Jump to content

The Moose

Members
  • Posts

    400
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Moose

  1. IOC originally demanded the technical manual to be kept restricted. However, that would have been in violation of Norwegian law regarding public access to government documents. In Norway,any citizen can in principle ask for any local or national government document. There are exceptions, of course, like medical records or matters of national security. Although these revelations further tainted the IOC in the public eye they were hardly decisive.
  2. Btw:Many people have commented the bid might have had a better chance if the committee / government had been even more critical to IOC and gotten clear concessions. As we all know, that would most likely have been impossible, however.
  3. To Rob:The IOC's communication since the Oslo decision is indeed curious. It is not true that the case that the Norwegians did not come to IOC meetings, but contrary perhaps to the IOC wishes it was in good Nordic tradition the topical experts, i. e. the ones that can ask the right questions, rather than the high-flying cocktail drinkers. I firmly believe that what we have seen here is a culture clash. The leader of the Oslo city government, a strong supporter of the bid, was lashing out on IOC today saying that he never has met anyone so focused on etiquette and titles. Further, the IOC blame the decision on half truths, but is not able to be specific. In reality, however, nothing of this mattered for the decision. What was important for the conservative party,most likely was the lack of popular support, the costs, and the survival of the national government coalition.
  4. ;-D (although you need to drive 6 hours from Oslo to get a landscape that resembles this. My last post was supposed to answer Baron's "frozen" post...
  5. As said before,I have seen this coming for years, and I fully support the decision. Part of the reason is IOC and its arrogance and the incredibly high costs. At least as important, however, was the arrogance of the Oslo elite, perceived by many having stolen the games from Oslo. Together with the clear no by the other governing party, the progress party, the Oslo 2022 was an impossible political project. High costs on something most people did not want, risking to ruin the government coalition.
  6. What I meant was that Oslo would be no better than a third or fourth best potential candidate from Norway. The Oslo candidacy has at least five main weaknesses IMO: Distances. They call themselves compact games, but the reality is that the distance from Oslo to Kvitfjell is more than 230 km, or three hours of driving and usually even more by train. Within the so-called Lillehammer cluster the distances are 50 km / 45 minutes from the sliding events to downhill at Kvitfjell. Potential other Norwegian candidates (Tromsø, Trondheim, even Trondheim - Åre, or the more speculative Drammen and Bergen / Ålesund) are significantly more compact. Fog. Three out of four WC in Nordic skiing that has taken place in Oslo has been marked by dense fog. In two WCs, like in 1982 below, the winner of the ski jumping competitions could not be seen, as this image from 1982 illustrates...http://gfx.nrk.no//cvn6v6kAZjaytSFX8Ha82Qe8TV9RCVGq6U-KB_vhd0QA At least neither Trondheim or Tromsø have similar problems. Some will argue that there is not a fog problem in February. This is very wrong. The fog was also discussed here: http://www.gamesbids.com/forums/topic/21127-oslo-2022/page-13 Snow cover: Oslo has the least reliable snow cover of the three candidates (Oslo, Tromsø, Trondheim) in the 2018 bid. With global warming, this will not improve. I am sure they will be able to stage the snow events as planned using underfrozen tracks and artificial snow, but the landscape around as well as the city will be glum. Landscape: Oslo is located in the least scenic region of Norway, and the Lillehammer region / Kvitfjell is not much better. Logistics: The recent 2011 WC in Nordic Skiing was a logistic nightmare, where people were stuck in hours without reaching the events they had paid for. This was in quite stark contrast to the 1997 WC in Trondheim which in fact had even more spectators. Now, this can probably be improved, but the negative experience will still be in Oslo's disfavour in any bid. Regarding the costs, the costs numbers of Oslo (34 billion NOK) are already significant higher than Tromsø's (28.9 billion), even if the Oslo bid has not yet gone through a quality assurance process which in Tromsø's case raised the bill from 15.5 billion NOK. Hence, a state guarantee of around 50 billion NOK / 10 billion USD may be expected. In the current budget, only about 15 % will go to public investments. The rest of the costs are for planning and operations of the games, as well as for support to private entrepeneurs for media centers and participants villages etc.. Less than 5 % are for transport infrastructure, while the remaining 10 % or so are for sport infrastructure. Regarding the size of the public investments, the experience from public projects almost always become higher in the capital area than in other places of the country, just compare the costs of theatres, concert halls, museums, and, more relevant, world championships. In the Tromsø candidacy, which I did not support, btw, they planned using a lot of temporary venues. This may seem like a vaste, but is considerably cheaper, and lets face it: venues built to Olympic specifications has very little value after the games. When it comes to sport venues for the ordinary man and women, we can get far more, for far less, without an olympics. An often heard argument for olympics is that it will improve the image of Norway abroad, and hence spur increased tourist traffic and bussiness in other parts of the society. This is where I am most concerned about an Oslo WOG. My fear is that a foggy, snowless WOG in a dreary forested landscape would repel more tourist than it will attract. Tourists don't come to Norway to see Oslo, they come to see fjords and mountains, and if anything, an Oslo WOG can spoil this image. I do not think 50 billion for 3 weeks of fun, with very little left in terms of long term benefits, is not something any sane government will take on easily, especially if they now that such a move will enrage a large part of their constituencies. The lack of sense of reality from some of the profilic Oslo 2022 agitators do not really help their case, like Inge Andersen managing to say that the government now should follow the will of the people (when in fact, only a single digit percentage of Norwegian voters had been asked), or hotel owner Petter Stordalen claiming that "this is what we should make our income on after the oil". Your comment about "unsustainable infrastructure investments" outside Oslo I am tempted to put in the same class. It does not seem like you know the rest of your country very well.....
  7. Yes, and although Oslo2012 won the local referendum after a massive campaign, the Oslo bid is still very controversial around the country. Spending 10 b$ on a sport event in the capital will alienate far more voters for the political parties than it will win, particularly after the dodgy process since the 2018 bid, which has embittered many people around the country. One of the major parties on the victorious right side of the national election has made a clear position against any government guarantee, the other parties have no official stance yet, but I would be very surprised if Oslo2012 get the go once the final price tag is announced. As stated in before many years ago now, I think Oslo is the third or fourth best option for Norway, and although I am a very interested in winter sports, I do not think Oslo2012 is something to spend national funds on. That I'm also increasingly skeptical to the IOC concept overall is a different story.
  8. What I noticed was that a certain word was substituted with ****, but I guess I should learn to watch my mouth....
  9. Thought I should give Sweden a neighborly hand here.... Sweden has about 10 % more people than Quebec, and about 10 % higher GDP. I don't see your point. And GDP is not everything. Norway has significantly higher GDP per capita than Sweden, but it is Sweden, not Norway, that probably is probably the most well-organized country in the world. Swedish infrastructure is in general very good. There are about 60 000 people living in Ôstersund, actually. Not a metropolis, but much larger than for instance Lillehammer. Being the largest winter resort of Scandinavia, Åre alone has about 35 000 guest beds, and there is roughly a similar number in the nearby Härjedalen. No real sport enthusiasts give a **** about the ceremonies anyway, hmh I might not have many supporters on that view in here.... Having said this, Munich will probably be hard to beat if they try to pull off a 2022 application, in which case a the next European opportunity might be 2030. ^^Interesting sensorship functionality detected in the above post...
  10. Regarding Norway's bid, that was exactly my point. IOC member Gerhard Heiberg headed the Lillehammer WOG, and there is currently a lot of pro-Oslo people in the boards of the sports associations / NOC currently, so with the process closed, they will probably select Oslo, probably with a Lillehammer satelite again. However, an Oslo WOG in 2022 is in my mind very unlikely. Firstly, because it will have a hard time getting enough political and popular support. In the 2018 round, the government made it pretty clear that it would not support an Oslo application, and still the same parties are in the government. Secondly, I believe it would be an easy match for München, Sweden, or even Switzerland, if any of these are to apply. An application associated with Lillehammer is simply too soon after 1994, and even the 1952 Oslo games could be a problem. An Oslo-application would also clearly be the least spectacular among the 2018 proposals. Regarding France, they are clearly not among my personal favorites. A great country, but Albertville was not the best games, and compared with N/S/D their winter sport traditions are limited. I don't really buy your "Alps" argument. The reason that there has been many more games in the Alps than in the Nordics is mainly that there are many more countries with downhill possibilities to choose between there. In Northern Europe we only have Norway and (perhaps) Sweden. Winter nations like Finland, Netherlands, and Estonia will never have a WOG.
  11. Yes. Other alpine disciplines could be closer though, but in the 2018 proposal Oppdal had all the alpine skiing, while Vassfjellet 24 km away from the city center had freestyle and snowboard. Vassfjellet should also be suitable for slalom and giant slalom, but I guess they wanted to have the alpine disciplines together. It is also possible to stage at least freestyle and snowboard in a hill about 9 km to the west from the city center.
  12. In my mind, 2022 should be ripe for a WOG in traditional winter sport climate and culture after two consequitive exotic games in Korea and Sochi. Furthermore, I think 2022 should be staged in Europe since the last time would be in 2006. (Sochi does not count in my mind, it is on the border to Asia or even, according to some geographers, Russians in particular, located in Asia.) After all, it is in Europe the interest for winter sports are highest and most of the medals won. What priorities IOC makes could of course be a different story..... I agree with your arguments for Trondheim, that is where I now live after some years in Oslo. Not sure what the Norwegian NOC is thinking, though. The process is much more closed this time, and I fear they end up with Oslo-Lillehammer, which I do not think will stand any chance internationally. I think it was written somewhere that Åre is closer to Trondheim than Oppdal. That is not true, but still, a trans-national Trondheim-Åre games would be a great idea, if it were allowed.... In any case, Åre-Östersund would probably need to use some of the infrastructure of the Trondheim area, just as a Trondheim bid could benefit from all the hotel beds and appartments in Åre, which is the largest alpine resort of Scandinavia.
  13. Thanks, interesting! In here semi-Molde dialect she said among other things that.... 1. She wants to continue competing for Germany 2. That her appearance in cross country skiing was a one-off Otherwise she seemed very charming
  14. Winner: Russia, I hope. Hopefully this is the start of a new dope free future! I see a lot of potential in young Russian athletes Sweden: Finally back. I've missed them, Not fun to beat our arch-rival when they have none among the 20 best.. Loser Finland: The cross country skiing scandal in 2001, where almost the entire team was caught broke the back. They lost all my respect after Virpi Keutonen was allowed back into the warmth. Now they also failed in ski-jump and Nordic combined. This is a much larger fall than Italia. Good Finns have always be around before.....
  15. I regard, or hope, the Vancouver games is a fresh start for Russia after 40 years of dubious results. The number of Russian athletes from the last couple of decades that are revealed as dopers have been way too high, finally it seems like they have taken doping AS A PROBLEM somewhat seriously. In such a situation they had to trust the young and inexperienced, and I for instance see a lot of very promising cross country skiers coming that will be very strong in four years (like Junior world champion Sedov). Hopefully this political commotion will not be a return to old sins....
  16. Vancouver were OK games, but not among the very best, IMO, there were simply a bit too many mistakes in the events and venues, like sending out biathlon skiers at the wrong time, the bad ice if Richmond, and the bingo ski-jump hill, and a bit badly behaved Canadian supporterts, in particular those that watched curling. However, I've also experienced far worse games, without mentioning any names......
  17. lehari, in case you didn't know / notice: Unless you are a premium member, itt is not possible to edit any messages in this forum If you write two messages in a row, they are concatinated together, hence the look of my previous message which in fact was three separate ones Trøndelag are two counties in Norway, located in the central part of the country: The mother of Miriam Gössner, who is a German biathlon skier, comes from Molde, a couple of hours drive from Trondheim in Møre og Romsdal county. Together with the Trøndelag counties, it makes up the Mid-Norway administrative region: Miriam Gõssner is cute! End of argument...
  18. No, I did not know that, but I've heard that two in the Norwegian team (including Nystad, I guess) are speaking Norwegian. As much as I enjoyed Northug winning the final cross country gold I in fact think it would have been better if Axel Teichmann had won, to keep up the interest of cross country skiing in Germany. Other than that, I think FIS has destroyed the 50 k race. It used to be all about extreme endurance and personal will with the interval start. The way it is currently, it is a long transport leg before the final sprint at the end. Quite boring, but I guess easier to understand for non-nordics... ^^ The first sentence above should of course have been "but I've heard that two in the German team (including Nystad, I guess) are speaking Norwegian". (And I guess a new paragraph would have helped afterwards!) ^^^^ And after reading myself up on Miriam, I have learnt that her mother is from Molde, which is not in Trøndelag, but located in the third county of the Mid-Norway region.....
  19. Does not seem like many people know what Nistepakke means The key word of this post is "Karsk".... In Norway, regional patritism often runs much higher than national partriotism, and the rather patriotic local newspaper in Trondheim has calculated the medals from athletes that either are born or lives in the two sourrounding Trøndelag counties, and discovered that if Trøndelag was independent, we would have the following medal tally from Vancouver: (gold silver bronze total) Canada 14 7 5 26 (population 309 M) Germany 10 13 7 30 (pop 82 M) USA 9 15 13 37 (pop 309 M) Trøndelag 8 2 4 14 (pop 422k) South Korea 6 6 2 14 (pop 50 M) Those numbers include team competitions (although with prominent participation from Trøndelag). If only counting individual medals, Trøndelag's score is 5-2-2, which still places us on 9th place, just after Sweden (and counting their team medals). However, compared with the history this is nothing, in 1952 Trøndelag would have been the second best nation, and quite frankly, Trøndelag could easily have won a couple of more golds this year as well. The biggest ski star in Norway, which is not alpinist Svindal but cross country skier Northug could easily have won at least one more gold if his skis had been waxed properly during and his pole had not been broken (by the Swedish winner...) during the first few cross country races. Similarly, medal hope Magnus Moan was really unlucky with the wind conditions in the Nordic combined races.... Finally, a lot of the Swedish stars either comes from or trains in the former Norwegian county Jämtland of Sweden (the county of Østersund / Åre). If split from their mother countries and reunified we would have become a fine olympic nation..... Olympic medals of Trøndelag: Gold: Silver: Bronze:
  20. Actually there used to be an official olympic point system in the early history of the games. I think the system was something like this: 1st Place = 7 points 2nd Place = 5 points 3rd Place = 4 points 4th Place = 3 points 5th Place = 2 point 6th Place = 1 point For some reason, this system is still used by the Norwegian press sometimes. As for medal tallies, they have in Norway always been given with the country with the highest number of gold first.
  21. I guess IOC added this sport in order to seem cool or something, but just as for curling, based on the Norwegian results, I don't see why this is an olympic sport. Both Norwegian medal winners were mediocre in traditional alpine skiing before they decided to shift ground....
  22. Honestly, I am not sure why curling is an olympic sport. I mean, in Norway we only have a handful of amateur players, and we still are able to make it to the finals....
  23. That may be true, but already at 325 a high speed train consumes as much energy per seat as an airplane with similar load factor on intermediate (~600 km) distances, and the energy use doubles between 200 km/h and 300 km/h. Airplanes are more flexible than trains and are realisticly likely to have higher load factors. In addition, the extreme speed means much higher line construction costs in most countries. An environmental sound speed, which still will make train competetive with airplanes on intermediate distances, are probably 200-250 km/h. Of course, if you have a clean renewable source of electricity, high energy consumption is not a problem for trains, but for most countries this is not the case.
  24. The list is of countries that are building or will build high speed trains in the future, thus neither France, Germany, China nor Japan, to name a few countries that already have operating high speed train lines, appeared on this list. And > 300 km/h is certainly "high speed train", does Nigeria actually have such a line?
×
×
  • Create New...