stryker

Lillehammer does not have a second 10.000+ arena needed for an Olympics and it would be ridiculous for them to build one. Hakons Hall and the Olympic Amphitheatre could host ice hockey at capacities of 10,500 and 7,000 respectively. Gjovik at a smaller capacity of 5,000 could host curling. Oslo already has an indoor arena, a much newer one at that, in Telenor Arena for figure skating and short track (this was the proposed venue for the respective sports in Oslo's aborted 2022 bid). The WOGs have grown in massive size since 1994. Beyond just venues, Lillehammer does not have the transportation infrastructure that Oslo has to handle a WOGs on its own. Then there's the matter of an Olympic Village. I'd imagine Oslo would be much more in need of public housing in a post-Olympics than Lillehammer would.

A bit of a head scratcher but if Doha is serious about this, then the sheikhs may have finally realized an Olympics isn't going to happen and the best they can hope for is the Asian Games (it would be their second go around as the host). As for the IAAF World Championships, it's a disaster. Crowds are sparse and there are serious concerns about the marathon in the humidity. Of course Qatar is blaming everything on the Saudi-led blockade as they do for everything that doesn't go there way these days.

I'm not convinced Milan-Cortina is the bid that saves the WOGs and gets some traditional winter sports powers back into bidding. For starters, this bid was originally supposed to include Torino because many of the sports venues either need extensive renovations (Cortina sliding track) or have to be built from scratch (ice hockey arenas, speed skating oval). Torino had the venues for ice hockey and speed skating already and they'd only need minor renovations. Unfortunately, the respective city governments couldn't agree so now Milan is going to foot the bill and the price could easily get of hand. In fact, I predict that once cost figures start coming out, you will see a movement to get Torino on board. I find the public support in Milan to be a bit of a head scratcher and that we've only seen one poll that gave any numbers. In terms of seeing whether or not the IOC's reforms could truly work, IMO Stockholm had the better bid, but as has been mentioned, the public support simply was not there and the IOC probably didn't want a nightmare scenario where the games were given back because of an upswell of people against hosting. I wouldn't call Milan-Cortina a great choice, rather it was the best of a bad lot.

I suppose it's a possibility given today's bidding environment and perhaps CNOSF might see co-hosting as a way of keeping costs down rather than a solo French bid with let's say Lyon, Grenoble, and Albertville.

Interesting that this announcement comes right after South Korea says they have finalized legacy plans for the remaining Pyeongchang venues that will in their words "offer year-round activities to support the sports and educational legacy of the most recent Winter Olympic Games." Sounds like they have just kicked the can down the road a little bit and now with a winter YOGs bid in the cards (I can easily see this being awarded at the next IOC session in Tokyo next year) the fate of the sliding track, main ice hockey arena, and the speed skating oval are kept in the short term, from demolition. And Choi's argument that the YOGs will help raise the profile of the country and revitalize the local economy, well, wasn't that the main purpose of hosting the big one in in 2018? Not sure how the YOGs helps in that regard. This is speculation and it might be a stretch, but maybe the IOC made a few phone calls encouraging the Koreans to bid for the YOGs so as not to have another PR disaster about unused venues in a time when the IOC is desperate to get bidders in the first place?

This is why I'd question the long term legacy of a Barcelona WOGs. IMO, it's an interesting idea in theory, but long term, given that Spain is not a winter sports power, would a ski jumping complex, speed skating oval, or a sliding track really get that much use. I'm sure you'd see a small uptick in winter sports participation but I doubt it would be enough to justify the cost and upkeep. I can remember where I saw it last, might have been insidethegames but I remember an article from earlier this year that discussed a tri-nations winter bid between Spain, Andorra, and France. Not many details but I would've assumed that Barcelona would have been the ice cluster, skiing in Andorra, with the sliding and ski jumping events in France. Great way of making use of existing infrastructure, as I mentioned earlier, why go to all that trouble logistically when France could host the entire event on its own. Definitely think long term a SOGs is the way to go for Spain.

I wouldn't say it's overconfidence as it is as much as a lack of options and the need for a stable bid with little in the way of infrastructure spending to try and restore confidence in bidding for the WOGs. Salt Lake mirrors L.A.'s bid for the SOGs. SLC has almost everything in place. Vivint Smart Home Arena is getting a renovation. The commuter and light rail lines are being expanded as is the airport. The oval and ski jump stadium would need only minor touch ups. The only outstanding venues needed are a secondary ice hockey arena, curling arena (I think the Ice Sheet at Ogden or Peaks could host curling with their capacities) and an Olympic Village as I don't know if either the University of Utah or Brigham Young University would need additional on-campus housing. Lillehammer is a no go by itself. It's too small to host on its own. The city would have to partner with Oslo, but I have doubts that you will see a Norway bid anytime soon after the fallout when Oslo withdrew from the 2022 race and the IOC's scathing reaction. Austria with Vienna would be credible. The whole Barcelona-Pyrenees idea seems to crop up every year or so (as it has again) but it never seems to gain any traction and would require a huge amount of investment for the ski and sliding events. Salt Lake City has most of what is already needed for a WOGs and it is a compact bid. It's a win-win.

I would lean more towards the latter with the AOC along with the fact that Melbourne never really seemed to actually show any interest. I have a colleague from Melbourne and I asked him not long ago if there was ever any interest from local officials in a bid and he said no. In terms of the weather issue, while it's a factor, I highly doubt if Australia said Melbourne is our host city, that the IOC wouldn't bend the rules a bit. Australia is too large a media market and with the whole bidding process on shaky ground anyway, I could've seen it happening, but, if Melbourne was never interested it's a moot point. The troubling issue is the push for Brisbane seems like putting a square peg in a round hole. Brisbane needs lots of work in terms of venues and transportation upgrades to make this work and frankly, it would not surprise me the least if the costs got out of hand very quickly. In terms of Bach's comments about electing a Brisbane bid early, well, I take that with a grain of salt at this point, but it fits in line with a targeted approach and a desire for a safe bid considering the potential competition: Korea, Jakarta, Shanghai, India, or Germany. Jakarta and India are out. There's no way the IOC is going to a developing country again anytime soon and I'd also rule out all of Africa and South America as well (that's what the YOG are for). I can't see the IOC going back to China so soon after Beijing 2022 and the joint Korea bid requires so much to fall into place besides the political problems (Pyongyang's infrastructure is archaic) that it's a fantasy. I'd say a Brisbane bid's biggest competitor would be a German bid, the Rhine-Rhur regional bid, but then there's the old referendum issue which hasn't gone well for German bids recently. As I've stated before, I doubt for a while the IOC considers a SOGs from anyone other than the USA, Western Europe, Russia, China, Japan, Australia, or Korea.

Brisbane doesn't need a 60,000 seat stadium either. What sports franchise even needs a stadium in Brisbane? To my knowledge, the Gabba is supposed to get a 100$ million upgrade. The whole reducing a stadium to 15,000-20,000 from 60,000 has yet to be shown to be a viable option. It's a white elephant either way unless there's a permanent tenant.

Sure seems like the IOC is going with a targeted approach. Consider the options so far; Indonesia, India (the IOC isn't going to a developing country after the Rio debacle), China (hard to see them going back so soon unless there was no other option), a joint Korea bid (fantasy at best). Western Europe (Paris) has 2024 and the U.S. has 2028. Not many options left other than Australia so it makes sense to try to lock 2032 in. The problem is from a feasibility standpoint it's the wrong city. Yes Melbourne has shown no interest in bidding so I agree it's a non starter but compared to Brisbane it's far more ready facilities wise. Brisbane, in a time when the IOC is desperate for a PR win and keeping costs down, is looking at bid that could get out of hand cost wise very quickly. For starters, Brisbane has no need for a an 80,000 capacity Olympic Stadium that would become a white elephant afterwards with no permanent tenant. And I don't buy the argument that 85 percent of the venues are already in place when considering in the initial feasibility study so many venues were set to be constructed with the legacy "community centres." which sounds very similar to what Rio proposed. Then there's the whole matter of the needed transportation upgrades and hotel rooms. It can get very expensive very quickly. I could see a budget easily surpassing the 20$ million mark.

France is capable of hosting a WOGs on its own but there'd have to be an anchor city like Lyon, Marseille, or Nice. Switzerland is in the same boat, but much like Austria, it would have to be a country-wide bid. In terms of joint bids, the new rules could finally open up a Helsinki bid with maybe Are in Sweden for the alpine events (anyone remember their 2006 joint bid with Lillehammer?) While a joint bid might be viable, it's hard to see it winning in 2030 against a compact and moderately cost bid from Salt Lake or Sapporo. While we're on the subject, while Calgary crashed out of the 2026 race and the sliding track in WinSport at risk of closure, maybe Vancouver gives it another go the next time Canada wants a WOGs though I doubt for 2030.

https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1084526/belarus-olympic-bid-russia-ukraine So on the heels of the European Games, Lukashenko wants the big prize, but recognizes that Minsk can't go it alone. Even with changes to the bidding procedure, why would Russia join up with anyone (Ukraine isn't an option). It's a pipe dream and I suspect we'll see more of these joint-bids, but I imagine very few, if any, are viable. I commented in another thread shortly after the end of the 2026 race that the SOGs, with their sheer size, now seemed to be limited to a handful of countries that can realistically host with minimal to moderate costs and sustain a viable legacy. The IOC is going to want safe hosts after the debacle in Rio and the costly overruns of Pyeongchang and Tokyo so I suspect they will take a targeted approach with the likes of the UK, US, Western Europe, Australia, Russia, China, Korea, and Japan along developing countries like Indonesia, India, Malaysia, along with all of Africa and South America. That leaves the likes of Belarus on the outside looking in unless they can co-host, but as I mentioned before, why would Russia do so when they could easily host everything themselves? Then there's the YOGs which is much more suited for Minsk.I expect you will see the IOC market the YOGs as a scaled down version of the big one in order to go to cities like MInsk and Dakar.

The ISU also requires a speed skating oval to have a roof for the Olympics.

Expecting Qatar to put aside any controversy is the equivalent of the thinking that giving the Olympics to Beijing in 2008 would improve China's human rights record. It's already practically going to be a "dry" World Cup, a far cry from Russia in 2018 when bars actually ran out of beer. I do wonder big the check is that FIFA will write to Budweiser for them to accept this for one cycle.

Granted Morocco was on limited time to put the games together following Equatorial Guinea's withdrawal, but the opening ceremony was done before a stadium that was half-full at the very most.