Advertisement
BBC BLOGS - Mihir Bose
« Previous | Main | Next »

Chicago's Olympic hopes in the balance

Post categories:

Mihir Bose - BBC sports editor | 18:00 UK time, Wednesday, 22 October 2008

Now you may wonder what the American presidential election has got to do with the Olympics. Quite a lot. At the moment, four cities - Chicago, Madrid, Rio de Janeiro and Tokyo - are bidding for the Games in 2016.

Although it is too early in the race to say who will win - it is another year before the bid is decided - Chicago has generally been considered the favourite.

The United States has not had the Summer Games since 1996 in Atlanta, although it did stage the Winter Games in Salt Lake City in 2002. Given their dominance of the Olympics, that is a long time.

You may think that's a bit rich. After all, should Chicago win, it will be the ninth time the Games - both summer and winter - have gone to the US. Remember, vast swathes of the world - South America, Africa and large chunks of Asia - have never had an Olympics. But then the US, which ends up paying most of the money needed to stage a Games, feels it has a right to them every few years.

The Chicago bid team is well-funded, well-organised and clearly feels it has learnt the lessons of Atlanta as well as New York's failed bid for the 2012 Games, which went to London. But this is where the issue of the American election comes in.

If John McCain wins, then the general view is that Chicago's bid is dead in the water. Why? Because, back in 1999, when the International Olympic Committee was in the middle of its corruption crisis ignited by revelations that emerged out of the Salt Lake City bid, McCain held a senate hearing on the Olympics.

At the hearing, the IOC was put firmly in the dock and Juan Antonio Samaranch, the then IOC president, was summoned to appear. He did not attend, as it turns out, but the IOC has not forgiven, let alone forgotten, what it feels was an McCain-inspired American war against the Olympic movement. Indeed, at one IOC session, members rose to voice their anger about the hearing.

So the view is that if he becomes president then all that the rival cities will have to do to sink Chicago's bid is bring up the subject of the IOC's humiliation at the hands of McCain and the US Congress.

US presidential hopeful Barack Obama

Now this does not mean a US presidential victory for Barack Obama will mean Chicago will win the right to stage the Games in 2016. But it is his city and, given the rest of the world seems to love him, that will make a difference. Should Obama decide to be in Copenhagen next October, when the host city is decided, then that will make an even better impression.

But an Obama win will not solve one particular thorny issue - and it concerns money. At the moment, the US Olympic Committee gets a big slice of funds generated from marketing and sponsorship deals as well as the sale of Olympic television rights before they are distributed to the rest of the IOC members.

This agreement, negotiated in the days when a cash-strapped IOC was rescued by American television and sponsors, is much resented by the rest of the Olympic family. However, despite months of negotiation, no settlement has been reached. If there is still no resolution by the time the IOC meets to decide the host city for the 2016 Games, not even an Obama victory in the US election on 4 November may help Chicago.

CommentsSign in

You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.

  • 1. At 6:32pm on 23 Oct 2008, sweetsmellofsuccess wrote:

    You say the Americans "end up paying most of the money needed to stage a Games". Where is the basis for that?

    Is it because they routinely host them? Well duh, they're the hosts, of course they're paying.

    Is it because American companies are big advertisers/broadcasters? Well duh, all you're doing is reflecting the USA's relative dominance of the global economy.

    You then go on to explain that the USA gets a huge whack of EVERY Games, before the rest of us get a share. So surely they're getting their money back, then?

    Perhaps you could explain the net inflows and outflows of the American situation, rather than make a sweeping statement with insufficient evidence.

    It would seem to me that the USA has had more than its' share of hosting, with two summer and two winter Games in the past thirty years. I would prefer to see the exhuberance of a Brazilian Games.

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 10:11pm on 23 Oct 2008, James-Orient

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 3. At 11:27pm on 25 Oct 2008, sensiblerobsimpson wrote:

    It would be rather hypocritical to sight the fact that CHICAGO 2016 being the ninth Olimpiad to be held in the United States as a major reason for not awarding it to that city considering that counting LONDON 2012 23 and a bit Olimpiads have been given to cities within the current bounderies of the EU,and this out of a total of just 49.
    It should also be noted that CHICAGO has a unique claim to host a future Olimpiad in veiw of its being the only city to have been awarded one (ST.LOUIS 1904) and not thus far not be given another in conpensation.

    BERLIN 1916 given 1932
    SAPPORO 1940 given 1972
    TOKYO 1940 given 1964
    CORTINA 1944 given 1956
    LONDON 1944 given 1948

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 01:59am on 26 Oct 2008, Dennis_Junior wrote:

    Hi Mihir:

    I also agreed with your premises abotu Chicago's Hopes for the Olympics are in the Balance...

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 12:46pm on 01 Nov 2008, Brekkie wrote:

    Far too soon for the Games for return to America - it would be the third summer games in a generation.

    The best result is for Rio to win - it gives South America their first Olympics, and is pretty much in the same time zone as the US, so should please NBC too.

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

Explore the BBC

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.