If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the O...
(05-21-2016 11:40 PM)_C2_ Wrote: I forgot to address Vegas: if they got that stadium built near the Strip they'd have not only a new stadium but a new arena within walking distance of thousands of hotel rooms and one of the biggest tourist hot spots in the world. Thomas & Mack was actually just slightly renovated, so it's not being demolished either. There are numerous convention halls and arenas in the area and on the The Strip. I say this to say other than a few events like sailing/rowing, which may need to be held on the ocean front in LA, Orange County or San Diego, most of the venues for a Vegas bid will be within walking distance of each other.
Vegas is not equipped to be an Olympic host. Full stop. They are missing a number of event facilities that you cannot just place in a convention center (e.g. Velodrome). And most of the venues they do have won't support an Olympics crowd. Traveling to the California coast for ocean events? That's not gonna happen. Other than hotel rooms, they are no closer to being ready for an Olympics than any other town with a medium sized university.
But let's assume they come up with a plan to address all these issues. How are you going to host an Olympics in a location where summertime temperatures are near 80 degrees at 6am? You can't run a marathon indoors.
RE: If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
They've run marathons in worse conditions. And besides, the Olympics are scheduled at the best time of year for the site, so if necessary, it can be scheduled in the Spring or Fall, which almost always happens in years the Olympics are contested in the Southern Hemisphere when it is winter time in June, July and August.
And why wouldn't they do oceanic events in California? When the Olympics were in Atlanta, the oceanic events were held in Savannah IIRC. There's no rule that says every single event has to take place a certain distance from the host city or even in the same country unless the rule has been changed/strengthened. Some events of the London could have taken place in Normandy unless I'm mistaken, which I could be. They just encourage everything to be a short distance away from the site of the opening ceremonies, backed by light rail/commuter trains.
If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
London would actually be difficult to pull off because the Olympic Stadium has been converted into a football (soccer) stadium, the basketball arena is gone (although it may still be in storage) and several other facilities have been converted for Olympic use.
Los Angeles would be in better shape to go on 2 months' notice, assuming a track could be laid down at the Coliseum in time. Staples Center could host basketball, UCLA could host gymnastics, Anaheim could host volleyball, USC could host team handball, etc. Football (soccer) has always been spread between multiple cities, but the Rose Bowl could make a suitable venue for the finals, and if scheduled aggressively, most of the Prelims as well; San Diego or Phoenix could have the rest.
That said, it would be more likely the entire Games get cancelled rather than moved at this point. If things are really bad for sailing and open water swimming events, maybe those get moved somewhere. Think of all the tens of thousands of people from all around the world who have made travel plans to Brazil.
RE: If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
They won't move the games. But we'll all be a lot more pissed that they weren't moved, when Zika is spread all over by everyone returning home from Rio.
If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the O...
(05-22-2016 03:13 PM)Wedge Wrote: They won't move the games. But we'll all be a lot more pissed that they weren't moved, when Zika is spread all over by everyone returning home from Rio.
RE: If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
(05-22-2016 12:19 PM)_C2_ Wrote: They've run marathons in worse conditions.
Name one. They were upset about the temperature hitting 80 at the end of the race in Atlanta. It'll be that to start in Vegas and closer to 90, if not above by the finish. There have been no games in a city where the daytime high AVERAGES 105, and they won't start now. It's not just dangerous for athletes - you'd have spectators dropping like flies.
Quote:And besides, the Olympics are scheduled at the best time of year for the site, so if necessary, it can be scheduled in the Spring or Fall, which almost always happens in years the Olympics are contested in the Southern Hemisphere when it is winter time in June, July and August.
And why wouldn't they do oceanic events in California? When the Olympics were in Atlanta, the oceanic events were held in Savannah IIRC. There's no rule that says every single event has to take place a certain distance from the host city or even in the same country unless the rule has been changed/strengthened. Some events of the London could have taken place in Normandy unless I'm mistaken, which I could be. They just encourage everything to be a short distance away from the site of the opening ceremonies, backed by light rail/commuter trains.
But WHY would they do these things? Just because Vegas has lots of hotel rooms close together, and a couple of arenas? They don't have anything else.
RE: If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
(05-22-2016 06:55 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: Time to break out the DDT
Like Jake the Snake Roberts? (Someone will get that)
And looking back at this thread, I can't believe how many times I said I was born in the Inland Empire. You'd think Brookes Owl would have tuned out after a while.
Me: I was born in the Inland Empire and lived in LA.
Brookes Owl: Oh really? (makes argument)
Me: I was born in the IE.
Brookes Owl (thoughts): Yeah, I got you the first time.
Me: I was born in the Inland Empire and lived out there.
RE:If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host?
(05-22-2016 09:22 PM)_C2_ Wrote: And looking back at this thread, I can't believe how many times I said I was born in the Inland Empire. You'd think Brookes Owl would have tuned out after a while.
Me: I was born in the Inland Empire and lived in LA.
Brookes Owl: Oh really? (makes argument)
Me: I was born in the IE.
Brookes Owl (thoughts): Yeah, I got you the first time.
Me: I was born in the Inland Empire and lived out there.
Brookes Owl: [Rolls eyes]
That's about right. Worth noting that every time you type "Inland Empire" I think "Valley of the Dirt People".
You know, it kinda reminds me of that line from Vacation, after Chevy drives the Family Truckster off the embankment...
(This post was last modified: 05-22-2016 09:51 PM by Brookes Owl.)
If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
(05-22-2016 07:03 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:
(05-22-2016 12:19 PM)_C2_ Wrote: They've run marathons in worse conditions.
Name one. They were upset about the temperature hitting 80 at the end of the race in Atlanta. It'll be that to start in Vegas and closer to 90, if not above by the finish. There have been no games in a city where the daytime high AVERAGES 105, and they won't start now. It's not just dangerous for athletes - you'd have spectators dropping like flies.
Quote:And besides, the Olympics are scheduled at the best time of year for the site, so if necessary, it can be scheduled in the Spring or Fall, which almost always happens in years the Olympics are contested in the Southern Hemisphere when it is winter time in June, July and August.
And why wouldn't they do oceanic events in California? When the Olympics were in Atlanta, the oceanic events were held in Savannah IIRC. There's no rule that says every single event has to take place a certain distance from the host city or even in the same country unless the rule has been changed/strengthened. Some events of the London could have taken place in Normandy unless I'm mistaken, which I could be. They just encourage everything to be a short distance away from the site of the opening ceremonies, backed by light rail/commuter trains.
But WHY would they do these things? Just because Vegas has lots of hotel rooms close together, and a couple of arenas? They don't have anything else.
If the USOC and IOC wanted to put it there enough, they would. And yes, having an area with so many hotel rooms like that so close together is actually very beneficial, better than a place like DFW which has most of the facilities already but is spread across every inch of the metro area.
And as I said, the 1968 games were in Mexico City. I couldn't find anything on the temperature then but it's an interior city that is more or less at the same latitude as Miami and probably farther south toward the Tropic of Cancer. I can only assume it was a very steamy Olympics. And a Vegas Olympics, if they were halfway intelligent, would take place in May or September just to avoid those outreageous temps.
(This post was last modified: 05-31-2016 03:18 PM by C2__.)
If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
(05-22-2016 09:57 PM)_C2_ Wrote:
(05-22-2016 07:03 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:
(05-22-2016 12:19 PM)_C2_ Wrote: They've run marathons in worse conditions.
Name one. They were upset about the temperature hitting 80 at the end of the race in Atlanta. It'll be that to start in Vegas and closer to 90, if not above by the finish. There have been no games in a city where the daytime high AVERAGES 105, and they won't start now. It's not just dangerous for athletes - you'd have spectators dropping like flies.
Quote:And besides, the Olympics are scheduled at the best time of year for the site, so if necessary, it can be scheduled in the Spring or Fall, which almost always happens in years the Olympics are contested in the Southern Hemisphere when it is winter time in June, July and August.
And why wouldn't they do oceanic events in California? When the Olympics were in Atlanta, the oceanic events were held in Savannah IIRC. There's no rule that says every single event has to take place a certain distance from the host city or even in the same country unless the rule has been changed/strengthened. Some events of the London could have taken place in Normandy unless I'm mistaken, which I could be. They just encourage everything to be a short distance away from the site of the opening ceremonies, backed by light rail/commuter trains.
But WHY would they do these things? Just because Vegas has lots of hotel rooms close together, and a couple of arenas? They don't have anything else.
If the USOC and IOC wanted to put it there enough, they would. And yes, having an area with so many hotel rooms like that so close together is actually very beneficial, better than a place like DFW which has most of the facilities already but is spread across every inch of the metro area.
And as I said, the 1968 games were in Mexico City. I couldn't find anything on the temperature then but it's an interior city that is more or less at the same latitude as Miami and probably farther south toward the Tropic of Cancer. I can only assume it was a very steamy Olympics. And a Vegas Olympics, if they were halfway intelligent, would take place in May or September just to avoid those oureageous temps.
I don't disagree that the USOC/IOC *could* make whatever allowances needed. I just don't think there's any reason they *would* when there are so many US cities that are better equipped and would better support the games. Hotels just aren't enough to overcome the hurdles. Reminder: Mexico City is 7,200' so the temps for the Olympics were almost certainly mild.
RE: If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
Ha. Like they could move it even if they wanted to. Brazil would sue the crap out of everyone.
Nope, that's not how things work in the modern day. We'll just have to accept the fact that either a bunch of people will get really sick or they won't.
If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
Sick? Heck, the biggest issue is Microcephaly but people aren't dying because of it. At worst we'll have a whole generation of people with really small heads like a better version of what happened to those who double crossed the Voodoo priest in the waiting room on the movie Bettlejuice:
/
If Rio or some facilities were incapacitated, what US cities could host the Olympics?
![[Image: ShrunkenHead-1.jpg]](http://cdn.photonesta.com/images/i16.photobucket.com/albums/b24/msbillen/ShrunkenHead-1.jpg)