Jump to content

2020 Olympics - Where?


monorail

Recommended Posts

And why can you perfectly see Paris being defeated again? Do you think the IOC could reject them for a 4th time? That would really be a slap in the face to them if it came down to that. But then again, this is the IOC we're talking about.

Of course the IOC could say no to Paris again.

Technically speaking, I don't think Paris could propose a plan much stronger than the one for 2012.

The main reasons for Paris repeated failures are known:

  • Poor lobbying skills,
  • Even if the sports movement was behind Paris bids and involved, mostly politicians were under the spotlights (see Paris 2012 final presentation),
  • Lack of French presence among IF and sports leaders in general
  • General dislike (or at least not particular like) of France within the Olympic Movement

Unless all this is solved (we need to find a Seb Coe and if we can't find a French one, then we should look abroad - just like Madrid 2012 approached Coe at the very beginning), I think any French bid will face tough challenges, especially if faces to a Spanish or Italian bid (Spain and Italy are very powerful among the IOC).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 245
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Why can't you have a proper discussion without resorting to name calling the exact second that someone states something that hasn't received Baron seal of approval?

I remain convinced that the USOC knew perfectly well that 2012 was most likely coming to Europe (the 2010 voting results being one clear clue), no matter how strong the US proposal was. And NYC selection over the other domestic candidates was at least partially the product of sentimental reason (remember how the USOC suddenly chose to change the rules forbidding the Bay Area bid to state the financial benefits USOC would get from selecting San Francisco just days before the USOC vote?).

(I know expect more name callings and "I hope Paris will never ever win the Games")

But why were u throwing that in, in relation to the earlier direction of the thread -- that if your NOC were to enter the 2018 fray, it would merely be to appease 'domestic' issues and NOT because it sincerely believed that its entry was of the right time and the rigth place? That is what I objected to.

So I disagree that the USOC put forward NYC's bid in the same light. So $35 million is just something to sneeze at? Just blow it because it feels whimsical to do so? That's what I don't understand PLUS the flippant tone of your reply.

Usually you're rather perceptive and incisive -- and then you throw in some 'dig' that seems totally contradictory to how you are perceived by your other posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But why were u throwing that in, in relation to the earlier direction of the thread -- that if your NOC were to enter the 2018 fray, it would merely be to appease 'domestic' issues and NOT because it sincerely believed that its entry was of the right time and the rigth place? That is what I objected to.

So I disagree that the USOC put forward NYC's bid in the same light. So $35 million is just something to sneeze at? Just blow it because it feels whimsical to do so? That's what I don't understand PLUS the flippant tone of your reply.

Usually you're rather perceptive and incisive -- and then you throw in some 'dig' that seems totally contradictory to how you are perceived by your other posts.

Just to make things clear: I wouldn't approve the French NOC putting forward a candidate if it believes it has no chance.

But there has been a change of mood recently within the CNOSF that makes me think such a move cannot be completely ruled out (and I stand by my assessment that any of the French potential 2018 bids would stand very little chance against PC / Munich).

And I am personally convinced that, although 2012 might have been at one point an interesting window for USOC, the 2010 voting results (where an overwhelming majority of the votes that initially went to Salzburg then went to Vancouver) was a very clear sign that: Europe wanted 2012 and that backing Vancouver for 2010 was part of this strategy (Vancouver 2010 being most likely to hurt a North-American bid than PC 2010).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to make things clear: I wouldn't approve the French NOC putting forward a candidate if it believes it has no chance.

But there has been a change of mood recently within the CNOSF that makes me think such a move cannot be completely ruled out (and I stand by my assessment that any of the French potential 2018 bids would stand very little chance against PC / Munich).

And I am personally convinced that, although 2012 might have been at one point an interesting window for USOC, the 2010 voting results (where an overwhelming majority of the votes that initially went to Salzburg then went to Vancouver) was a very clear sign that: Europe wanted 2012 and that backing Vancouver for 2010 was part of this strategy (Vancouver 2010 being most likely to hurt a North-American bid than PC 2010).

well, those reasonings/explanations sure didn't come thru in your previous posts.

Anyway, re 2012, yeah, the 2010 result sure colored the outcome of Singapore. I overlooked that factor and/or was too partisan to think objectively since I don't think there will be another race when the Top 3 jewels of 'western' civilization, as we know them today, would compete so vigorously against each other for such a high-profile prize. Even if the USOC read it that strongly, I doubt that they would've sat 2012 out and asked NYC to wait for 2016.

There are/were certain factors in the recent summer US bids that won't wait another quadrennial; namely the rights to the main stadium/prospective village sites. See, the option for the prospective 2012 NYC Village was only available for that one time. Similarly, the adjoining juxtaposition for SF 2016's Candlestick location (for the main stadium)/Hunters Point Village, would only align for 2016. Just like the Michael Reese Hospital site for Chicago's possible OV (or addition thereof) only became recently and most serendipitously available.

The choice real estate in major US cities (for optimum brand-new OV locations) are just too valuable and can't stay on hold for the next quadrennium to be developed. That Michael Reese Hospital site might no longer be available for a Chicago 2020 bid if the USOC were to have Chicago bid again. And which is why the USOC just goes ahead -- because the prime locations would probably not be available in the next round.

You can't win the lottery if you ain't in it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

istanbul will be the 16th economical biggest city in world 2020 and turkey will be equal to italy 12th ....

while brazil is the 10 th biggest economy and the rio will be in 31th richest city 2020

2 economical big countries never host Olympic games in that region. unique in their applications and their situations in world... they all deserve the olympics

SA will has a big supporting wave after 2010 world cup. and being in afirca is a big +

so i said istanbul rio and cape town must be the 3 candidates for 2020

Link to post
Share on other sites
And I am personally convinced that, although 2012 might have been at one point an interesting window for USOC, the 2010 voting results (where an overwhelming majority of the votes that initially went to Salzburg then went to Vancouver) was a very clear sign that: Europe wanted 2012 and that backing Vancouver for 2010 was part of this strategy (Vancouver 2010 being most likely to hurt a North-American bid than PC 2010).

Well, some say (not me really, since I don't really buy into the following theory) that Vancouver mainly won as a "consolation prize" for Toronto's failed summer bid. I really don't think that the IOC has that much remorse for the losing cities. They could probably give a rats a$s, really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't read all the updated posts to this topic, but if Rio does win 2016, I can assume that the USOC will want to bid for the 2020 Olympic Games. The bigger question is that whether it really wants to bid for the 2018 Winter Olympics, too. We can almost guess how some of us GB members here are going to say about that prospect. Besides, if Chicago does not win 2016, do you think it will try again?

If Chicago fails in it's 2016 quest, it's a good question whether they'll try again. Several scenarios would have to be looked at for starters. First, would the city want to try again. Mayor Daley can be stubborn at times, & he could be like Mayor Bloomberg of NYC; If they don't get it the first time, then forget it. Another element that would have to be looked at is, if they failed, how badly did they fail. If as bad as NYC 2012, then the USOC could just automatically start looking at other candidates. I'm sure L.A. would start jumping at the heels again, along with maybe Houston, too. :rolleyes:

Personally, I'm not so sure if the USOC would want to try again for 2020, since this 2016 run wasn't sure to take off at one point. The USOC made it very clear at the beginning that they didn't want to go for it this time around, unless they really believed they had a very good shot at this. So a consecutive failure would probably make them sit the next one out. Which, at the same time, I think would be a big mistake cause the Games would surely be ripe to come back to N.A. by then. And the Canadians, I'm sure would launch a bid right away if that were the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it won't.. or, almost surely not by Rome which I even doubt will bid for 2020.

So no noise from Rome if they are or are not interested in 2020? I thought they were so gung-ho at one point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, some say (not me really, since I don't really buy into the following theory) that Vancouver mainly won as a "consolation prize" for Toronto's failed summer bid. I really don't think that the IOC has that much remorse for the losing cities. They could probably give a rats a$s, really.

We all know that the IOC members vote for such or such city for a combination of reasons.

I do think that some of the IOC members (how many? no idea) did probably vote for Vancouver partly as a consolation for Toronto 2008.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought Vancouver won because:

Consolation for Toronto

A relatively decent bid, combined with two mediocre bids from Salzburg and Pyeongchang.

The European factor

Beijing

I feel that giving the games in 2016 to Rio and 2018 to Pyeongchang would be the best possible result for a European games in 2020.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2016 & 2018 Games going to Chicago & Pyeongchang would yield the best possible result for a European Games in 2020. If anything, Rio getting 2016 would put Europe & North America in real contention for 2020, since Toronto would probably also throw their hat in the ring.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The 2016 & 2018 Games going to Chicago & Pyeongchang would yield the best possible result for a European Games in 2020. If anything, Rio getting 2016 would put Europe & North America in real contention for 2020, since Toronto would probably also throw their hat in the ring.

If Toronto does, Mexico would have an equally valid claim since, like Rio, they would've hosted PanAms 2011 and therefore have a calling card for the 2020 selection in 2013. Altho 2 Summer Olympiads in the Americas would not be probable.

But I think that the IOC will be somewhat sensitive to FIFA going to Africa in 2010, South America after that, and they haven't (if it gives 2016 to Chicago). If Chicago does indeed get 2016, and South Africa gets good grades for WC 2010, that would be the best case for the first SOGs south of the equator for 2020.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tokyo and Madrid are very very good bids, but Beijing resp. London are much too close...

I think so. But they got the highest scores in June, more than 1 point better than Chicago and Rio.

I'd like South Africa to host 2020 Olympics if Madrid hosts them in 2016. If not, which is much more probable, then Madrid 2020 and Cape Town 2024.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought as a Singaporean you have heard something called Wawasan 2020 ? A malaysian goverment project, that also the reason why they didn't support 2010 YOG, because they want to focus to 2020

Yes, I have but still I don't see KL bidding. The Malaysian government needs to support it, which I feel they're not doing.

Take the Malaysia FA , the local professional leauge there is just ____. There isn't much funding for it nor are the crowds there . Same goes the national football team. During the Asian Cup, Malaysia hosted, the stadium was hardly half-filled and there wasn't many home supporters as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kuala Lumpur stands virtually no chance anyway, against the new-frontiers like Rio, Cape Town, Istanbul or even New Dehli. And with Tokyo wanting the Summer Games as well, that just puts KL's chances even further back, as far as the next Asian Games go.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think so. But they got the highest scores in June, more than 1 point better than Chicago and Rio.

I'd like South Africa to host 2020 Olympics if Madrid hosts them in 2016. If not, which is much more probable, then Madrid 2020 and Cape Town 2024.

Like the others IMHO, Madrid doesn't have any chance to get 2016 games :), for me 2016 is a race between Chicago and Rio which Chicago have a better chance maybe 55-45 for Chicago, and 2020 will be the battle of new frontier Rio vs Capetown, maybe Istanbul have a little chance too in 2020, KL ? for me KL really doesn't have any chance, like FYI said, not in 2020.. and for Madrid, I think best chance for she is in 2024, which I think 2024 will be battle of european city Paris, Madrid, Milan, Berlin (If the don't pull Munich in winter games), and IMHO Madrid have a same chance as Paris, and Milan in 2024 :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, see the thing I see with Madrid is that there hasn't been enough variety from Europe in recent years to merit an other Summer Olympics in Spain. In a 40+ year period you have Germany-Russia-Spain-Greece-United Kingdom, and then Spain again? No France? No Scandinavia or Low Countries? No Eastern Europe?

Kind of the same I see with the news that Saint Petersburg wants 2020. Just 6 years after Sochi? Why not wait until after you have proven yourselves? Or at least overcome the Olympic fatigue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm, see the thing I see with Madrid is that there hasn't been enough variety from Europe in recent years to merit an other Summer Olympics in Spain.

I hate to disagree but doesn't Spain's win in the Euro and Nadal's win in the Wimbleton count for anything ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I hate to disagree but doesn't Spain's win in the Euro and Nadal's win in the Wimbleton count for anything ?

Could be. But the US was winning quite a few international tournaments from 1933 - 1976, yet was denied the Summer (and Winter) Olympics by the Eurocentric IOC for a good 43 years despite:

1. being the top medal winner in the Summer Games until about 1956 (when the Russkies came in);

2. having multiple cities bidding; and

3. an American (Avery Brundage) heading the IOC for most of those fallow years. (Actually maybe Brundage didn't want to appear favoring American cities, which is why he made sure NO American cities won during his terms.)

So, in the grand scheme of things, those 2 recent Spanish victories might seem like 2 little blips on the achievement radar.

But who knows how the IOC thinks? Per Puppy and Jeremie, and w/ or w/o the presence of the Samaranches, Spain seems to have a secret cult following w/in the IOC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
Cause it's a unique bid? Cause it's 2 geographically close cities? Cause funding can come from both governments and public populations? Cause there's already an ease of travel between cities by both citizens? (Which shouldn't be a problem during the games for visitors and locals alike)

While Canadians and Americans can cross the border fairly readily, that is certainly NOT the case for foreign nationals. Trying to ferry thousands of people from 200 countries across the border on a daily basis without interrupting the hundreds of billions of dollars in trade that cross the Detroit river every year. Even if the IOC would consider it, this is a major technical weakness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In general I'm in favor of having new areas host the games. Its a shame that for an international competition, the hosting has been so heterogenous. I think Cape Town has an excellent chance. I also think Rio will put forth a strong bid if they don't get 2016. I think the dark horse in all of this is India. They have an emerging economy and if they do well in hosting the 2010 Commonwealth games they have a good shot. The UK has said it will throw its support behind India and China has hinted at the same. 1/7 of the world's population... its time for India to get the world stage

Link to post
Share on other sites

India has the same problem has China though, poor human rights record, the Kashmiri issue, always the threat of war with Pakistan, pollution, and a poor sports record.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...