71 replies to this topic

[RiceXIX]

I am biased here and would like to only see a winter games held in Salt Lake . However, with that said, it is too soon for Salt Lake. If they were to host I feel that the games for Salt Lake would lose their "luster" if you will. I think that USOC should bypass a winter bid and focus on a summer games for 2024. I would much rather see a summer Olympics before another winter Olympics. Then, say in 2046, we can meet again in Salt Lake .

[Athensfan]

Every city has run down areas. But most also have something more memorable to recommend them. Apart from Tahoe-- which is mainly in another state, my personal experience of Reno is that it doesn't have much to offer.

I loved Athens and much of it is decidedly rundown, but it also has the Acropolis, the Plaka, the Adriatic, etc...

As for Romney, I believe he would cash in some Olympic chips to bring the Games back even if he weren't in office to see them. It would be a part of his legacy.

[baron-pierreIV]

RiceXIX, on 06 February 2012 - 08:59 PM, said:

. I think that USOC should bypass a winter bid and focus on a summer games for 2024. I would much rather see a summer Olympics before another winter Olympics. Then, say in 2046, we can meet again in Salt Lake .

Why do you say that for 2024 when experienced hands pretty much see 2024 for (South) Africa? Isn't that an even more suicidal move than Chicago's 2016 foray when the IOC leaned to one of the last 2 continents that still hadn't hosted an Olympics? Hmmmm...

[Athensfan]

baron-pierreIV, on 06 February 2012 - 09:45 PM, said:

Why do you say that for 2024 when experienced hands pretty much see 2024 for (South) Africa? Isn't that an even more suicidal move than Chicago's 2016 foray when the IOC leaned to one of the last 2 continents that still hadn't hosted an Olympics? Hmmmm...

I concede this is a very fair point. But what if Africa doesn't bid or can't meet the IOC's minimum qualifications?

[baron-pierreIV]

Athensfan, on 06 February 2012 - 09:42 PM, said:

Every city has run down areas. But most also have something more memorable to recommend them. Apart from Tahoe-- which is mainly in another state, my personal experience of Reno is that it doesn't have much to offer.

I loved Athens and much of it is decidedly rundown, but it also has the Acropolis, the Plaka, the Adriatic, etc...

As for Romney, I believe he would cash in some Olympic chips to bring the Games back even if he weren't in office to see them. It would be a part of his legacy.

Neither did Salt Lake...other than the Cathedral which would really mean something only to Mormons. For some people, the casinos are enough reason to go...how else do you explain the successes of Vegas? Monte Carlo? Atlantic City? Macau? It may not be your thing...but for many people, it's their main sport. Besides, Olympic crowds primarily go to the host city to view competitions, and then can do touring later.

BTW, what are the other sites of Sochi and PyeongChang?

Athensfan, on 06 February 2012 - 09:50 PM, said:

I concede this is a very fair point. But what if Africa doesn't bid or can't meet the IOC's minimum qualifications?

I think that will be something more apparent as 2017 approaches. In the meantime, 2022 comes first.

[Athensfan]

Reno is far cry from Monte Carlo or Vegas. Sochi and PC have glamorous Olympic parks. Sochi is a resort town. PC won for sentimental geopolitical reasons that won't be much help to the next US bid.

[Quaker2001]

Athensfan, on 06 February 2012 - 11:24 PM, said:

Reno is far cry from Monte Carlo or Vegas. Sochi and PC have glamorous Olympic parks. Sochi is a resort town. PC won for sentimental geopolitical reasons that won't be much help to the next US bid.

To that point though.. look at how much money Sochi is spending to become a world renown resort town. Lake Tahoe (yes, moreso than Reno) largely has that already, and as history tells us, they definitely have the 1960 Olympics to thank for that. It's difficult to predict the geo-politics of a future race, let alone how much or how little that may affect the bidding. Reno is not a major city, we know this. But as ski resorts go, they can make a pretty compelling case. Is that enough to make a compelling case? Probably not, but I think they have enough to at least present their case to the IOC.

baron-pierreIV, on 06 February 2012 - 06:37 PM, said:

Yeah, that's funny...the core of the Denver bid has NOT released any sort of ALL-IMPORTANT surveys which show that a bid would have at least 80% of sincere, SOLID public support that just won't do a complete 180 if it all of a sudden becomes fashionable to become anti-Games again. Show me something like that; and I will support the city. But short of any solid numbers which can scuttle another bid in a Rockie-mountain-high minute, Denver is just an also-ran to me.

I wouldn't go so far as to call them an also-ran. There's something there, but it needs to come to the forefront at some point. But again, like I've said, and I agree with you here.. they need financial support and a strong local backing before they can even get themselves off the ground. And not that they need to do these things tomorrow, but it's going to take a lot of effort just to get to the start line. Athens, that's why I say Reno is further along, simply because they don't have that giant Boulder (pun totally intended) sitting right on top of them.

baron-pierreIV, on 06 February 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

As for Denver, cities go chasing after this dream for generations. They had it in their hand...but blew it like some whore on crack, and now want other cities to make room for them again? Sorry, you had your chance. Go back to the end of the line and await your turn again.

Again, remember though, and I know you know this.. we've seen these cities compete against each other before. For `92 and `94, you had Denver, Reno, Salt Lake, and Anchorage all in the mix. Then Anchorage drops out because the USOC realizes it's a bad idea, and Salt Lake takes its turn and wins. I know your argument says that Denver had their shot and now they should back off until the others have tried, but you know it doesn't work that way. If Denver is the better option for the USOC than Reno, it's not about whose turn it is. Certainly they have a lot working against them, but those obstacles aren't insurmountable. Extremely difficult sure, but if they can get to that point, their history doesn't mean they should get passed over for a lesser bid if the USOC sees it that way.

[Lord David]

baron-pierreIV, on 06 February 2012 - 10:40 AM, said:

One significant consideration (as Faster has pointed out before) though (for the 3 current candidate cites of the US west) is the luge-bobsled run which I think cost (if I remember right) some $85 million when it went up for Whistler 2 years ago. Squaw Valley 1960 forsook the luge-bobsled competition/track because there just didn't seem to be that many entrants.

So right now, the US west only has the one track in Salt lake (Park City?)...whereas the Canadian west has at least two (Whistler and Calgary). A new one that will be built for use by 2020 will probably cost $100 million then. So the big question for the USOC will be where would they like to see this huge, 2nd infrastrucutre investment for the rest of the 21st century go up? In Denver/Colorado Springs or in Reno-Tahoe? The US teams right now train in Salt Lake and/or Lake Placid for this. So where will it not be a white elephant?

P.S. Or both Denver and Reno-Tahoe could use the existing track in Park City since both cities are about an hour's flying time each. Some $100 million saved from the budget there; and no white elephant afterwards.

It was only Bobsleigh back then and with a mere 9 nations indicated that they were willing to take part. So understandably a track wasn't built and the event wasn't held.

So you're all for peeps flying back and forth for a couple of days (yes I'm aware that each discipline runs for 2-3 days each) to Utah? Well why not save a little more money and use the speed skating oval, biathlon course and ski jumps too? You're all for a mere hour's flight to another state yet not for events to be held in the region (like using Colorado Springs for example)?

[baron-pierreIV]

/\Whatever it was in Squaw Valley, it was something like that. Thanks for doing the reserach. Felt lazy to do.

I didn't say it was my PREFERRED plan. I was just offering it up as a possibility should the USOC decide that cost-cutting was a premium consideration, and building another one for $100 million when after the Games, a 2nd one in Colorado Springs or Tahoe would be redundant. Again, you miss the point and exercise your penchant to build grand-new venues when the money isn't really yours to spend or allocate.

If they can allow distant sites for yachting, football, equestrian in the SOGs for one reason or another, why should one distant venue in the WOG be such an anomaly when it's going to be nothing but an expensive white elephant after the 2-week period?

Besides, such a plan would also include a mini-village there for the luge-bobsled athletes. It would only be the IOC officials who would have to fly in an d check on things. Spectators could schedule their itinerary to set aside a day or 2 at the bobsled site SHOULD THEY WISH. Again, it's entirely up to the individual.

Edited by baron-pierreIV, 07 February 2012 - 08:41 AM.

[baron-pierreIV]

Oops. Just came across something. According to wikipedia:

Quote

Plans to Launch Gay Winter Games in 1986 Fail

Plans to launch a complementary Gay Winter Games, slated for February 1986 in Denver, Colorado collapsed, due to a lack of sufficient funding and logistical problems.

Hmmmm. First they bail out in 1972; and then could not even organize a smaller Gay Winter games in 1986? Hmmmmm, what can these Denverites do right???