I bet none of you care at this moment. I bet some of you haven't even noticed, but Rio de Janeiro was selected to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. The games were awarded to Rio earlier this year, and I never thought that they would have won them. In fact, here were my predictions that I made in April. That's right April.

1.) Chicago

2.) Tokyo

3.) Madrid

4.) Rio
This was the actual outcome of the voting:

1.) Rio




2.) Madrid

3.) Tokyo

4.) Chicago
Wow. Can anyone please throw me a bone here? The exact opposite? This isn't good. This is the Kids Bop of predictions. The vise versa. The contrary.
Is it just me, or does Chicago always get the short end of the stick in anything sports related? The Cubs haven't won the World Series since Al Davis, the current and very old Oakland Raiders' owner, pretty much died and forgot to close his eyes and lie down. I know that the White Sox won the Series in 2005, but seriously: Who was watching that year? It was almost like the WS didn't count. The Bears were supposed to be this years Cardinals with Jay Cutler, and his interception count is as high as Chien-Ming Wang's ERA last season. The Bulls haven't done anything since MJ left, and the Blackhawks haven't won the cup since 1961 when there was still only six teams in the NHL. Their MLS team, the Chicago Fire..... well, I don't know how they're doing. As for their bid, even President Obama couldn't reel it in for Chi-town. If the president can't win an Olympic host bid, than no one can. After this, I can only come to one conclusion: Chicago must have done something really bad to make the sports gods mad.
As for Rio, it's almost the exact opposite. Rio had the lowest IOC evaluation score, a 6.4.Even Doha, Qatar, a city that didn't make the shortlist, had a higher evaluation score! Also, Rio's high crime rate couldn't have helped the IOC's decision. But Rio had a load of supporters, over 4 million more than Chicago did.
Uh oh, now I'm felling it. I'm now in the mood to do some Bidotology, or the study of Olympic bidding, a word I just made up about a minute ago.
Tokyo got the highest evaluation score out of each city with an 8.3. Almost as perfect as you could get. The big problem, and I mean BIG problem, was that the 1964 Olympics were awarded to Tokyo also. If this bid were about 100 years ago, then Tokyo probably would have gotten the Games. But the IOC has had kind of.... trend, or should I say, pattern while picking host nations. The only cities that have or will host the Summer Olympics twice or more are Athens, (1896 and 2004) Paris (1900 and 1924) and London (1908, 1948 and 2012). So that means Tokyo probably will have to wait for another Olympic Games. Also, Beijing hosted the Olympics last year, so the IOC wouldn't pick a nation on the same continent as a recent host. Next.
Madrid was the “most forgotten” bid in the shortlist, like the Sacramento Kings in the NBA, the Seattle Seahawks in the NFL, or the Cincinatti Reds of the MLB: Not the worst team, but a team no one talks about. Madrid had a very good master plan on the table. New stadiums being built, ideal setting and transportation, to name a few. But going back to the IOC's previous selections, a Madrid 2016 Games would make it a 3rd consecutive Olympic Games, summer and winter, in a row in Europe (London in 2012 and Sochi, Russia in 2014 for the Winter Games). Back to the new trend. The last time the same continent hosted three straight Olympic Games (in order of Summer, Winter, Summer) was in 1948 for the London Summer Games, the 1948 Winter Games in St. Moritz, Switzerland and the 1952 Summer Games in Helsinki, Finland. Eliminate Madrid from the picture.
So that would just leave Chicago and Rio. The United States last hosted the Games in 1996 in Atlanta, Georgia. It seemed like it was our turn. But then, enter Rio. Here might be the key to the IOC's decision: No South American country has hosted the Summer Olympics. Never mind Brazil's projected economy to skyrocket by 2016, but take a closer look and Brazil, has hosted/will host smaller athletic events compared to the Olympics: The 2007 Pan-Am Games in Rio and the 2014 World Cup. These pretty much acted as set-ups for the Games. Destiny? Probably not. A really big coincidence? Sure, why not.
So my last question is this: Is Rio capable of hosting the world's biggest sporting event? My answer: Give it a go. You never know if it will be an amazing event. But considering the strength of Brazil's economy (one of the world's top five, projected by 2016) and depending on how the 2014 World Cup fares will determine the Games outcome . If it goes well, then we're all set. But if not...... (gulp).