Jump to content

Booville

Members
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Booville

  1. The argument for Vancouver would be like this - IMO 1. Most of the facilities used previously that would be reused again would in 2030 need only minor upgrades - add another 12-30 years and we are talking major upgrades or new builds 2. Money has already been set aside for some of the community centres that could be used - they are likely to be built whether a bid happened or not, but a Games could allow for better facilities that might otherwise be built (hence public support?) 3. The big social issue in Vancouver is affordable housing/social housing - building a village for 3000+ athletes/coaches etc - convertible after the games would be a step towards alleviating this 4. and of course, the cost of hosting the games, like for Salt Lake City, will be much reduced because some of the more expensive facilities are already in place As a comparison and correct me if there are new plans I don't know of Ceremonies: Vancouver - BC Place (updated since 2010) Ceremonies 54,500 SLC - Rice Eccles 45,807 Hockey 1: Vancouver - GM Place 18,630 SLC - Maverick Center 10,100 Hockey 2: Vancouver - UBC Arena 7,200 (currently 5,000?) so slight upgrade needed SLC - Peaks Area 8,400 (currently 2,300) (i) Figure: Vancouver - Pacific Coliseum 14,239 (upgrade required) SLC - Vivint Smart Arena 17,500 Curling: Vancouver - Hillcrest Centre 6,000 (a) SLC - Ice Sheet at Ogden 2,000 (ii) Speed: Vancouver - Richmond Oval 8,000 (b) SLC - Olympic Oval 6,500 (currently 3,000) (iii) From a pure infrastructure perspective both candidates would need to upgrade some of their facilities. For Vancouver, a couple of main arenas need some upgrade but the main issues would be (a) which could be replaced by a new arena in Newton or the existing Langley Events Centre (5,276) whilst (b) could be replaced by the proposed Surrey Community Centre. For SLC, (i) would need a very large capacity increase whilst (ii) and (iii) would require significant capacity increases. All other venues appear in good working order If Vancouver enter v SLC, from a technical perspective it is really 50-50
  2. and the 1948 Summer Olympics went to London which was not exactly a neutral country in WW2
  3. A United States bid where they are holding the Summer Games two years earlier ... apparently SLC don't think they match up against the likes of Sapporo https://www.foxnews.com/sports/salt-lake-city-eyes-2034-olympics-after-sapporo-bid-for-2030
  4. How about Vancouver 2030? Unlike Calgary, there appears to be a little more support in BC, with maybe 60% in favour of making a bid - 2010 did make money despite what people think with the ex-VANOC CEO pushing the idea ... and a new Olympic village could assist in dealing with the No1 issue of housing affordability and homelessness. BC Place has been modernised into a world class venue since 2010 and a number of the venues such as GM Place (Ice Hockey1), the Pacific Coliseum (Figure Skating) and the Thunderbird Sports Centre (Hockey2) could be easily used again. Whilst the use of the Hillcrest Cenre and the Richmond Skating Oval would be far more problematic due to the success of their post 2010 legacy, a new speeding skating type venue in Surrey and a curling arena in Newton would create a future 'legacy; - this would spread out the venues a little more than in 2010 but in the scale of some bids this would be minimal in terms of distances. Of course, all outdoor events would be held in Whistler. https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-2030-olympics-bid-plan-legacies-ideas It will only be 20years since the previous Vancouver games but St Moritz held in 1928/1948
  5. It is such a disappointment that we don't look like seeing Munich 2030. An international city with direct international connections to five continents, with all the venues already in place bar an extra coat of paint and meeting the minimum capacity requirements without the need to add a single seat Ceremonies - Olympic Stadium Bobsleigh/Luge - Schonau am Kongisee Speed Skating - Max Aider Arena, Inzell Cross Country/Biathalon - Ruhpolding Skiing/Ski Jumping - Garmisch Partenkirchen Figure Skating - Olympiahalle Ice Hockey Main - SAP Arena Ice Hockey Second & Curling - two from Olympia Eishalle, Audi Dome, or further afield Curt Frenzel Stadion (Augsburg) Saturn Arena (Ingolstadt), Eisstadion am Gutenbergweg (Landshut) or Olympia-Eissport-Zentrum (Garmsich) the last 4 either DEL or DEL2 arenas all within about 90kms of downtown Munich. Bavarian sponsorshop possibilities could include Siemens AG, BMW, MAN AG, Audi, Allianz, Munich Re etc. SLC would not be a slam dunk anymore
  6. Do members of the forum actually think this is an option that the IOC might seriously considered if officially put forward? 13 cities with an approximate distances of a maximum 160km between the furthest edges, excluding Kiel. There are 16 existing stadiums of 30,000 seats, 24 large sports halls so 80%+ venues are already in place. The one missing component is the ever problematic Olympic Stadium - a potential remedy will be 1FC Koln. The Rhein Energy Stadium with a capacity of 50,000 seats is deemed too small. They want to expand to 75,000 seats. There are a number of issues with the expansion of the current site that would make it economically unviable to do so under an official assessment. The city which rents the stadium actually makes a loss due to the current capacity. The club have investigated the possibility of a private stadium near the A1 which provides great access. The first argument against will be that fans will not accept an athletics stadium due to the poor viewing angles but in Europe it has already been demonstrated that an athletics stadium always planned to be converted to football (Etihad, Manchester) or one will moving seats (Stade de France) have worked whilst the Stade Pierre-Mauroy was designed for multiple configurations. If 1.FC Koln and the city can come to an agreement alongside the bid committee to build a main site stadium, with the option of multiple configurations and maybe a rectractable roof and you have a happy football team (new stadium, increased revenues, limited building costs), a happy city with a multi use stadium which can bring in additional revenues to help offset any losses if the yo-yo football club continue to up and down and a solution to the Olympic Stadium issue.
  7. It does not seem to stop people saying SLC 2030 is the favourite having just had LA 2028 I'm not sure the IOC can be that picky
  8. I think if Madrid enter the games they represent a severe threat to the current front runner. Facing facts were are talking about the 3rd largest city vs. a capital city and soon to be 2nd largest in the EU. Dust off the 2012/2016/2020 bids there is a low risk bid for the IOC with no white elephants but lacking one venue - the Olympic stadium .... ... how about a temporary expansion of the Estadio de Vallhermoso, an existing 12,000 seat venue with temporary stands up to 60,000 seats currently hosting the Meeting de Athletismo Madrid?
  9. I think Madrid might be a case of 5th time lucky .... if there is the money available there are definitely the venues ... and even the issue of the athletics stadium might be resolved by a temporary expansion of Vallehermoso stadium from 12,000 to 60,000 with temporary seating rather than host the athletics in Barcelona or Sevilla
  10. and of course in 1998, SLC almost went out in R1 and had to win a run off with Aosta After that, the assistance of a few brown envelopes aided the closeness with Nagano They learnt their lesson in 2002 ... bigger brown envelopes from the start
  11. For Lillehammer to add those additional sports would be minimal ... Kanthaugen hosted freestyle skiing and half-pipe, and Hafjell the slopestyle in 2016, the curling already has a purpose built arena and there is likely to be enough capacity to host additional women's hockey games A games encompassing the true spirit of the games vs a games forever tainted by bribery ... clearly an easy call
  12. I think those people saying that 2030 is SLCs to lose are being over confident. After all, it will be only 2years since LA2028, and I cannot ever recall two games (Summer & Winter) being held in the same country in such close proximity of time. With Sapporo it will be 10years since Tokyo2020 though the appetite for these games might diminish if the costs of Tokyo are to be believed. The romantic attachment (if this is to be believed) that the IOC have for Lillehammer will make them a very strong contender maybe without some of the issues that SLC and Sapporo might have. Sapporo will have a lot of work to do to build some of the venues required or expand the footprint of the games to include some of Nagano's facilities such as the bobsleigh run. SLC vs Lillehammer makes an interesting comparison. Unless there is a plan to replace the Vivint Smart Home Arena, the Committee would need to significantly increase the size of the Peaks Ice Arena (2,300 seats) and/or the Ice Sheet at Ogden (2,000 seats) to get to the minimum arena capacity standards though a temporary option could be built. Otherwise, SLC is good to go. For Lillehammer, a similar situation exists with a single larger arena required to meet the IOC's standard if the Hamar Olympic Arena cannot be expanded, and Pyeonchang has already shown the way with a large temporary solution for the ceremonies. I would also not rule out a bid from a central European country like Austria with a combined Salzburg-Innsbruck being offered. Again, whilst the more challenging to justify facilities exist - jumping hills, bobsleigh run - the lack of suitably sized arenas is a problem, though two largish cities could justify a conference facility (speed skating) and a larger sized arena, if not creatively using one of their football stadiums as a temporary solution
×
×
  • Create New...