Two weeks ago, I shared my thoughts on the longshots in the race to host the 2016 Summer Olympics ("Like torches in the wind: 2016's Olympic underdogs," Sept. 26). These four cities - Baku, Doha, Prague, and Rio de Janeiro - are, for all intents and purposes, the little fish the very large pond of Olympic tradition. Considering that the race has just begun, now is the perfect time to handicap the three remaining competitors. Chicago, Madrid and Tokyo are the real deals. Considering that in nine years' time the world's attention will in all likelihood be focused on one of these three cities, I thought it would hardly be appropriate to give them such short shrift so quickly out of the starting gate. Thus, I present you with the Olympic frontrunners for 2016:
Chicago: In the words of All-American Renaissance Man Will Smith, we all know Chi-town's got it goin' on. Although the city was awarded the Games near the start of the modern Olympic movement in 1904, the IOC voted to move the games to St. Louis so that they could coincide with the more popular World Fair going on there at the time, thus boosting the profile of the burgeoning sporting event. Consequently, Chicago has never had the chance to showcase its one-of-a-kind blend of cosmopolitan street smarts and Midwestern warmth and charm. The city's bid looks to be technically excellent: Opening and closing ceremonies would be held in a stadium to be built in the historic Washington Park area, beach and water events would be held along Lake Michigan and famed venues like Wrigley Field and Soldier Field are being considered to host field events. The city has tens of thousands of hotel rooms in the immediate vicinity of the downtown area, and the world-class public transportation infrastructure can easily accommodate the influx of international visitors that comes with the Olympics. Helping matters is the fact that by 2016 North America won't have hosted the Olympics for a full twenty years, meaning that it could be this continent's "turn." The city is easily the leading candidate at this early stage of the game. In fact, the city's perceived inevitability is so strong that United States Olympic Committee head (and former MLB commissioner) Pete Ueberroth is publicly stating that the city is currently running third or fourth place in an attempt to discourage International Olympic Committee members from voting against Chicago in a backlash against its apparent status as the Chosen One.
Madrid: Madrid is this Olympic season's ultimate paradox. Their bid for the 2012 games was one of the strongest - with the backing of influential former IOC president Juan Antonio Samaranch and the memory of the stellar 1992 Games in Barcelona, the citizens of Spain's capital put forth a technically excellent bid that was complemented by the warmth and openness of the Spanish people. Unfortunately, London ended up winning the 2012 Olympics, putting Madrid at a serious disadvantage for this go around. Although their experience in the past bidding season will have only improved their already incredible attempt to win the Games, the IOC's general guideline of spreading the wealth among continents makes it unlikely that Madrid can win for 2016 (after all, two of three prior Summer Olympic installments will have taken place in Europe by the time 2016 rolls around, with Athens in 2004 and London in 2012). Ultimately, Madrid's best chance relies on their being the guaranteed successful alternative if Chicago and Tokyo (and possibly Rio) stumble. Although they may not win in 2016, it would come as no surprise to see a Madrid Olympics within the next decade or two.
Tokyo: Tokyo is the only pony in this horserace to have hosted before - they held the Summer Games back in 1964. Tokyo's bid would bring a typical Japanese sensibility to the Games - they would undoubtedly be elegant and sophisticated, and the financial acumen of Tokyo's business community would make sure the Games stay in the black. The big draw of a Tokyo Olympics in 2016 would be its efficiency. Most of the venues needed are already in place - only two new ones would eed to be built. Moreover, the Games would be centered around an extremely compact area along Tokyo's dramatic waterfront district. All in all, the Games in Tokyo are projected to have breathtakingly low costs. Some say that this efficiency is actually a drawback, as the IOC likes to leave a significant legacy wherever it goes: after all, the technically strong bid for the 2014 Olympics of the Austrian city of Salzburg was rejected because it didn't make enough of an impact on the host city itself. Tokyo circumvents this by focusing its venues in a run-down part of town that would be revitalized by the Games. In addition, it hopes to leave a legacy of hosting the greenest Olympics to date. Although Beijing's 2008 Olympics may scare voters away from awarding the Games to nearby Japan, Asia hosts the big tamale so infrequently that they likely wouldn't mind throwing the region a bone. In the end, Tokyo is positioning itself to be the one big alternative to big, bad American Chicago.
Like I said in my column two weeks ago, these cities, strong though they may be, are hardly guaranteed to host the Games this time. Geopolitical concerns can play into cultural trends and throw the race in a completely different direction, and any one of these current frontrunners could be left hanging. Chicago, Madrid and Tokyo are indeed the most likely hosts for the upcoming Olympics, but almost any of their competitors could snatch them away. In the end, nobody can know anything solid until the votes are tallied two years from now in 2009, but the one guarantee that can be made is that an excellent Olympic Games will be crafted by 2016.
Adam Cambier '09 is taking bets.
