The Best Choice

[james]

Plus there's the overall shadow of 2014; thus the precarious prospect of 2 back-to-back global mega-events in a country just getting its feet wet in organizing events of this scope. Maybe the IOC will not risk their party being jeopardized by the OTHER event when there are 3 other more certain cities to go to.

At least South Africa is showing it's willing to wait 10 years and earn its stripes before taking a stab at the other pie, whereas Brazil is trying to take it all on in 2 years' time.

How did you mean? Should they have to follow after SA step? Brazil and SA are two different countries.

[baron-pierreIV]

How did you mean? Should they have to follow after SA step? Brazil and SA are two different countries.

"Do you ever understand what I write at all?"...where did I hear that before?

[FYI]

I have always said that I wouldn't be surprised in the least if there was only a 3-city short-list. It may very well be that the IOC just wants to play it safe this time around. And like jeremie says, Rio's best chance of making the short-list would be politics. Anyone saying that politics would be what would keep Rio out is an oxymoron of a statement & does not fully understand how the Olympic movement runs. Politics is what got Beijing & Sochi the Games & what would be Rio's best chance to get them as well.

[Faster]

I have always said that I wouldn't be surprised in the least if there was only a 3-city short-list. It may very well be that the IOC just wants to play it safe this time around. And like jeremie says, Rio's best chance of making the short-list would be politics. Anyone saying that politics would be what would keep Rio out is an oxymoron of a statement & does not fully understand how the Olympic movement runs. Politics is what got Beijing & Sochi the Games & what would be Rio's best chance to get them as well.

I think South Africa is seriously wounding Rio's chances of being short-listed. Cape Town is in better shape than Rio, has more infrastructure, though some of the same problems, would overall be a better choice. Plus Cape Town is in a good television market for Europe and the drive to go to Africa is probably stronger than to go to South America.

[cfm Jeremie]

As cynical as I may sound, I think Rio would have a greater chance of making the short list if it had not chance to win in the end. This way, the IOC would be in win-win situation: on the one hand they would enjoy the "feel good" factor of encouraging bidders from new frontiers while on the other hand being assured that the Games will go to a risk free place at the end of the day.

"Unfortunately", the sentimental push for Rio would be so great that, should it be shortlisted, Rio could create a major upset.

So unless the IOC can be assured that Rio would with no risk be able to deliver the Games (i.e. be significantly above the threshold), I highly doubt the EB will give Rio the extra push to be shortlisted.

[Rafa]

I think South Africa is seriously wounding Rio's chances of being short-listed. Cape Town is in better shape than Rio, has more infrastructure, though some of the same problems, would overall be a better choice. Plus Cape Town is in a good television market for Europe and the drive to go to Africa is probably stronger than to go to South America.

While I do of course fully support Cape Town, we'll need to look at each city in some detail to be able to make a conclusion that Cape Town is in better shape. It could def be a true statement and I agree that overall it could be a better choice, BUT Cape Town is far from its potential and will still require some major work before it even bids. Luckily the 2010 world cup provides some incentive to get that work done and provides some foundation.

[FYI]

I think South Africa is seriously wounding Rio's chances of being short-listed. Cape Town is in better shape than Rio, has more infrastructure, though some of the same problems, would overall be a better choice. Plus Cape Town is in a good television market for Europe and the drive to go to Africa is probably stronger than to go to South America.

Whether Cape Town would be an overall better choice than Rio is datable & subjective, to say the least. On the other side of the market coin, Rio is in a good television market for America, which the IOC has ignored long enough. NBC is most likely getting very tired on waiting for their investment to pay-off. Europe has already had Athens & will also have London & yet nothing for the North (or South) American television market in-between. And whether the drive is stronger for South America or South Africa is another issue which is detable & subjective. I think both are on par within New Frontier hosts.

[Sir Rols]

As cynical as I may sound, I think Rio would have a greater chance of making the short list if it had not chance to win in the end. This way, the IOC would be in win-win situation: on the one hand they would enjoy the "feel good" factor of encouraging bidders from new frontiers while on the other hand being assured that the Games will go to a risk free place at the end of the day.

"Unfortunately", the sentimental push for Rio would be so great that, should it be shortlisted, Rio could create a major upset.

So unless the IOC can be assured that Rio would with no risk be able to deliver the Games (i.e. be significantly above the threshold), I highly doubt the EB will give Rio the extra push to be shortlisted.

Hmmm. Similar to the Almaty situation _ very close to the cut-off mark, but nevertheless the executive board did not want to risk it getting the sentimental vote

and springing a surprise win. Oh well, we'll see in less than a month.

And James _ as has been said over and over, basing a short list on technical capabilities and perhaps cutting Rio would NOT be a political statement _ keeping it on if it only barely scrapes through would be. I know you don't like technical evaluations, but it is the basic minimum guarantee that city can safely stage a games. It would be irresponsible for any city to be awarded a games of any type without such approval.

[davidp604]

I think people on this board are discounting how Doha could be "the" most dangerous on this list of cities, in terms of terrorism. One of the biggest issues for moderate Middle Eastern countries is how hated their governments are by Al Qaeda and other muslim terrorists groups. Jordan, one of the more western Arab countries, just had a bombing at one of its nicer hotels a few years ago because it was seen as western sympathetic. And since the Olympics, besides the World Cup, is the primary place to promote peace among the world, the IOC has basically put Doha out there as a target for terrorism. Nobody will admit it, but theres no chance the IOC puts the Olympics in Doha, ESPECIALLY with a potential war brewing between Israel/United States vs. Iran, Doha's neighbor across the Gulf.

Also, I think if the IOC gives the Olympics to Tokyo, Denver will have the strongest chance of getting the Winter Olympics in 2018. Denver could have the best current infrastructure for a Winter Olympics of any potential city, given its proximity to world class Ski resorts, a booming economy, one of the largest/nicest airports in the US, and central location in the United States. The IOC should recognize this, and instead might just plan on a Winter Olympics in Denver (despite its history of snubbing the IOC), give the 2018 Olympics to Tokyo and sort out the issue of too many Olympics on US soil. They know they need to return to the US, and if Chicago doesn't get the bid, its very unlikely the US will get it in 2020, given the other strong candidates.

[james]

What we are doing is that we use the most advanced countries to measure who`s to host. I am really deafed to such idea. When it continues that way there`s no developing countries that can be able to cope. So, this idea must be westerners`.

I think there should be minimum requirements and, which countries like Brazil, India,etc can be able to meet. Not just looking at the very best or most advanced infrastruture but other things that are necessary important to a good level to cope with in any country puting in to host, those countries not in the group of advanced(West).

Despite all the critism by many people here , the very best choice for a sustainable sporting life(not through showing off of technology, power, infrastruture and affluence) is of RIO`s chance in the bid. And, I hope itt finally succede.

[Aronious]

Despite all the critism by many people here , the very best choice for a sustainable sporting life(not through showing off of technology, power, infrastruture and affluence) is of RIO`s chance in the bid. And, I hope itt finally succede.

so you're saying Rio has a bigger and better sporting culture than Chicago? Outside of football what does Rio have?

[james]

so you're saying Rio has a bigger and better sporting culture than Chicago? Outside of football what does Rio have?

Thank you for listing one of the very important sports in the world here. Atleast you agree to that and that`s a point already.

[davidp604]

Thank you for listing one of the very important sports in the world here. Atleast you agree to that and that`s a point already.

Brazil is fairly good at basketball.....10-20 years they could be one of the top 5 countries at the sport.

[Aronious]

Brazil is fairly good at basketball.....10-20 years they could be one of the top 5 countries at the sport.

do they have wide scale week in week out support for it like in the US though?

[Sir Rols]

I think there should be minimum requirements and, which countries like Brazil, India,etc can be able to meet. Not just looking at the very best or most advanced infrastruture but other things that are necessary important to a good level to cope with in any country puting in to host, those countries not in the group of advanced(West).

But that's the whole purpose of the IOC's short list, james _ to filter through those bids that meet the minimum possible requirements to stage the games. Once named on the short list, all the remaining candidates are theoretically possible to stage the games. Not all those who make the short list will be technically equal, but they will then, theoretically, have an equal chance of winning the bid depending on their plans, campaign and appeal. It's up to how the IOC members base their choices then.

Let's put it this way _ surely you'd agree that it would be irresponsible to put a city through to the short list, or to choose a city to host, that DIDN'T meet the minimum theoretical capacity to host?

As I've said many times before, hosting a games is a luxury for any country or city. They don't solve a country's problems, help it advance or propel it into prosperity. It's like having a big party to which you splurge and invite the world.

[baron-pierreIV]

But that's the whole purpose of the IOC's short list, james _ to filter through those bids that meet the minimum possible requirements to stage the games. Once named on the short list, all the remaining candidates are theoretically possible to stage the games. Not all those who make the short list will be technically equal, but they will then, theoretically, have an equal chance of winning the bid depending on their plans, campaign and appeal. It's up to how the IOC members base their choices then.

Let's put it this way _ surely you'd agree that it would be irresponsible to put a city through to the short list, or to choose a city to host, that DIDN'T meet the minimum theoretical capacity to host?

As I've said many times before, hosting a games is a luxury for any country or city. They don't solve a country's problems, help it advance or propel it into prosperity. It's like having a big party to which you splurge and invite the world.

He doesn't understand that. He's really a child insofar as his personal choice vs. objectively looking at certain factors in the cold light of day.

[Guardian]

Guess we will find out in 2 weeks from now on which cities will be in the 2016 short list, compliments of that IOC Executive Board meeting in the Hilton Athens Hotel. Here is the reminder link from the IOC web site for those who do not know what will be talked about in that upcoming meeting.

Link: IOC: IOC EB meeting in Athens - 4, 5 and 6 June 2008 - Information for the media