One of my favorite affairs to blog about are the Summer Olympics, and one of my favorite posts of all times is this one analyzing the possible 2016 host cities http://cal337.blogspot.hk/2009/10/spo-2016-olympics.html. Well it's been four years and the IOC will select the 2020 host city in Buenos Aires on September 7. I've heard absolutely no buzz from the event this time around and I wonder if anyone cares. Well even if they don't, I do and I'm going to blog about it, mostly for the sake of tradition. In case you didn't know, and you probably didn't, the candidate host cities are Istanbul, Madrid and Tokyo. Candidacies are declared years in advanced (Rome, Baku and Doha were rejected or pulled out) and as you'll see, each candidate city has seen developments since their original bids that will hurt them.
(See also http://cal337.blogspot.hk/2010/12/world-cup-bids.html for World Cup bids)
The factors that I'm interested in are not the same as the factors for IOC voters. I care about how cool the city is, how well prepared its infrastructure is to support the Olympics, how recently the city/country/region has hosted the Games, how novel it would be, how interesting it'd be to attend, how much it would help the city, how much the region loves sports etc. The IOC cares mostly about how much money that city government has used to bribe its voting members. And to lesser extents infrastructure and government relations and financial windfall. Here is how I would vote if I were an IOC member, but I'll conclude by telling you who will actually win.
3) Madrid
The Spanish capital bid for the 2012 and 2016 Games as well, where it finished 2nd to Rio de Janeiro. If you clicked on the first link above you'll have noticed that I ranked it last back then as well. I don't want to appear as a Madrid hater, but it's still a less exciting city for me than the other two. In the last 4 years, the Spanish economy has really tanked, with national unemployment rate exceeding 27%, youth unemployment exceeding 50%, although you wouldn't be able to tell from the €100million transfer fee paid by Real Madrid for Gareth Bale. The city of Madrid has debts of €7.4 billion, and its bid for the games was dubbed "The Hunger Games" in a Spanish left wing opinion piece. That said, the bid is remarkably frugal, offering a $5 billion Olympic Games. In comparison, some estimates put Beijing's spendings at over $40 billion for the 2008 Games. Previous experience has shown that the Summer Olympics do not make the city money in the short run, and probably don't in the long run either. Sure, the Olympics bring in construction and speed up infrastructure development and may create jobs in the years leading up to the Games. It'll of course attract swarms of tourists (even after the Games). However, in Spain, it's not clear that more construction is a good thing. Sorry that was a low blow (or a high blow)?
Madrid does have some world class facilities, including Real Madrid's home stadium Santiago Bernabéu. It's a great sports country with the world's best football team (the national team). It's already got a great infrastructure and is a world class high speed rail hub, the recent train disaster not withstanding. As a tourist attraction, it's got a lot going for it as a beautiful city that lots of people love to visit (top 5 most visited city in Europe) and it's not an overcrowded behemoth. In terms of recent regional redundancy, Barcelona hosting the 1992 Games is probably largely irrelevant now, but Western Europe held the 2012 Olympics in London. For an Olympics that keeps trying to branch out, keeping the host cities Eurocentric goes against that philosophy. Still the biggest hurdle Madrid faces is the financial crisis. You can't have a city that takes on massive debt to host a sporting event, and you can't have swathes of homeless people bumming around during the Games. Will the committee members think that the Spanish government can afford the Games? Will they think the Games can be a boon to the beleaguered economy? Will the 3rd consecutive bid be a charm?
2) Tokyo
Tokyo also bid for the 2016 Games. Repeat bids historically help, as infrastructure gets laid out and plans get to become more detailed and refined. Tokyo is the only previous host in this competition, although the 1964 games are ancient history (Detroit was a candidate city that year, dear God). As the world's biggest city, they probably deserve to be a multiple host city, and they certainly have the infrastructure prepared including some stadiums built for co-hosting the 2002 World Cup. In fact, Tokyo is billing themselves as the safe choice. The Rio Games are behind in their preparation, as was London slightly and Athens majorly in 2004. Tokyo shouldn't have much trouble pulling together the funds and getting a precise, reliable Japanese-style Olympics. The real wild card is the Fukushima disaster, which puts radioactive leaks into the equation. Whether or not scientific evidence can prove that there will be no lingering effects by 2020, the conception out there is decidedly mixed. Some athletes will be scared of competing in Japan and some committee members will reflect this in their vote. Beijing held the Games in 2008 and Pyeonchang of South Korea will hold the Winter Olympics in 2018, but that's really not too much exposure for the continent holding most of the world's population.
Will committee members put faith in the Japanese to put a reliable, successful Summer Olympics? Will Japanese ingenuity make these Games a very special affair? Or is the fear of radioactivity too much to overcome?
1) Istanbul
If you know me, you know that I like diversity and spreading these sort of events to parts of the world where it has never been before. It's no surprise that I'd rank Istanbul #1. However, I'm not alone with this mindset. The 2008 and 2016 Summer Olympics, 2014 Winter Olympics and 2010, 2014, 2018 and 2022 World Cups are all spreading their events to uncharted territories. Istanbul would be remarkable mainly for bringing the Games to a Muslim-majority nation and a Middle Eastern nation for the first time. Turkey is an up and coming country with some similarities to China in 2001 (when the Beijing bid was won). Most excitingly, placing the Games in Istanbul would have the novelty of spreading events across Europe and Asia. Istanbul previously bid for the 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012 Games and is very familiar to committee members. Can the IOC reject Istanbul again??
What's Istanbul's recent Achilles' heel (an ancient Achilles' heel perhaps being Achilles himself)? Well the conflict in Syria probably shouldn't be a factor by 2020, but it's definitely in people's minds right now and refugees from Syria have been spilling over into neighboring Turkey. God forbid there's conflict so far down the road, but I think there is a red line that you can't host the Olympics with a war raging nearby. Istanbul is also under question for its handling of protesters in its public park this past year. It's thus seen as the riskier host city with potentially great intriguing reward. I think it'd be awesome, it's an unbelievably beautiful and special city and would make for a memorable Olympics. Istanbul has hosted major sporting events before, including the 2010 FIBA World Championships, and it'll probably be up for the challenge as much as Rio de Janeiro is. The Olympics would bring a crowning achievement and recognition to a city with storied history that much of the world needs to relearn. Bring the Games to the Bosphorus or you'll have a lot of people giving up on the IOC cold turkey.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the host city, the IOC will vote to add one more sport. The main contenders are baseball/softball, squash and wrestling, 2 of which we're talking about re-adding. Wrestling was unjustly removed last year, a shocking victim of the Olympics cutting weight, because apparently some IOC members don't associate wrestling as one of the quintessential Olympic sports. Wrestling is international, with medalists from all sorts of countries including Kazakhstan, India, Japan, Cuba and Mongolia. It's difficult, impressive and athletic as hell, and it's not a bad sport to watch in person or on TV as long as the announcers are competent. Really I don't have much to add. Wrestling is a perfect Olympic sport, I wrestled in high school, and it better be added back to the 2020 Games.
The three cities involved are all awesome. I really believe these Games will be great to watch in any host city and I'd love to attend and eat tapas, kebabs or sushi. Tokyo however is an overwhelming favorite, and even though Madrid is catching up, expect to see the Games in Japan.
(See also http://cal337.blogspot.hk/2010/12/world-cup-bids.html for World Cup bids)
The factors that I'm interested in are not the same as the factors for IOC voters. I care about how cool the city is, how well prepared its infrastructure is to support the Olympics, how recently the city/country/region has hosted the Games, how novel it would be, how interesting it'd be to attend, how much it would help the city, how much the region loves sports etc. The IOC cares mostly about how much money that city government has used to bribe its voting members. And to lesser extents infrastructure and government relations and financial windfall. Here is how I would vote if I were an IOC member, but I'll conclude by telling you who will actually win.
3) Madrid
The Spanish capital bid for the 2012 and 2016 Games as well, where it finished 2nd to Rio de Janeiro. If you clicked on the first link above you'll have noticed that I ranked it last back then as well. I don't want to appear as a Madrid hater, but it's still a less exciting city for me than the other two. In the last 4 years, the Spanish economy has really tanked, with national unemployment rate exceeding 27%, youth unemployment exceeding 50%, although you wouldn't be able to tell from the €100million transfer fee paid by Real Madrid for Gareth Bale. The city of Madrid has debts of €7.4 billion, and its bid for the games was dubbed "The Hunger Games" in a Spanish left wing opinion piece. That said, the bid is remarkably frugal, offering a $5 billion Olympic Games. In comparison, some estimates put Beijing's spendings at over $40 billion for the 2008 Games. Previous experience has shown that the Summer Olympics do not make the city money in the short run, and probably don't in the long run either. Sure, the Olympics bring in construction and speed up infrastructure development and may create jobs in the years leading up to the Games. It'll of course attract swarms of tourists (even after the Games). However, in Spain, it's not clear that more construction is a good thing. Sorry that was a low blow (or a high blow)?
Madrid does have some world class facilities, including Real Madrid's home stadium Santiago Bernabéu. It's a great sports country with the world's best football team (the national team). It's already got a great infrastructure and is a world class high speed rail hub, the recent train disaster not withstanding. As a tourist attraction, it's got a lot going for it as a beautiful city that lots of people love to visit (top 5 most visited city in Europe) and it's not an overcrowded behemoth. In terms of recent regional redundancy, Barcelona hosting the 1992 Games is probably largely irrelevant now, but Western Europe held the 2012 Olympics in London. For an Olympics that keeps trying to branch out, keeping the host cities Eurocentric goes against that philosophy. Still the biggest hurdle Madrid faces is the financial crisis. You can't have a city that takes on massive debt to host a sporting event, and you can't have swathes of homeless people bumming around during the Games. Will the committee members think that the Spanish government can afford the Games? Will they think the Games can be a boon to the beleaguered economy? Will the 3rd consecutive bid be a charm?
2) Tokyo
Tokyo also bid for the 2016 Games. Repeat bids historically help, as infrastructure gets laid out and plans get to become more detailed and refined. Tokyo is the only previous host in this competition, although the 1964 games are ancient history (Detroit was a candidate city that year, dear God). As the world's biggest city, they probably deserve to be a multiple host city, and they certainly have the infrastructure prepared including some stadiums built for co-hosting the 2002 World Cup. In fact, Tokyo is billing themselves as the safe choice. The Rio Games are behind in their preparation, as was London slightly and Athens majorly in 2004. Tokyo shouldn't have much trouble pulling together the funds and getting a precise, reliable Japanese-style Olympics. The real wild card is the Fukushima disaster, which puts radioactive leaks into the equation. Whether or not scientific evidence can prove that there will be no lingering effects by 2020, the conception out there is decidedly mixed. Some athletes will be scared of competing in Japan and some committee members will reflect this in their vote. Beijing held the Games in 2008 and Pyeonchang of South Korea will hold the Winter Olympics in 2018, but that's really not too much exposure for the continent holding most of the world's population.Will committee members put faith in the Japanese to put a reliable, successful Summer Olympics? Will Japanese ingenuity make these Games a very special affair? Or is the fear of radioactivity too much to overcome?
1) Istanbul
What's Istanbul's recent Achilles' heel (an ancient Achilles' heel perhaps being Achilles himself)? Well the conflict in Syria probably shouldn't be a factor by 2020, but it's definitely in people's minds right now and refugees from Syria have been spilling over into neighboring Turkey. God forbid there's conflict so far down the road, but I think there is a red line that you can't host the Olympics with a war raging nearby. Istanbul is also under question for its handling of protesters in its public park this past year. It's thus seen as the riskier host city with potentially great intriguing reward. I think it'd be awesome, it's an unbelievably beautiful and special city and would make for a memorable Olympics. Istanbul has hosted major sporting events before, including the 2010 FIBA World Championships, and it'll probably be up for the challenge as much as Rio de Janeiro is. The Olympics would bring a crowning achievement and recognition to a city with storied history that much of the world needs to relearn. Bring the Games to the Bosphorus or you'll have a lot of people giving up on the IOC cold turkey.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the host city, the IOC will vote to add one more sport. The main contenders are baseball/softball, squash and wrestling, 2 of which we're talking about re-adding. Wrestling was unjustly removed last year, a shocking victim of the Olympics cutting weight, because apparently some IOC members don't associate wrestling as one of the quintessential Olympic sports. Wrestling is international, with medalists from all sorts of countries including Kazakhstan, India, Japan, Cuba and Mongolia. It's difficult, impressive and athletic as hell, and it's not a bad sport to watch in person or on TV as long as the announcers are competent. Really I don't have much to add. Wrestling is a perfect Olympic sport, I wrestled in high school, and it better be added back to the 2020 Games.
The three cities involved are all awesome. I really believe these Games will be great to watch in any host city and I'd love to attend and eat tapas, kebabs or sushi. Tokyo however is an overwhelming favorite, and even though Madrid is catching up, expect to see the Games in Japan.
1 comment:
Awesome, Cal! you should really send this to the IOC. The one thing I'd like to hear you expand on us how is Tokyo "cool", and for that matter how each of the other two cities ranks on your "coolness" scale. I think it's an important concept, not only for cities with Olympian ambitions, but also for cities that wish to attract investments, talent and tourism.
Post a Comment