Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dezcrafty

  1. It's very safe to say that Stockholm is very likely to win the vote at this point, considering that they have MUCH more appeal than the Italian bid.

    Now, the question is probably, will the Italians remain interested in the years to come?

    If they do, they might have a good chance for 2030 or 2034

    So it might, maybe, be smart to do a joint award, because, then, the IOC knows that both will accept..

    Unless, both are only interested in 2026. TBH, I'm not sure if this is the case with either bid.

    If either of them are okay with waiting a couple years after 2026, then a double is possible. If not then, It won't happen.

    And although this might upset the USOC, there are other hosts than SLC.

  2. 17 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

    Still not buying this.  If both the Italian bid and the Swedish bid fall apart, then all bets are off.  But then that probably means even less of a chance of a double because what are they left with?

    Salt Lake, Denver, Reno, Minneapolis, Albany, Quebec City, Erzurum, Bursa, Astana, Borjomi, Sochi, St. Petersburg, Beijing, Ushuaia, Lahti, really, the list goes on.

    All jokes aside, there was a time with no elections like this. Remember, they didn't do this in the earliest days of the Olympics (Though I'm not sure if I'm entirely right about that..)

    Possibly, they could do a system like: "Okay.. What's the best host and who are we interested in?". And then they could go ask the city that they chose if they want to host. And if they say no, find another. I remember they did similar to find a replacement for Denver. Hopefully it dosen't go to that point, however.

  3. So if there is a winter games in the southern hemisphere, Why does everyone assume it to be hosted in July-August? This is probably a stretch, but they could, maybe, host the Olympics itself from April-May and then the Para May-June. It averages about 62f in April and 57.2f in May. Not that far off from Sochi. Maybe the IOC could contribute money toward movig snow?

  4. On 1/19/2019 at 1:50 PM, Olympianfan said:

    if Italy is likely to have a down turn in the economy then they will be out too

    Only if that happens BEFORE June. (BTW, that ain't alot of time.)


    On 1/22/2019 at 6:54 PM, Olympianfan said:

    Sochi Russia

    F*ck you


    On 1/22/2019 at 6:54 PM, Olympianfan said:

    If the USOC says NO to 2026 with LA 2028 issues then what would you do? They only have 2 real options Sochi Russia or Almaty Kazakhstan but do the IOC really want to go back to Sochi after all the issues which lead to this mess 2026 will be post Putin era in Russia from 2024 and Almaty Kazakhstan a major city in the middle of Euroasia with winter sporting experience a country with a great economy with great relations with everyone Almaty won't have to build that much to host the Winter Games.

    Sapporo Japan won't have the games until that train line is done in 2030/31 so they are out of the picture no matter what happens with the 2026 winter games.

    Instead of attacking me what is your plan B or C


    Ok.. First of all, the chances of the USOC saying no is, well, slim to none. And even if they do, there's still more than two real options. To name some citie(s),  Ushuaia, Lillehammer, Innsbruck and if worst comes to worst, Beijing. And don't count Sapporo out entirely because of one stupid train line. Besides, there's always a slight chance that it'll get done before 2030/31.

    Almaty might, MIGHT, be given 2030 in a joint award. And that's if they get really, really, REALLY lucky. 

  5. 2 hours ago, RuFF said:

    Does the fact that Stockholm’s bid is private make any difference? I’m wondering if the IOC would consider infusing the private bid with money and attempt to convince the country to cover just security costs? 

    Ok, but the security costs still cost billions. That, in itself, is STILL pretty expensive. 

    Quoting Zeeshan Aleem from Vox:

    Allen Sanderson, a sports economist at the University of Chicago, says that post-9/11 security “adds between $2 and 5 billion to the price tag to start with.”

    That's a lot. And, considering it's, well, Sweden, even that might be hard to get support for.

  • Create New...