|
Post by rubcale on Aug 23, 2008 12:32:37 GMT 1
The final four bidding ciities in the race to hold the 2016 Olympics are Chicago, Madrid, Rio de Janeiro and Tokyo.
It's hard to understand why Madrid are throwing money at it since it is almost guaranteed that they would not come to Europe twice in a row and if they are in the bidding the next time it does they would almost be a slam dunk to win them. They were only just edged out by Paris in the penultimate round of voting for the 2012 ones and most experts reckon that in a final vote with London they would actually have won.
If money can buy them then there is no question Chicago will win but I still remember Atlanta in 1996 - of all the recent Games everyone agrees they were the worst.
I think they should go to Rio. Along with China and India Brazil is is the leading emerging country in the world, and the Olympics have never been to South America before. They have held the Pan-American Games and therefore should have the infrastructure to be able to meet the requirements.
|
|
Si.
Member
Posts: 2,087
|
Post by Si. on Aug 23, 2008 12:55:25 GMT 1
I'd love to see it go to Chicago. I read their intentions the other week. Its all going to be centralised around grant park, the museum campus and the lake front.
|
|
|
Post by Mart!n on Aug 23, 2008 14:34:17 GMT 1
Tokyo won't get it, its so near to China and they are hosting this year, Madrid won't get it, as London is hosting in 2012, that's two European cities on a trot, it be most likely Chicago or Rio, I will have to opt for Chicago.
|
|
|
Post by suedehead on Aug 23, 2008 14:50:11 GMT 1
Two of the last seven Games have been in the USA so I don't see why they should return there any time soon.
|
|
|
Post by Razzle Dazzle on Aug 23, 2008 14:52:01 GMT 1
I also think chicago, i just don't think it would be as good in Brazil in any way and like Martin says the other 2 cites are rather close to this and the next olympics or i would have been tempted by them 2 cities
|
|
|
Post by Panda on Aug 23, 2008 16:38:17 GMT 1
Rio for me.
|
|
|
Post by Panda on Aug 23, 2008 20:16:12 GMT 1
These were the scores given by the IOC after each applicant city had completed the first phase questionnaire. 6.0 is the IOC's benchmark score, with a city being deemed capable of hosting the Games if it scores more than that.
Tokyo - 8.3 Madrid - 8.1 Chicago - 7.0 Rio de Janeiro - 6.4
The following cities weren't put forward to the candidate stage:
Doha - 6.9 Prague - 5.3 Baku - 4.3
Doha's small population and their plan to hold the Games in October were thought to be the main reasons for them not being selected for the next stage, despite them scoring higher than Rio.
The first stage scores for 2012 were:
Paris - 8.5 Madrid - 8.3 London - 7.6 New York - 7.5 Moscow - 6.5 ------------------ Leipzig - 6.0 Rio de Janeiro - 5.1 Istanbul - 4.8 Havana - 3.7
|
|
tdino
Member
*Box of Horrors does it better*
Posts: 1,535
|
Post by tdino on Aug 23, 2008 20:56:15 GMT 1
Do i have to say which one I went for?
|
|
Smurfie
New Member
Old Account!
Posts: 1
|
Post by Smurfie on Aug 23, 2008 21:01:52 GMT 1
Sorry to sound a bit thick, but how does the IOC's benchmark scoring work exactly? 5.1 for Rio for 2012, but 6.4 for 2016?
|
|
|
Post by Panda on Aug 23, 2008 21:22:17 GMT 1
The score is based on evaluating a number of different elements: political and social support, general infrastructure, sports venues, Olympic Village, environment, accomodation, transport, security, past experience, finance and legacy. I don't know exactly how they come up with the final score.
Given that Rio faired so poorly last time, it makes sense that they've improved their plans for this bid.
It was after the first stage of the 2012 bidding that Barbara Cassani was replaced as the head of the London bid and Seb Coe took charge.
|
|
Smurfie
New Member
Old Account!
Posts: 1
|
Post by Smurfie on Aug 23, 2008 21:28:38 GMT 1
Thanks MrH.
|
|
Pablo
Member
*With Great Power comes Great Responsibilty*
Posts: 8,120
|
Post by Pablo on Aug 24, 2008 0:05:55 GMT 1
I'm surprised neither Canada or South Africa are in the bidding, more surprised at Canada as I'm sure they would have had a good chance.
But after London it should be held somewhere in the Americas so my wish is towards Rio hosting.
|
|
|
Post by snowqueen on Aug 24, 2008 15:22:52 GMT 1
I presume they have the capacity to host them so as it is a global event in all fairness it should go to Rio de Janeiro. I would love to see it held in Africa most although probably no country there could afford them.
|
|
Al
Member
Posts: 12,575
|
Post by Al on Aug 24, 2008 15:29:22 GMT 1
Madrid
|
|
|
Post by Panda on Aug 24, 2008 17:12:50 GMT 1
I'm surprised neither Canada or South Africa are in the bidding, more surprised at Canada as I'm sure they would have had a good chance. But after London it should be held somewhere in the Americas so my wish is towards Rio hosting. Canada have got the next Winter Olympics.
|
|
|
Post by -Big Dan- on Aug 24, 2008 17:18:47 GMT 1
Rio
|
|
Smurfie
New Member
Old Account!
Posts: 1
|
Post by Smurfie on Aug 24, 2008 17:23:04 GMT 1
I would love to see it held in Africa most although probably no country there could afford them. Isn't Nairobi, Kenya thinking about the 2028 games?
|
|
|
Post by Panda on Aug 24, 2008 17:26:36 GMT 1
Cairo bid for 2008 but didn't make the final shortlist. Capetown was on the shortlist for 2004.
|
|
frag
Member
*Paranoid Android*
I have no idea what you're talking about, so here's a bunny with a pancake on its head.
Posts: 25,137
|
Post by frag on Aug 24, 2008 19:35:14 GMT 1
Tough between Chicago and Rio, but I went to Rio because the games have been to the USA loads of times before but never to South America.
|
|
Thor
Member
Why can't this moment last forever more?
Posts: 22,606
|
Post by Thor on Aug 28, 2008 9:47:42 GMT 1
I voted for Tokyo
|
|