The International Olympic Committee, meeting in Copenhagen, awarded the 2016 Summer Olympics to Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, beating out Madrid, Tokyo and Chicago. The Chicago loss — the city was eliminated in the first round — was a bit of a stunner since it was the pre-choice betting favorite.
The choice of Rio makes a lot of sense. South America has never hosted an Olympics and this choice breaks the Europe-North America hold on the events (2006, 2010, 2012 and 2014). Brazil is also an emerging economic giant, yet a country faced with extreme poverty and a very high crime rate. Brazil is in the Southern Hemisphere, which will make these more like a Winter Olympics (they are set for Aug. 5-21, 2016).
We might never know why Chicago lost. President Obama made a personal appeal to the IOC, yet so did the leaders of Brazil, Spain and Japan. Chicago had Oprah, but she does not have the international star power that Brazil’s Pele does. In the end, my guess is that the IOC simply wanted to try something new. And given the IOC’s checkered past, one can never overlook bribery.
Chicago can also look on the bright side — no cost overruns, huge deficits and white elephant facilities that get used for two weeks and then are forgotten about. Hosting an Olympics usually rewards the well-connected and powerful and leaves everyone else holding the bag. Let Rio have those headches.
on Oct 2nd, 2009 at 12:39 PM
I’m not that surprised the Rio won – but am shocked Chicago was eliminated in the first round. I think Rio faces some HUGE obstacles though. Gorgeous setting, great beaches and beautiful beachchfront hotels – but once you get more than a block or two away from the beach – much of the rest of Rio is as dangerous and crime ridden a place as there is almost anywhere.
And there were two schools of thought here in Toronto on the impact this vote would have on Toronto’s bid for the 2015 Pan Am games. One line of thinking had us more likley to succeed if Chicago’s bid was successful because Toronto being so similar to Chicago in so many ways – including weather – would make Toronto the perfect choice to provide athletes with a sort of Olympic trial run one year out from the Olympics. The other line of thinking is that the Latin American countries will now be happy they have won this vote so will be more likely to support a North American bid for the Pan am games.
But who knows – as this vote proves – predicting how these votes will go is a muggs game.
on Oct 2nd, 2009 at 12:43 PM
I’m glad to see that Rio gets the Olympics. I’m tired of the same old nations every time. Also, with economic times being what they are, we don’t need to be laying out that kind of money. Let someone else have that problem.
on Oct 2nd, 2009 at 12:59 PM
I agree with Jimbo. I want to see the Olympics staged by nations that haven’t had it before. Let them show the world what they can do.
As an aside, I was surprised by the lack of support during the Athens games. Greece was the birthplace of the Olympics, but you wouldn’t know it by all the near-empty stands at most of the events.
on Oct 2nd, 2009 at 1:51 PM
Michael Jordan could have tried to help, not that it would have made any difference, but man what a bitter, selfish ass he is.
on Oct 2nd, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Spanish former IOC head Juan Antonio Samaranch apparently made an emotional appeal to members skewing the first round more toward Spain and perhaps damaging the US chances of getting to the next round.
His plea that he was “nearing the end of my time” resonated with some as I thought it might, but then may have played against Spain in the later rounds.
Rio will have a struggle as host but I hope they will do really well.
on Oct 2nd, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Looks like I am going to add some Portuguese to my repetoire
on Oct 2nd, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Repertoire that is LOL
on Oct 3rd, 2009 at 6:02 AM
Pat having been through a Pan Am bid cycle that lost out to Rio I feel Toronto’s chances are very good at this point. PASO had an informal rotation approach which San Antonio would have disrupted. Too many PASO reps were stuck in their traditions and voted against San Antonio in the final round. I know how Chicago feels when you have the best bid but politics wins out.
When the US opted out of bidding for 2011 to focus on Chicago that changed the bid cycle. Since Vancouver is 2010 that gives Canada enough “breathing room” to stage Toronto Pan Am. Bogota is your other challenger and I don’t think PASO wants Olympics and Pan Am in the same continent that close together. They’ll be upstaged by Rio during the “test” competition that is always held during the year prior to the Olympics.
Good luck on your city’s bid.
on Oct 3rd, 2009 at 8:31 AM
I will so be there in 2016. Can’t wait. Congratulations to Rio De Janeiro.
on Oct 3rd, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Regardless of a person’s sentiment towards Rio they don’t have the economic power to pay for an Olympics. Well, maybe they do at the expense of the people. I’ve noticed that among the powerhouse South American cities Rio is more about the party and Buenos Aires is more about the people.
As many have noted get a few blocks from the beach and you see the true Rio De Janeiro. They’ll do like Athens and pull the Games off with a huge debt to the country. Even with IOC cost controls you’re still looking at a Games with a price tag in the tens of billions. To avoid a publicity black eye they will have to clean up large parts of the city since the venues will be spread throughout the city. If I’m not mistaken it was the candidate city with the worst venue and transportation plan.
on Oct 3rd, 2009 at 3:47 PM
What has been interesting is seeing the conservatives trying to blame the loss on Obama. Anything to snipe at him. Heck, I’ll bet they blame their football losses on him.
on Oct 3rd, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Can’t help but speculate if that videotaped beating death of the teen in Chicago factored in the decision to cut the city in the first round…
on Oct 4th, 2009 at 7:02 AM