LA or CHICAGO and do you think they would stand a good chance at the others like Rio.. Tokyo and South Africa??
2007-04-14 02:09:50 · 12 answers · asked by whymeagain13 5 in Sports ➔ Olympics
only Chicago or LA can get it maybe the otheres would be nomited at some future Olympiad but as for 2016 its Chicago or LA
2007-04-14 02:39:20 · update #1
Chicago..and yes they do stand a good chance..LA has hosted twice and Atlanta has also hosted the games..now lets have the city of Big Shoulders have it and it more Centralized than Atlanta or LA
2007-04-14 02:15:31 · answer #1 · answered by nas88car300 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well i hate to say it but Chicago won the bid i really wanted L.A. to get it. As for the outlook, Chicago wont stand a chance with the others. I think the International Olympic Committee is going to choose Tokyo or Rio de Janeiro.
But then again they already picked an asian city Bejing 2008
and an European city London 2012.
But Brazil hasnt hosted one and Rio is where the 2016 olympics is going to be.
2007-04-14 09:51:06 · answer #2 · answered by Rex 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Chicago ... It's got so much more going for it. Despite all of the corporate sponsorship... the citizens of the world come to watch their sons and daughters compete at the highest level...
When they aren't competing, they can roam thru the various activities of Chicago a lot easier than the spread out nature of LA...
And Mayor Daly said that if Chicago were to ultimately win the Olympics, they would create a scholarship fund for the athletes of any country that participated...
2007-04-14 08:01:25 · answer #3 · answered by po5myp 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
it's going to be impossible for it to be desperate via purely one vote. The voting shape isn't set up that way. quite, they do an digital pollof all 4 of the finalist cities. (Madrid, Tokyo. Rio de Janeiro and Chicago). the city getting the smallest quantity of votes is then dropped from the poll, and yet another vote is taken between the three ultimate cities. Then they repeat the technique, with the third place city dropping off the poll. So there'll finally end up being 3 votes taken all mutually. 9It's a farly worry-unfastened technique - that way the winner is certain of ending up with a majority interior the suitable vote, quite than somebody prevailing the bid with purely 26% of the vote). I determine that Madrid stands out as the 1st one out. Barcelona had the Olympics in 1992, and London could have them in 2012. I doubt they'll do 2 consecutive Olympics in Europe. i might wager that Tokyo stands out as the subsequent one out, lower back by way of actuality that the Olympics have been merely held in Asia final year (Beijing). yet another attention for those 2 cities being out is the time distinction between those cities and the u . s .. you could no longer decrease value the reality that the television money from the yankee networks is extensive while in comparison with that of different international locations. yet American television needs greater stay events in best time, this is incredibly confusing to do once you're coping with time adjustments of 8-sixteen hours. So the suitable vote will come all the way down to Chicago and Rio. And this is going to likely be incredibly close. Rio for sure has the convenience of being in South u.s., which has on no account hosted an Olympics. besides the incontrovertible fact that it additionally has another subjects i think of their financing isn't as stable as that for the time of Chicago, and mutually as Rio has a acceptance of being an incredible occasion time for the time of Carnival, it additionally has an incredible quantity of crime and poverty. And mutually as Chicago additionally has those problems, it incredibly is probable no longer incredibly as noticeable because it incredibly is in Rio. i will wager it is going to Chicago. no longer via lots - i might wager it's going to be a distinction of 5 votes or much less.
2016-12-26 07:24:29 · answer #4 · answered by harpal 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chicago hands down. Chicago won the us bid for the 2016 summer games. Chicago does have alot going for the Olympics. there's the lake for the swimming and other water based events, and there's three statums for the land based and there will be more built for the other events that are land based. there are other states in the area that can help if needed or other events that could happen.
2007-04-14 09:56:13 · answer #5 · answered by jeangray26 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Chicago should get it. No reason to let LA host for the third time.
2007-04-14 07:49:13 · answer #6 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
LOS ANGELES has better stadiums and more and it has better weather then the windy city it also has more tourist atractions and its just an overall better city and the reason it has hosted it twice shows u how great of a job the city does in hosting the olympics!!!
2007-04-14 09:18:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Either Seattle of Detroit would be good.
2007-04-14 06:46:59 · answer #8 · answered by r o y c e RIDICULOUS :D 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I think Newark, NJ or Detroit, MI would be just perfect.
2007-04-14 02:17:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
chicago........yes
2007-04-14 05:11:04 · answer #10 · answered by 0110010000 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋