How do you solve a problem like 2024? How can the IOC choose between Paris and Los Angeles when it has to decide who gets to host the 2024 olympics this September? The question still intrigues me, as it seems to me there is a hell of a lot of national pride riding on this decision. Both cities have lost out numerous times; but they are both places their respective countries are extremely proud of. I think Paris is still bitter after losing out to London in 2005, and LA equally thinks it's their turn to host. Whoever the committee go with, then, the other city and their respective country will feel slighted. The problem is, the IOC cannot afford to create such losers; they don't want to piss either the USA or france off, as there is a good chance they would give up and stop bidding altogether. After all, even bidding isn't cheap. So what do they do?
Easy: award them both games: one city can have the '24 games, and the other '28. According to this, that's exactly what they're planning to do. I must admit, I'm a little disappointed, as I was quite looking forward to one of those tense, highly emotional moments when one of the world's greatest cities is chosen over another. Were they to go with Paris and one gets to behold the americans in a strop. Go with LA and it would be 2005 all over again. And we Londoners would just get to sit here and watch the fireworks, knowing that we beat them both, our olympics already being done and dusted.
This solution, however, means we miss out on that moment of schadenfreude, but I must admit it is sensible. The IOC seriously does not want to piss either country off. The question remains, though: who goes first? Who gets 2024 and who gets 2028? Well, that's easy. The same way you decide who bats first in cricket, and who gets to kick off in football: toss a coin!
Mind you, you have to feel sorry for the third city bidding: poor old Budapest!
[Edited 14/02/2017 at 20:21:43 - added a bit]