the eye of the beholder, but sometimes the evidence and continued international presence of Sydney just speaks for itself. 

6 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

What lifts a games higher is organisation, flair and a bit of luck - it’s like capturing lightning in a bottle. It’s not the size or importance of the host city, it’s what they make of it. I don’t think the majority of people watch an Olympics specifically for the host. They’re there for the occasion, and if the host can add some local pizzazz to proceedings, that’s a bonus.

My worries are that many of those less internationally recognized will not be able to bring those elements to the level that truly elevate a games experience and legacy. I really am not opposed to lesser-known cities (notice how I'm not using the term "beta" anymore, do not wanna get mixed up on technicalities) hosting the Olympics, as long as those lesser-known hosts are able to elevate the games to a point that makes them influential and makes them special- even for those typical viewers. With global cities like Tokyo (again if those games happened anytime but 2020/1), much of those elements like great organization, cultural flair brought about by that international name, are already apparent and can make hosting a games that are truly well done are already there. With the new norm, I'm afraid we will not see a lot of that happen- especially with the lack of emphasis on legacies and truly wholistic transformations. And without a lot of that, I'm scared that the Olympics will slip into the backwater and not be as internationally prevalent as they are now. I'm all for lesser-known localities, as long as they can bring prestige and truly great games for the Olympic movement. Without that great games experience, the Olympics can just become an irrelevant afterthought in cities that do not excite or bring the Olympics to international prominence. 

 

1 hour ago, FYI said:

dare I say Brisbane!

No need to dare! A fact is a fact. We'll see how those games turn out...if they end up bringing up in a lot of those elements @Sir Rols and I mentioned, then we can see a great games that will help really provide that energy and buzz around the Olympics. But I am hoping for a big name after Brisbane to bring the Olympics back to the forefront if Brisbane does not perform. 

 

5 hours ago, FYI said:

While I wouldn't deny myself watching an Olympics simply because it's not somewhere I don't really care for that much, the enthusiasm would definitely be less if the host city is a ho-hum one.

This kind of goes to what I'm saying. Through probably marginal, I'm hoping Paris 2024 and LA 2028, two truly big names in succession, increase bring the Olympic movement back to the sports, political, and cultural powerhouse it once was. They have all those elements @Sir Rols mentioned, and I'm hoping for a great games from both!

 

5 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Possibly more like the Baron, another admitted Francophile, who hasn’t liked them and done nothing but complain and kvetch in the lead-up.

Care to voice some concerns. I'm curious for a different point of view...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, venuedesignlover said:

First of all, this is a little bit unnecessary and unproductive to discussion. We can all be mature around here. No reason to call me "delusional".  Not even going to deal with that insecurity comment that is so incredibly unnecessary. Secondly, you completely mischaracterize my argument about "global cities" by bringing up Dili in East Timor. You fall into the "straw-man" logical fallacy where you think just because I argue that Sydney was an alpha city because it was Australia's most famous city even if it was not up to par with Tokyo or London, then all country's most famous cities must be alpha cities. My argument is not that a country's most famous city must be an alpha city. My argument is that Sydney's international presence and relevance made it an alpha city. Dili cannot compare to that international presence, and that's why its not an alpha city. The creators of this "alpha, beta city" (The Globalization and World Cities Research Network) system back me up on this when they say that even in the year 2000, the year of the Sydney olympics, Sydney was still an alpha city. Just take a look here: https://www.lboro.ac.uk/microsites/geography/gawc/world2000t.html. Sydney was considered an alpha city back then, the evidence is plain and simple. As for your second point that, just because Sydney is not up to par with Tokyo or London, it cannot be an alpha city, that's also false. Cities like Sydney can hold their international weight very well, and do not have to aspire to be anything Tokyo or London-like to uphold that weight well. In fact, Tokyo and London belong to categories above typical "alpha" cities. Tokyo belongs to Alpha+ and London belongs to Alpha++, meaning that they are in their own truly unique echelons that Sydney does not need to belong to in order still hold that coveted and distinguished "Alpha" sport. I agree a lot of this is up to the eye of the beholder, but sometimes the evidence and continued international presence of Sydney just speaks for itself. 

 

sorry i'm not going to have a debate with chatGPT.

maybe cut the adderall by half starting tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he really did an "in conclusion, the international presence of sydney speaks for itself."

now we know whose writing AI was trained on.

this planet is so cooked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, krow said:

in conclusion, the international presence of sydney speaks for itself."

So you didn’t read any of what I said before…concerning actual evidence. I meant those last comments as even if my some godforsaken reason you don’t believe the evidence, just grasp onto the vibe that is so prevalent in the world. I encourage you to actually read what I wrote before. Maybe you’ll learn something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

And I wouldn’t be too sure about that. For al that Qatar was a reviled host in so many quarters in the lead-up and during its World Cup, it ended up being the most watched ever. 

And I wouldn't be too sure about that, either. Soccer fans are a different breed altogether, quite fanatical really (moreso than even NFL American football fans are). Soccer fans would likely go anywhere, even if it was the middle of the Sahara, to go & watch their favorite soccer team play at the World Cup. Olympic fans, not so much.

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

I still say it’s the event (and tme scheduling) more than the host. 

Of course it's about the event. But it's also about the location, location, location (as they say in real estate)! The two compliment each other, they go hand-in-hand like two peas in a pod. Otherwise, what's the point in them traveling the world for?

Let's just get it over with then, & station the Olympics in permanent locales with permanent facilities, like it's been suggested time & time again, if the host city/country really doesn't matter as much, & therefore, the Olympics will just become like your ordinary, run-of-mill world championships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, krow said:

he really did an "in conclusion, the international presence of sydney speaks for itself."

now we know whose writing AI was trained on.

this planet is so cooked.

@krow Was not looking for an argument. I made a perfectly normal comment looking for discussion and you were the one who decided to hurl insults at me. You say the planet is cooked because of me, but do you even realize how you completely straw-man all my arguments, misconstruing them completely for your own benefit. This is why the world is so polarized right now, and I do not mean as something personal to you (unlike the insults you threw at me earlier), rather just as a comment on how actions like yours are so damaging to constructive discussion in the world today. Then, instead of reading my response, you decide to grasp at one line in my response, completely taking it out of its context which I explained in my previous post. Wow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, venuedesignlover said:

Care to voice some concerns. I'm curious for a different point of view...

That’s not me, that’s BaronPierreIV being Baron. I have confidence, or at least hope, the French will deliver splendidly. Baron just doesn’t like any of the artistic choices so far. That’s his opinion and it’s fair enough. 

I don’t know @venuedesignlover, so many of your questions seem to be asking for some definite formula for things that are indefineable or subjective. It’s like asking what makes a good song? Or what’s a nice colour? Or you’re seemingly worried about circumstances that may or may not ever happen. There’s no scientific formula, or even right or wrong answers, for much of what you ask or we discuss here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:
Quote

 

 Baron just doesn’t like any of the artistic choices so far. Thats his opinion and it’s fair enough. 

 Corrected that for you.;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

There’s no scientific formula, or even right or wrong answers, for much of what you ask or we discuss here. 

All I ask is to be treated with respect. I do not claim that there are right answers to any question. Just asking for personal opinions. Also nothing wrong with talking about “situations that may never occur”. Theoreticals and thought experiments can teach us a lot about certain truths of the world and in this case., truths about the future of the Olympics :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/16/2024 at 1:09 AM, Australian Kiwi said:

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 

What are some of our favorite Olympic parks and reasoning behind them? I really like Montreal, Beijing, and London.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, venuedesignlover said:

What are some of our favorite Olympic parks and reasoning behind them? I really like Montreal, Beijing, and London.

That’s a nice conversation or thread starter, but likely too much of a diversion from this thread, which is to discuss the potential candidates and possible winners of the 2036 games. I think it’d make a great thread in General Olympic Discussions if you wanted to start it, or if you’d like me or someone else to do so. 

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...