wayneofway
Member
- Joined
- March 6, 2012
- Posts
- 304
I always believe it should be award to the best candidate, I don't care what continent it is on, and whether they have previously hosted. Out of the 3, Istanbul was the one I really didn't want.
But who said they awarded to the best candidate? I aggree that Tokyo might be a little step ahead, but they've got important problems too. IOC evaluation comittee gave almost equal evaluations to three cities. Both three cities had some main disadvantages, as a matter of fact, radioactive danger seems the most important one as it is about health. According to the evaluations, for 2012 London was worst candidate and Rio was again the worst for 2016. But, both cities have been chosen as host cities. Actually I'm glad they've been chosen. There's a strong loby work for voting and most of votes are political, as we know.
Olympics is not about just hosting some competitions. The main mission of Olympics Comittee is spreading olympics soul to overall world. This is official mission, which is quite meaningful. We know wherever olympics has been hosted, the youth there started to adopt the sports much. The sports bring peaceful competition and health. I think, Olympics and all other sports are keystones to spread the peace to overall world.