Jump to content

2016: Chicago Or Tokyo


Recommended Posts

Chicago !!

Cause asia is already hosting an olympic game which is bejing !!

So tokyo don't have a chance !!

Not necessarily.Europe has been awarded the summer Olympics eight years apart (Athens 2004,London 2012) with a winter games in the middle (Torino 2006) so there's no real reason why the IOC couldn't or wouldn't do the same for Asia!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not necessarily.Europe has been awarded the summer Olympics eight years apart (Athens 2004,London 2012) with a winter games in the middle (Torino 2006) so there's no real reason why the IOC couldn't or wouldn't do the same for Asia!

Because there was only 1 non-European candidate in the 2005/2012 round. And besides, Athens 2004 really was considered a continental Rotation. If the Games had been born in New Zealand, they would've returned there for a sentimental homecoming, regardless of whether 2000 was awarded to Sydney or not.

So with 2008, I think the SOGs are returning to a rational continental 'rotation' (of every 3rd Games returning to Europe...)

1992 - Europe

1996 - should've been Athens; went to Atlanta - fluke

2000 - Oceania

2004 - making up for 1996; returns it to Athens/Europe - a make-up fluke

2008 - Asia

2012 - Europe

2016 - (supposed to be North America) after which

2020 - new frontiers are to be tried...either Africa, India or South America

Main, your argument does not apply to Asia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1992 - Europe

1996 - should've been Athens; went to Atlanta - fluke

2000 - Oceania

2004 - making up for 1996; returns it to Athens/Europe - a make-up fluke

2008 - Asia

2012 - Europe

2016 - (supposed to be North America) after which

2020 - new frontiers are to be tried...either Africa, India or South America

According to this list we are about due a 'fluke' for the 2016 Games.

I really don't think that there are any patterns that can be applied to who is awarded the Olympics - it's just who appeals most to the IOC at the end of the campaign. There are obviously attempts to avoid staying within the same continent two Summer Games in a row, although the last time this happened was the Olympics following the London Games - so perhaps fate is on Europe's side this time too ;-)

As many of you already know I don't see Beijing 2008 being a huge obstacle to a successful Tokyo 2016 campaign any more than Athens was an obstacle to London. However, I do think that a successful bid from PyeongChang 2014 would be far more difficult for Tokyo to overcome and make the Americas a more obvious location for the next Games.

I never really doubted that the US would bid for 2016, and I'm sure they were all aware they would bid all along too. Chicago is of course the obvious choice - Los Angeles is merely there to give the world the false impression that a competition is taking place and that the 'US is serious this time' - but the choice has already been made, it was made as soon as San Francisco pulled out last year. The USOC know that LA would struggle against the likes of Tokyo, even with PyeongChang 2014, and would probably even struggle against Rio de Janeiro and Madrid - the last LA Games are just too recent. Chicago would be a far more formidable adversary and will surely be the hot favourite to win - so long as they don't make a total mess of the campaign like New York 2012 did - at least the world's most unpopular leader will have gone by then and perhaps everyone will love America again by 2009!

......I still choose Tokyo though. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to this list we are about due a 'fluke' for the 2016 Games.

I really don't think that there are any patterns that can be applied to who is awarded the Olympics - it's just who appeals most to the IOC at the end of the campaign. There are obviously attempts to avoid staying within the same continent two Summer Games in a row, although the last time this happened was the Olympics following the London Games - so perhaps fate is on Europe's side this time too ;-)

As many of you already know I don't see Beijing 2008 being a huge obstacle to a successful Tokyo 2016 campaign any more than Athens was an obstacle to London. However, I do think that a successful bid from PyeongChang 2014 would be far more difficult for Tokyo to overcome and make the Americas a more obvious location for the next Games.

I never really doubted that the US would bid for 2016, and I'm sure they were all aware they would bid all along too. Chicago is of course the obvious choice - Los Angeles is merely there to give the world the false impression that a competition is taking place and that the 'US is serious this time' - but the choice has already been made, it was made as soon as San Francisco pulled out last year. The USOC know that LA would struggle against the likes of Tokyo, even with PyeongChang 2014, and would probably even struggle against Rio de Janeiro and Madrid - the last LA Games are just too recent. Chicago would be a far more formidable adversary and will surely be the hot favourite to win - so long as they don't make a total mess of the campaign like New York 2012 did - at least the world's most unpopular leader will have gone by then and perhaps everyone will love America again by 2009!

......I still choose Tokyo though. :lol:

Sorry, Stu -- your post is LOST in Translation.

I am putting you on a 'watch-list' as potential trouble-maker for 2016!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Salzburg wins the 2014 Games, I think it is pretty safe to say that 2016 is not going to Europe. I just don't see three games going to Europe when there are so many other countries now able to host the Olympics. One factor that doesn't get spoken of very often is NBC's influence. At some point, NBC is going to tell the IOC "If you expect us to pay as much as we do for the Olympics, you had better strongly consider getting it back in the US." NBC lost TONS on Torino thanks to the Internet and everyone being able to see the results of the marquee competitions well before NBC broadcast them. Sure, Vancouver will help NBC a great deal, but a US game means big money for NBC, who pays more than any other broadcaster for the rights to broadcast the Games.

Chicago is a great choice for the USOC, but that Olympic Stadium better be a done deal by the time it gets to the IOC. I haven't been able to see much on their venue plans but from what I hear, its pretty compact which is both good and bad. Given Daley's influence on Chicago though and how badly he wants the Games, I think whatever he wants, he's going to get.

It will be an interesting few years! If the US doesn't get it in 2016, I think some US city will emerge as a good candidate for 2018 (Tahoe?). I believe that 2020 is going to Cape Town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not necessarily.Europe has been awarded the summer Olympics eight years apart (Athens 2004,London 2012) with a winter games in the middle (Torino 2006) so there's no real reason why the IOC couldn't or wouldn't do the same for Asia!

As much as I appreciate your logic, I still think that Chicago is going to come out on top.

Just a thought. I wonder how much attention the IOC actually pays to events outside of the games that have been hosted by a bidding nation. Ie. Would the Japanese hosting a World Cup in 2002 go in favour or against the Tokyo bid for 2016. I'm not sure what the actual feeling would be on this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Salzburg wins the 2014 Games, I think it is pretty safe to say that 2016 is not going to Europe. I just don't see three games going to Europe when there are so many other countries now able to host the Olympics. One factor that doesn't get spoken of very often is NBC's influence. At some point, NBC is going to tell the IOC "If you expect us to pay as much as we do for the Olympics, you had better strongly consider getting it back in the US." NBC lost TONS on Torino thanks to the Internet and everyone being able to see the results of the marquee competitions well before NBC broadcast them. Sure, Vancouver will help NBC a great deal, but a US game means big money for NBC, who pays more than any other broadcaster for the rights to broadcast the Games.

Chicago is a great choice for the USOC, but that Olympic Stadium better be a done deal by the time it gets to the IOC. I haven't been able to see much on their venue plans but from what I hear, its pretty compact which is both good and bad. Given Daley's influence on Chicago though and how badly he wants the Games, I think whatever he wants, he's going to get.

It will be an interesting few years! If the US doesn't get it in 2016, I think some US city will emerge as a good candidate for 2018 (Tahoe?). I believe that 2020 is going to Cape Town.

Just as there was the "M" era in Summer hosting (Melbourne, Mexico, Munich, Montreal, Moscow), I think the "C" era will be dawning in Olympic hosting:

2010 - VanCouver

2012 - Cancelled

2014 - pyong Chang

2016 - ChiCago

2018 - soChi

2020 - Cape Town

2022 - Reno/Cake Tahoe

2024 - Calcutta (reverting to its old name)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as there was the "M" era in Summer hosting (Melbourne, Mexico, Munich, Montreal, Moscow), I think the "C" era will be dawning in Olympic hosting:

2010 - VanCouver

2012 - Cancelled

2014 - pyong Chang

2016 - ChiCago

2018 - soChi

2020 - Cape Town

2022 - Reno/Cake Tahoe

2024 - Calcutta (reverting to its old name)

I am afraid I have to correct you my fat friend. The winners of 2012 were London. You know, the city that New York lost out to. I hope you remember now. Or is it just bitterness and resentment.......I thought so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am afraid I have to correct you my fat friend. The winners of 2012 were London. You know, the city that New York lost out to. I hope you remember now. Or is it just bitterness and resentment.......I thought so.

Yeah, for now. But my 6th sense tells me otherwise (I did have a seance with great-grandpere over New Year's Eve).

So better you know sooner, rather than later. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really agree with Stu. If PC grabs 2014, US will get 2016 if their come with a decent (Chicago) bid. If 2014 goes elsewhere, Tokyo might have a shot though.

It will be an interesting few years! If the US doesn't get it in 2016, I think some US city will emerge as a good candidate for 2018 (Tahoe?).

I really do not see 2018 going to North America either way. If Chicago gets 2016, it would be to soon after 2010 and 2106. If 2016 should somehow slip for Chicago, I pretty sure USOC will do everything to get 2020. US 2018 bid just does not fit in such plans

Just as there was the "M" era in Summer hosting (Melbourne, Mexico, Munich, Montreal, Moscow), I think the "C" era will be dawning in Olympic hosting:

2010 - VanCouver

2012 - Cancelled

2014 - pyong Chang

2016 - ChiCago

2018 - soChi

2020 - Cape Town

2022 - Reno/Cake Tahoe

2024 - Calcutta (reverting to its old name)

Ha, no it is the T-era that is about commence :P

2014: SoTsji (That's actually how it's spelt on my map...)

2016: Tokyo

2018: Trondheim

2020: Cape Town

2022: Lake Tahoe (USOC finally gives up SOG as they have no good T-candidate....)

2024: Toronto

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, for now. But my 6th sense tells me otherwise (I did have a seance with great-grandpere over New Year's Eve).

So better you know sooner, rather than later. ;)

I think you must have mis-heard what your great-grandpere was trying to tell you (maybe it was because he was speaking French?).

He was probably trying to say ' 2012 - La ville c-a-p-i-t-a-le qui travers le C-a-n-a-l ' (ie. London).

No doubt drunk and befuddled as you were on New Year's Eve you misheard what he was trying to tell you and confused 'Canal' with 'Cancel'! :blink:

Next time,I would recommend you try and stay sober when communing with dead ancestors!! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...