Starting Friday, Washington will be the first of four finalists bidding to be the U.S. candidate for the 2012 Summer Olympic Games to be visited by a 14-member evaluation team from the United States Olympic Committee (USOC).
USOC spokesman Bob Condron told the Washington Post “we’re in the ninth inning. We’re not hitting infield now, or taking batting practice. This is the last show-and-tell before (the evaluation team) reconnects and comes up with a recommendation”.
The USOC announced it would narrow the field of four to two in September.
Dan Knise, president and chief executive of the Chesapeake Region 2012 Coalition said, “we’re still confident. The pressure is building a bit. It’s exhilarating. I think there’s something about being able to see the finish line that’s motivating to any team”.
Charles H. Moore, USOC committee chair said it was back to square one. “It would be very unfair if we just built on where we were”.
The Washington Post reports that Moore made it clear that the Washington-Baltimore bid team improved its status by virtue of a drastic reshaping of its bid plan. The revision, said the newspaper, by far the most radical of the four bids, moved seven sports from Virginia or Maryland into the District and plans a central Olympic park in the area around RFK Stadium.
Moore added, “some (bids) have really helped themselves. Obviously we need to take that into consideration… Let’s take Washington. There’s no question the change to their venues is a plus”.
And Condron said, ”it’s (been) very well received… It’s as good as it seems. It’s excellent. On the other hand, we have four excellent bids”.
The team will not be visiting Baltimore this time, which has disappointed Knise.
John P. Bevilaqua, president and chief executive of Creative Marketing Strategies Inc. in Atlanta, who has attended 10 Olympic Games, believes that New York and Washington have good solid bids. “I think they would have to stumble badly during these visits in order to drop into a second tier. I don’t see that happening”.
Dan Doctoroff, head of New York’s bid said “we have made enormous progress. The city and state have moved forward aggressively now to move this thing ahead”.
The Washington Post said New York’s bid received a blow from IOC member Dick Pound. The newspaper quoted a Toronto Star article which was later reported on GamesBids.com, in which IOC member Dick Pound said that New York would “never, ever, ever win (an IOC vote). It’s a mess. It’s not possible to hold anything of that nature in New York”.
In a telephone interview with the Washington Post Doctoroff said, “those are the same questions everybody has about an Olympics in New York. How will everybody get around? That’s the beauty of the Olympic X…it provides the most compact Olympic plan in history”.
Doctoroff was referring to New York’s transportation plan called the Olympic X, a water and rail transit system that connects nearly all of the venues within New York’s city limits.
The Post article said that organizationally Houston boasted one of the strongest bids from the start. The bid was so solid from day one, Houston 2012 Foundation President Susan Bandy said that Houston has seen no need to change a single thing in the last year.
“We feel like what we put together was right the first time”, she said.
Judging by an editorial on its Web site dated May 5, 2002, GamesBids.com tends to agree.
San Francisco has made several venue changes as requested by the USOC. Ann Cribbs, head of San Francisco’s bid said, “we believe our bid can win in an international arena. People love to come to San Francisco”. She added, “I’m sure we all feel a little more pressure to really perform well and show off our areas to the best of our ability”. But “we’ve had a lot of fun along the way”.
The USOC will have other questions for the bid cities. How will they plan to handle the Paralympics and how do they intend to develop productive partnerships with the USOC.
