It is a sign of how much times have changed in the bidding business that Madrid and Rome can perhaps be considered outsiders in the race for the 2020 Olympics.

Time was when Western Europe and the United States could count on hosting a very large proportion of the planet's biggest sports events.

But the decade following London 2012 will see a very different pattern emerge.

Post-London, the sequence of Olympics/FIFA World Cup host-nations - the ones we already know about - reads as follows: Russia, Brazil, Brazil, South Korea, Russia, Qatar.

Not one West European or North American location in sight.

With the Qatari city of Doha entering the contest last week, it now looks very much like the battle for the 2020 Summer Games will be a five-cornered contest featuring Madrid, Rome, Doha, Istanbul and Tokyo.

The first thing to be said is that this is another strong, geographically-diverse field, and one that underlines, in spite of a few jitters, the Olympic Movement's recession-resistant qualities.

No great imaginative leap is needed to see any one of the quintet staging a successful Games – particularly given that Doha has got the green light to host the event, if necessary, outside the designated window of July 15-August 31.

It therefore follows that this could be a very open competition.

There are two reasons why I feel that Madrid and Rome are, as of today, among the least likely winners.

The first is the appetite displayed in recent times by the world's top sports bodies for exploring new territory.


In the past three years, China and South Africa have demonstrated that you don't have to be a traditional "old world" industrial power to have the capability to meet the onerous technical challenges involved in staging one of the globe's great sports events.

This appears to have encouraged sports decision-makers to feel they can be a touch more adventurous in their choice of hosts without exposing their organisations to undue risk.

To combat this, these two old European capitals will need to construct a really compelling narrative, explaining why it is in the Olympic Movement's best interests to revisit old pastures.

(The Winter Games were in Italy as recently as 2006, remember, while Spain hosted a Summer Olympics in 1992, although Madrid can argue it has not itself had the honour.)

As an unsuccessful candidate in both the 2012 and 2016 Summer Games contests, the Spanish capital will be able to play the persistence card that was part of Pyeongchang's winning hand in the 2018 Winter Olympics race.

The technical qualities of its bid will, once again, be outstanding and it has a growing fund of global sporting superstars on which to draw.

But can it unearth that elusive X-factor?

It is worth bearing in mind too that, this time, it must soldier on without the inimitable presence of Juan Antonio Samaranch senior, the former long-time President of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), who died in April 2010.

Rome - Summer Games host in 1960 and runner-up in the 2004 race won by Athens – faces, to my mind, a similar challenge.

As it seeks to concoct a winning story-line, however, it will have some of the most experienced minds in the IOC to draw on: Franco Carraro, Ottavio Cinquanta and, last but in no way least, Mario Pescante are all IOC members of at least 15 years' standing.

IOC President Jacques Rogge will also have spent much time in the city in his long stint as President of the European Olympic Committees, though the Belgian will, of course, remain scrupulously neutral throughout the two-year contest that is about to get under way.

The second reason why I think the Italian and Spanish candidates are up against it as things stand at the moment is the European financial crisis.

As I write this, concerns about public-sector debt-levels in a number of European countries, including Spain and Italy, continue to spook the markets and to cast a shadow over the Euro, the currency used in much of the European Union.

While some might think it absurd to allow current problems to influence the choice of host for a party that doesn't happen for another nine years, detailed plans must be laid, and financial guarantees given, far in advance of that.

Though it may be that Europe's present malaise will be forgotten long before the decisive vote in the 2020 contest, scheduled for September 2013 in Buenos Aires, if that vote were happening today, I think Rome and Madrid's chances would be severely hampered.

As for the other three runners, Doha, another unsuccessful candidate for 2016, will be a formidable contender.

It would be little surprise if it were the best-resourced bid; it may well also benefit from the advice of Mike Lee, the London-based PR guru who played a part in each of the last two successful Summer Olympics bids.


A Doha victory would also repeat a pattern that has emerged in recent times of countries hosting a World Cup and an Olympic Games in quick succession: both Brazil and Russia will be doing this over the next seven years.

This seems a pragmatic approach in terms of maximising the use of new infrastructure generally required by the host of any sports mega-event and preventing herds of the dreaded "white elephants".

That said, I think the Doha Olympic bid may have to work hard to ensure that the controversy overhanging the 2018-22 World Cup bidding process does not affect its prospects.

IOC members will also be aware that they will probably have another opportunity to take their flagship event to the Middle East in 2024, should they so choose, following Dubai's recent suggestions that they are minded to bid for that event.

Istanbul, a huge city, straddling two continents, in a spectacular setting, has a fantastic story to tell.

It also has a history of repeated Olympic bids.

But it probably has the most to do of any of the five candidates to convince the IOC's technocrats that it really can cope with the multifarious technical requirements of staging a Games.

Transport and security plans would, I think, be particularly closely scrutinised, and, based on a visit last year, I think the Atatürk Olympic Stadium and surrounding area would need a lot of work to serve as the centrepiece of an Olympic Games in close to a decade's time.

Turkey, though, is a significant and fast-developing economy of exactly the type that international sports administrators have been turning to with ever more frequency in recent years.


If its technical bid is up to scratch, Istanbul 2020 could take a lot of beating.

Tokyo, which hosted the Games in 1964, faces some of the same "old world" issues as Madrid and Rome.

It may also lose votes as a consequence of the 2018 Winter Games, as we now know, going to South Korea.

In my opinion, though, the city learnt more from its unsuccessful bid for the 2016 Games than any of its other defeated rivals.

Partly because of that, it can expect to have some influential IOC voices in its corner this time.

Though it sounds callous, the devastating earthquake suffered by the country this year could, if handled the right way, help to give a Tokyo bid extra emotional purchase.

Bid leaders might also be well-advised to find a role for Hiroshima, which was keen to bid until earlier this year.

In a city as crowded as Tokyo, however, the actual Games plan – where, for example, the Olympic Village can be located, how visitors and participants will get from A to B, that sort of thing – will inevitably require particular attention.

All in all, I think that Tokyo's bid might require the most skilful stitching together of any of the five candidates.

But, in the hands of the right tailor, it may surprise a few people.

David Owen worked for 20 years for the Financial Times in the United States, Canada, France and the UK. He ended his FT career as sports editor after the 2006 World Cup and is now freelancing, including covering the 2008 Beijing Olympics and 2010 World Cup. Owen's Twitter feed can be accessed by clicking here.