The decision yesterday by the International Olympic Committee to choose London as host of the 2012 Games is a milestone in New York’s quest for the Olympic Games – the campaign is half over. Spectators hoping for New York’s victory gathered at Rockefeller Center four years too early.

NYC2012 began its bidding process aware of the significant obstacles it would face in order to capture the 2012 prize. There was the preconception that it was Europe’s turn to win that was made even more obvious when the IOC selected four European cities for the short list. There was speculation that anti-American sentiments due to the war in Iraq could be a negative factor. There was a fear that 2012 was too close to the Salt Lake City 2002 Games and national neighbor’s Vancouver 2010 Winter Games, creating a geographic disadvantage. Still, the team moved forward with its goals in mind.

But the most unsurpassable obstacles were the four other cities that wanted the Games more than New York did.

New York has a great bid and would certainly stage an outstanding Olympic Games, but yesterday’s vote made it abundantly obvious – the IOC just wasn’t interested.

Voters already knew how vulnerable NYC2012 was before the first ballot was cast, as evidenced by typical courtesy voting, an IOC technique used to try to avoid embarrassing important cities with first- round eliminations. New York’s first ballot tally of 19 votes diminished to only 16 votes on the second ballot, suggesting that at least three voters switched back to their “real” choice. That put New York in the same category as Moscow, a bid that received a scathing evaluation report from the IOC.

It’s possible that New York was never even in the running.

In the final presentation to the IOC, the deputy mayor, Daniel Doctoroff, stressed that New York needs the Games in 2012 and that the land and resources were available until 2012 – an obvious attempt to eliminate any perception that IOC members could pass on New York this time in favor of 2016. But that plan may have backfired as United States Olympic Committee president, Peter Ueberroth, said yesterday that he will open up the 2016 domestic nomination to other interested American cities. The USOC must have some serious concerns if they’re willing to give up a four-year investment in New York.

I think an American bid will be well positioned for 2016. Olympic broadcaster NBC is way overdue for a Summer Games in a time zone favorable for American prime time viewing, and the last Summer Games in the Americas will have been in Atlanta, 20 years earlier. Rio de Janeiro in South America may be on the ballot, but it could be too early for that city to win an Olympic bid. I don’t see any reason why NYC2012 shouldn’t try again.

If NYC2016 is created, it would benefit from presenting a few fresh twists on its old familiar plan.

A new committee would have to consider putting a different face on the bid, one that is more about sports and less about business. London’s bid turned around and never looked back after appointing Olympian Sebastian Coe to replace businesswoman Barbara Cassani at the helm.

While New York emphasized exciting new plans to help promote International Sports Federations and to prevent ambush marketing, the fundamental sports message may have been lost. The IOC is changing. The old boys’ club that used to dominate the IOC membership is slowly being replaced by athletes, a recent direction for the IOC. Future bids will have to relate to the IOC members on the basis of sports.

London got that part right.

The final days of New York’s campaign were highlighted with the stadium debacle and political bickering that was an undisputable sign of wavering government support. London was able to rally strong support that reached its pinnacle when Prime Minister Blair and his wife had drinks with IOC members in Singapore – a move that likely sealed the deal for the bid.

If there were any doubts about the impact of the last-minute Olympic Stadium switch, you don’t need to search further than the question raised by Prince Albert of Monaco following NYC2012’s pre-vote presentation. He wanted assurances that there would be no more venue changes if New York were elected. The doubt in his eyes was likely a fair representation of the doubt in the hearts of his peers who were getting ready to vote.

I think it would be a shame if the USOC and NYC2012 gave up on a New York Olympics. I can’t imagine Mr. Doctoroff and his team would have come into this battle without intending to win the war – and eventually to secure the Olympic prize for the city they love.

Mr. Livingstone is the producer of GamesBids.com.