Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think our only shot at the Olympics is Los Angeles and New York City. When we try again we must try with these cities.
It really has nothing to do with "the city" it's in. The two most important factors are:
1) Where geographically the Olympics have been held in the recent past (Salt Lake City and Atlanta were rather recent and South America has never had the Olympics)
2) The strength of the bid, IE the proposal each city puts forward.
There's nothing wrong with Chicago and it could easily get the olympic another year. Likewise, L.A. and NYC are not our only contenders. San Francisco, Philadelphia, Boston, Miami, etc. are all possibilities.
I don't think there was any question about Chicago's ability to "handle" the Olympics...of course a city of that size with so many venues already in place and an established infrastructure could handle it. Atlanta also had the venues and infrastructure required to handle the Olympics.
The whole contest is all about politics...and I believe this one was decided long ago simply because of the whining and moaning about how South America had never hosted. It will be interesting to see how 2016 actually turns out.
let's hope all those tourists and athletes don't get robbed!
With Rio putting forth a bid, and giving it a good effort, it was just perceived as their turn, simple as that.
The way the U.S. does things in regards to its bids and funding isn't looked upon very favorably by the IOC, and the complaints of over-commercialization of the Atlanta games might have something to do with that.
The USOC is perceived as being inefficient and the IOC has had some problems with the entity also.
North America has had a pretty good showing within recent years, with LA in '84 (and they got the games by default), Atlanta in '96, Salt Lake City in '02, and Vancouver in 2010. Despite the fact that the IOC chairman said that they consider cities, not continents, the continent does play a role.
I think the U.S. should make a try of it again in 2024. For 2020, I'm thinking an African or Eastern European city would be looked upon more favorably. Depending on how well things go next year at the World Cup, Cape Town could actually have a shot at landing the games. I could see Houston or the Metroplex putting forth a particularly strong bid for 2024.
hrrm... Los Angeles has hosted the olympics twice...
With the last time being 25 years ago; it's possible he/she wasn't even born yet or was too young to remember the '84 games (I know I was; I was only 4 years old at the time). This was an entirely new bid.
Were you sour because Chicago beat out L.A. as the US candidate city?
Uhhh....the Los Angeles Olympics was one of the most successful Olympic games in history. It's the reason there is incredible competition for host cities today.
My condolences to the people of Chicago. I know how important these games were to the city of Chicago.
Important to the city's big shots and tastemakers but not so important to the regular folks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.