Will Korea Bid Again?

[NY20??]

IMO, Russia wasn't really "overdue" for the Winter Games - They never made much of an effort – It’s their fault it "took them this long" to land a Winter Games.

It's really saddening. Sochi bids once, and with the PutinWonder they actually win the whole damn thing! Ugh! PyeongChang really deserved it. They were the Paris, minus the smug arrogance. I really hope the emotional strain of two closely won, back-to-back failed bids isn't too much for them.

[Guardian]

Korea should bid strongly for 2018. The IOC can't have the nerve not to give them the Games...

... or can they?

I wouldn't go past them on this issue because the Koreans are proud people. If this "continental rotation" is to be used, then it wouldn't be a surprise, if Korea, China and Japan would put a Winter Olympics bid forward (regardless of Beijing 2008 and a possible Tokyo 2016 bid). But, a possible Japanese bid for another Winter Olympics, to me, would be excessive against the backdrop of the likes of Korea and China, for example.

[baron-pierreIV]

I wouldn't go past them on this issue because the Koreans are proud people. If this "continental rotation" is to be used, then it wouldn't be a surprise, if Korea, China and Japan would put a Winter Olympics bid forward (regardless of Beijing 2008 and a possible Tokyo 2016 bid). But, a possible Japanese bid for another Winter Olympics, to me, would be excessive against the backdrop of the likes of Korea and China, for example.

No, if the Japanese put up a winter bid (which they wouldn't since they are now focused on a Tokyo 2016), it would be what PC would need to win.

[Guardian]

No, if the Japanese put up a winter bid (which they wouldn't since they are now focused on a Tokyo 2016), it would be what PC would need to win.

Like I said: the Koreans are a "proud people." If the Japanese do try to go for 2018 or 2016, don't surprise that they will reciprocate in some form. I don't know, if this was true, but I think there is this "tit-for-tat" thing between them that has been going on since Seoul and Nagoya were the only candidate cities for the 1988 Olympic Games. And, remember, that decision was handed down in 1981.

[Lord David]

IMO, Russia wasn't really "overdue" for the Winter Games - They never made much of an effort – It’s their fault it "took them this long" to land a Winter Games.

It's really saddening. Sochi bids once, and with the PutinWonder they actually win the whole damn thing! Ugh! PyeongChang really deserved it. They were the Paris, minus the smug arrogance. I really hope the emotional strain of two closely won, back-to-back failed bids isn't too much for them.

Actually Sochi made a bid for 2002 but didn't make the shortlist. I agree with the whole effort thing, they just didn't want or consider to bid for a Winter Olympics during the 70's and 80's, when they would have probably should have (in Sochi or a city that was part of the USSR at the time... Almaty? They had the Medeo Ice Rink...)

So yes, in a way it's probably their own fault for getting a Winter Olympics so "late"

Anyhow, I say they'll host a great Olympics. PyeongChang can attempt a 2018 bid and see how that turns out...

[FYI]

South Korea (along with Austria) should just forget about the whole damn thing. The 2012 & 2014 races are obviously perfect examples that the IOC doesn't give a crap about hard work & effort. I could see it if Pyeongchang had lost to Salzburg, but to Sochi, it's just pathetic. And even though Sochi had bid in the past, it was over 12 years ago that they bid last. And they were promptly dismissed for the very same reasons that were of concern in the 2014 IOC evaluation report, but yet, this time they go on & win the whole f'n thing, because Russia was enough of a political incentive for the IOC this time around.

[Mainad]

South Korea (along with Austria) should just forget about the whole damn thing. The 2012 & 2014 races are obviously perfect examples that the IOC doesn't give a crap about hard work & effort.

How do you mean? You don't think London 2012 worked pretty hard to turn around a failing bid and,a year later,manage to overtake the acknowledged favourite?

I could see it if Pyeongchang had lost to Salzburg, but to Sochi, it's just pathetic. And even though Sochi had bid in the past, it was over 12 years ago that they bid last. And they were promptly dismissed for the very same reasons that were of concern in the 2014 IOC evaluation report, but yet, this time they go on & win the whole f'n thing, because Russia was enough of a political incentive for the IOC this time around.

Much the same reason as why Athens won for 2004 and Beijing won for 2008.As with Sochi this time round,many in the IOC decided the time was ripe to award those Games either for political/first time reasons (China) or for sentimental reasons (Greece).

[arwebb]

If hard work and effort were rewarded in these processes, you'd have Olympics split between continents every time. Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a consolation prize in the game of bidding.

[olympikfan]

South Korea (along with Austria) should just forget about the whole damn thing. The 2012 & 2014 races are obviously perfect examples that the IOC doesn't give a crap about hard work & effort. I could see it if Pyeongchang had lost to Salzburg, but to Sochi, it's just pathetic. And even though Sochi had bid in the past, it was over 12 years ago that they bid last. And they were promptly dismissed for the very same reasons that were of concern in the 2014 IOC evaluation report, but yet, this time they go on & win the whole f'n thing, because Russia was enough of a political incentive for the IOC this time around.

I think the voting for winning cities has to change why is that an IOC member who's country does't even attend a winter games vote. The winter IFs should vote withe the IOC just the summer IFs on which city is best. Sochi could be another Athens.

[tadeued]

Support Misha Bear back for Sochi!!

http://www.petitiononline.com/misha14/petition.html

[Filipe_Golias]

Great, another spammer.

[cfm Jeremie]

IMO, Russia wasn't really "overdue" for the Winter Games - They never made much of an effort – It’s their fault it "took them this long" to land a Winter Games.

It's really saddening. Sochi bids once, and with the PutinWonder they actually win the whole damn thing! Ugh! PyeongChang really deserved it. They were the Paris, minus the smug arrogance. I really hope the emotional strain of two closely won, back-to-back failed bids isn't too much for them.

Although I really feel sorry for PC (I am from "arrogant" Paris - still waiting to see where Paris was arrogant in their bid for 2012 BTW - I know how it feels to come so close) the fact remains that Russia was one of the few major winter sports power (along with Sweden and Finland) that was still to host the Games. And no it was not their first try: Sochi started a bid for 1998 and submitted one for 2002. Back in the early 90s, when these first bids were prepared, the economical and political situtation in Russia was very different from what it is today.

[FYI]

How do you mean? You don't think London 2012 worked pretty hard to turn around a failing bid and,a year later,manage to overtake the acknowledged favourite?

Well, 2012 was Paris' 3rd attempt & also worked very hard for a lot longer. It's kinda like if one were at their company for a very long time & knew that a promotional position was going to become available & you've worked very hard for that company, but all of a sudden a newbie comes in (and albeit, performs very well) but yet you think you should get the promotion over the newbie, but off of a sudden the newbie gets the promotion. Anyone in that (Paris) position would not be fond of it at all.

Much the same reason as why Athens won for 2004 and Beijing won for 2008.As with Sochi this time round,many in the IOC decided the time was ripe to award those Games either for political/first time reasons (China) or for sentimental reasons (Greece).

Yes, but both Athens' & Beijing's bids were only 8 years apart & both of them were also runner-ups in their respective races. And in addition, Beijing lost their first race by only 2 votes. Sochi was no where near this in terms of their previous bids. For 1998, they withdrew & for 2002 the IOC wasn't remotely interested in them, & dismissed them early on. So it's not the same as Beijing & Athens.

[cfm Jeremie]

South Korea (along with Austria) should just forget about the whole damn thing. The 2012 & 2014 races are obviously perfect examples that the IOC doesn't give a crap about hard work & effort. I could see it if Pyeongchang had lost to Salzburg, but to Sochi, it's just pathetic. And even though Sochi had bid in the past, it was over 12 years ago that they bid last. And they were promptly dismissed for the very same reasons that were of concern in the 2014 IOC evaluation report, but yet, this time they go on & win the whole f'n thing, because Russia was enough of a political incentive for the IOC this time around.

Why would you say that London or Sochi didn't work hard on their bid?

Agreed Sochi choice was the most risky but if 2012 has taught us anything (and that was a bitter lesson for the French), is that the IOC is more keen to reward ambitious shiny plans than more reasonable ones. I agree with you that it's a shame, especially with the constant IOC b*llsh*t of "downsizing the Games / keeping them under control".

In all fairness, the 2014 and 2002 evaluation reports did raise the same questions but in very different wording. Russia current economic power makes the building of infrastructure needed for the Games less of a challenge today than it was for 2002.

[FYI]

I totally understand that. But it still took even China 2 attempts to land their Games & they had more cards to play with. I just think the IOC could've waited 4 more years (& give Sochi that extra time to improve their infrastructure) & give them the 2018 Games. Doesn't the hard work & long effort & dedication of the Koreans (& Austrians) mean anything either? Everyone keeps saying about how hard the Russians worked at it (& I'm not saying that they didn't) but they didn't work as long for it like the Koreans & Austrians, & neither of them were rewarded for it.

[arwebb]

I understand why there is great sympathy towards Salzburg and Pyeongchang particularly, but at the end of the day, if enough of the IOC members thought Sochi was the best bid and voted accordingly, that is all that really matters.

[FYI]

Sochi was the "best bid" *politically*. Which is obviously how the IOC works.

[Sir Rols]

Sochi was the "best bid" *politically*. Which is obviously how the IOC works.

Is that so wrong? All of us also have our favourite bids and preferred hosts based on factors such other than technical abilities, why should the IOC be any different.

[FYI]

It is when one is making implications that Sochi was the best bid "technically", which it obviously wasn't. Far from it. Politics won Sochi the bid & whether right or wrong is a whole different can of worms.

[Sir Rols]

It is when one is making implications that Sochi was the best bid "technically", which it obviously wasn't. Far from it. Politics won Sochi the bid & whether right or wrong is a whole different can of worms.

I just don't get why people here get so surprised and outraged when a city that doesn't top the technical eveluation wins the bid. We spend years between elections talking about how factors like continental blocs, consolations for previous losses, strategically looking for future bid advantage, geopolitics, snappy presentations, flashy campaigns, the odd scandal, which national leaders are attending the session, and everything down to the shopping options available for members' spouses will effect a bid, and then people seem to think it's all a new development that a city gets chosen for reasons beyond infrastructure excellence.

Frankly, I'm quite glad that other factors count, that sentiment, emotion, geopolitics and biases also play a part. If not, we'd see a long line of pretty boring hosts, probably never venturing outside Western Europe and North America.

[FYI]

I'm not extremely surprised nor outraged.

The thing is, that a lot of people are being delusional & saying Sochi won because they had a "great plan" & are a huge winter sports power & yada, yada, yada, instead of realizing *the real reason* why they won. I don't care how many medals the Russians have won in the Winter Olympics, it still doesn't change the fact that their bid is by far the riskiest from what was Sochi's competition. Let's admit to the truth, shall we. That's all.

And Pyeongchang would've been venturing outside from Western Europe & North America that the IOC had an option to go to, even with all the reasonings that you described above, & which had worked harder for.

[Sir Rols]

I'm not extremely surprised nor outraged.

The thing is, that a lot of people are being delusional & saying Sochi won because they had a "great plan" & are a huge winter sports power & yada, yada, yada, instead of realizing *the real reason* why they won. I don't care how many medals the Russians have won in the Winter Olympics, it still doesn't change the fact that their bid is by far the riskiest from what was Sochi's competition. Let's admit to the truth, shall we. That's all.

So is it more, rather, that you're outraged not at the decision itself, but that people in the public eye after such a decisions start uttering platitudes? That's just basic diplomacy and manners. Deep down, everybody informed and involved who has followed the campaign _ from the members here to Rogge himself, know deep down that many factors go into deciding the winner, and technical ability is just of them. You're as likely to get Rogge or equivalent saying after an announcement that "that was a risky, arguably unfair choice!" as you would George Bush saying "whoops, we blew it big time in Iraq!".

I've argued before that if anything, all bids are carte blanche for any reason once the've made the short list. It's annoyed me enough in the past that the technical evaluation and the short list were already being used too narrowly by the executive board to knock out bids that I think may have been a bit more visionary (they used this one to cut-off Almaty, which the exec board were worried might have ridden a sympathy vote). But I'lll accept that it's the fair enough minimum to vet a selection of entrants who all should then be able to be considered with confidence to be technically and realistically able to successfcully stage the event. And then it's up to the wider membership to decide on the broader issues.

The alternative is to do away with the final vote by the wider membership. Restrict, as the executive board would secretly like anyway, the decision to the executive board (personally, I think it could get even more capricious). Or basically have top scorer on the technical evaluation automatically named as the host. Call me irreponsible, but personally I'm glad that there is an avenue to have such decisions made for wider concerns than technical score.

And Pyeongchang would've been venturing outside from Western Europe & North America that the IOC had an option to go to, even with all the reasonings that you described above, & which had worked harder for.

If it was a first for Asia, that would have been an almost irresistable argument to make. But Asia isn't a total winter games virgin frontier. It is sad for the dedicated and idealistic supporters in bids like PC's that their hard work wasn't in the end rewarded, but they're not the first or last bid team that has tasted multiple disappointment. It's bitter, but in any race all bids bar one are always going to be shattered and disappointed. In the end, almost half the members voting for 2014 agreed with your sentiments towards PyeongChang, but a bit more than half didn't _ they saw Sochi as the better bid for whatever their personal reasons.

[FYI]

Yes, Roltel. That's exactly it. I'm already over the IOC's 2014 decision. It's done. Sochi is hosting, good for them. But it's those "merit" claims that are just ridiculous.

And yes, Pyeongchang may not have been a winter Olympic first for Asia, but Eastern Europe is not Winter Olympic virgin territory either. Sarajevo has previously hosted & Europe as a whole has hogged more than half of them.

[cfm Jeremie]

If Sochi delivers on its plan (and I agree it is a huge IF), then their concept is technically excellent (I am no expert so I am not the one to say whether it is better than the other two or no but I would say it's close).

In particular, as a past olympic volunteer and spectator, I think the concep of the olympic park, which is a first for the winter games, offers a lot of advantages. The fact that all ice venues, OV, IBC/MPC, OF hotel are located within a single secured area will make it easier to go from one place to another without having to go through security check again. In particular, for the spectators, it will save time going from one event to another making it possible to combine several events within a day.

I am not kidding myself, I know that politics played a big part (like most of the time anyway) and I was hoping to see Salzburg getting it (even if I knew that its chance was close to 0), but I think that if Sochi won, it's also because its plan offers a great potential (if the plan was absolute crap, the Evaluation Commission would have said so).

[arwebb]

I just don't get why people here get so surprised and outraged when a city that doesn't top the technical eveluation wins the bid.

Is topping the technical evaluation becoming a bit of a curse perhaps?