kernowboy

I think several cities pulled out because of other commitments or a lack of government support. In 2014, there were 3 candidates in the bidding process, but another 4 submitted official bids but were not shortlisted to go to the next stage.

How can you block a particular user and their obnoxious attitude?

Denver and Berne have previously withdrawn from competitions and its not affected them. I think 2 years away in 2013, and lets say a minimum 10 years away in 2022 are different questions. Unlike Maribor, Ljubljana is the capital city with a population 3x the size. There are already sports venues in place in the capital which could be used, and a sporting culture that could use all of the facilities post games. There is a world class ski jumping venue at Planica with hills of HS215, HS140 and HS100, and a stadium with a 30,000 capacity. Kranjska Gora already hosts annual World Cup slalom events and has a vertical of 838m and is less than 90km from Ljubljana. The nearby town of Jesenice with its ice hockey team could be another possible indoor venue. If Ljubljana bid, you could bet the government would not withdraw funding for such a signifcantly more prestiguous event than the Universiade

I'm a big fan of making things scaleable. Often a stadium is built and it is then really expensive to expand it. The Joao Havelange was built at 46,000 but easily increasable to over 60,000. Reading about athletics, have they actually settled on the site yet? It does seem ridiculous that the Skydome is possibly only going to be used for ceremonies. Why not close the roof and use all that interior space?

I still don't get that once it became clear that in mid summer 2010, that Hamilton was rapidly becoming not an opton, that the Committee did not immediately pursue a waterfront option especially especially as the York location had already been rejected for a MLS and CFL stadium due to its remoteness. Whilst 2007 was an excellent stringboard for Rio successfully winning the 2016 games, 9 years later, Toronto seem to be striving for the complete opposite. Can you imagine a Joao Havelange Olympic Stadium built for 40,000 in the eastern portlands close to the village, ready to be expanded for the 2024 games? Talk about a missed opportunity. The irony is with over 3 years to go, it would be possible even now to build something similar.

The concern must be that Toronto are making an absolute Horlicks of this and whether it might affect any future Olympic bid. On the negative it doesn't look too good, but I guess it could be argued that all the kinks in organising a major multi-site event were ironed out during 2015, and that a future bid would go like clockwork

It could be argued that despite Turin 2006 and Albertville 1992, there hasn't been a Winter Olympics in the German speaking Alps since 1976. Part of this was due to acceptable bids but with Salzburg failing twice, then Munich, there might be sufficient impetous to give it to a Germanic area again

They'll need to sort out the route to Vail first

LOL - I wish I was. I just look things up. Re: Munich. I know reasonably well. The rest you can find online. For example in Munich there are a number of venues that a 2022 bid might alternatively use which meant there would be less need for temporary venues

I think if they made changes to the bid in regard to venues, they would not be adding to the overall footprint and compactness of the bid. The Inzell speed skating rink is actually on the way to the proposed bobsleigh run - you pass through Inzell. It is straight down the E45 towards Austria and you normally pass through Inzell to get to the bobsleigh run at Schonau am Konigsee. As events are already being held at Garmish it seems foolish not to use the already built Garmish Olympic Hall. This was would allow a larger arena in Munich to be the permanent home of EHC Muncheon, swapping temporary for legacy and replace the small Olympia Eisalle. Alternatively the Eisalle could be used as a 2nd venue and a larger temporary rink built for all but the finals. Or the Eishalle could be used for Curling, a larger arena built on the Velodrome and Garmish used. None really adds to the overall size of the games

For a Munich 2022 bid, I wonder if one of the changes might be to use the Eisstadion Inzell. The speed skating rink was previously open air and was one of Europe's fastest, but now they've enclosed it It is directly on the way to the famous Schonau am Kongissee bobsleigh run (this is 150km) and Inzell is 116km down the same road. It would help to alleviate 'Green' opposition as this was one of the temporary venues that they were looking to build in Munich. If they continue to use the Olympiahalle for Figure and Short Track skating, the swimming pool for curling, and build on the old Velodrome for one of the Ice Hockey venues, then that leaves them with a single new venue site to find. Alternatively there is a venue in either Augsburg or Garmish that could be used as the second ice hockey venue.

Le Massif is about 30 metres short. They looked into finishing on pontoons in the St Lawrence but that didn't work. They then looked at another side of the mountain, but the terrain is simply to gentle - Russo looked at it and said you couldn't have a suitably changing run. A pity as Quebec would be a great venue.

I agree. But Minnesota would be an ideal winter location for the USA if it had a mountain. And Finland reminds me of Minnesota There is no guarantee Finland will succeed - their plans are terribly difficult as its not a few metres, its hundreds they may need to add. And the downhill is the blue ribband event - it would be like holding the summer games without the athletics. The point I'm making is that there will be always locations, not traditional locations who by a freak of geography will have a better chance if the IOC will not compromise. And when you read about Quebec's withdrawl, the IOC won't compromise

http://www.ski.co.uk/resorts/scotland/glencoe/ There are several other sites some of which say 2635ft which is the same. And of course the normal vertcial drop at MtAllan used in Calgary 1988 is 779m but they went higher up the mountain for the men's downhill

Right getting back to the Winter Olympics theme, this gets worse. Glasgow could in theory hold a Winter Olympics game. The Commonwealth Games demonstrates there are a number of indoor facilities that could host events: The SECC Hall4 has a capacity of 12,500 seats for indoor events. The Scottish Hydro Arena is inclose proximity and holds 12,000 The Clyde Auditorium can hold up to 3,000 people The Braehead Arena holds 4,000 people for Ice Hockey and the National Indoor Sports Arena holds 5,000. But what about the mountains? Well ( and this was a surprise to me ), the biggest vertical drop in Scotland is apparently the Glencoe Ski Centre at 803m. The mountain isn't high but it is also low at Sea Level. A little further along is the Nevis Range ski resort at 543m vertical drop. Yes, there would need to be further investment in a speed skating rink, a bobsleigh run - which might have support as sliding events are an area that Team GB have success in - and of course ski jumping facilities. But if you've ever been to Scotland in winter, or spring, there is certainly the snow. And these centres are less than 80miles from Glasgow It really is sad when natural geography precludes traditional winter sports countries from effectively bidding NB* I'm not sure if would be possible to build a sufficiently challenging downhall course

And if the USOC are saying that they won't support any bid, what is the point in any city doing any more than expressing interest?

The UK were told in no uncertain terms that there was no way unless they bid with London. We bid in 1992 with Birmingham and 1996 and 2000 with Manchester. Realising that with continenal rotation, that we would not likely beat Athens in 2004, we won the first time we had a reasonable chance as 2008 was not possible. Paris having failed in 1992, 2008 and 2012. Unlikely to succeed in 2016, I am surprised they chose not to go in 2020 though suspect they believe 2024 (100yrs anniversary) is the better bet. There were multiple cities who said they were interested in 2020 - various cities expressed an interest but the USOC said the USA would not bid http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=oly&id=6884167 Many IOC members have said the United States receives an inordinate share of revenue. The United States receives 20 percent of global sponsorship money and 12.75 percent of television money, an arrangement that will be renegotiated in 2013. "Any U.S. bid city will be in a difficult place until the USOC works out a new relationship with the IOC in terms of the revenue cut the U.S. gets," said Dick Ebersol, chairman of NBC Universal Sports. I think if the USA had bid for 2020, you'd likely have won. It was Baron-Pierre IV who decided to insult every non-US bidder and all I am doing is simply stating and providing evidence that the IOC don't vote for contenders because their wives like shopping

Clearly Blair helped at the last moment, when Chirac expressing his opinion on Finnish food, but the HRH clearly helped us into the race even though our technical bid was poorer than both Paris and Madrid. In 2012, NYC came a poor fourth only just managing to beat a very average Moscow. I know what you mean about editing. Whilst some cities bid and bid and never succeed like Ostersund, that is often because there are challenges they often will never overcome. If Reno bid and failed in 2022, then they should IMO be the automatic US candidate in 2026. The chance to take feedback and make changes to an existing bid are much easier for the IOC to measure than to wipe the slate clean and start over somewhere else.

Pot calling Kettle black

There are currently proposals to, and a huge amount of debate about whether they should - they'd need to find several hundred metres though which is a huge ask

Baron, don't let the facts get in the way of your bile. 1) It was widely known that Atlanta was poorly received and highlighted as an example of how not to organise a games 2) Lillehammer won the WYOG because they were the only bidder, which saved the IOCs bacon and which will be a browny point. Even though the IOC asked Lake Placid to bid, the USOC refused. As Harbin also bid in 2012, along with Innsbruck who won and now Lake Placid are looking to bid for 2020 does this make China and the USA juniors too? To describe Lillehammer as 'juniors' merely reinforces the arrogant stereotype which wins the USA so few friends these days. 3) Your desperation of argument now extends to two different organisations IOC and FIFA and the way they chose hosts. The IOC vote with about 95 delegates, FIFA 22, and they vote in blocs. The USA representative didn't even vote for the USA 2022 bid. The British at least blew the lid on the corrupt practises before the vote which has now led to widescale reform of the voting practises. The bribes Salt Lake City made were uncovered 3 years afer the bid - you had to be caught with your hands in the till. 4) the RH Princess Anne as a former IOC member clearly helped the London bid overcome both Madrid (hindered by 1992) and Paris where it was the arrogance of Chirac that lost them the bid late in the day - a lesson for you there 5) It will now be at least 28 years between 1996 and whenever the USA bids and at least 20years between Salt Lake City and the next possible games. As a country 60x the size of Norway, that's pretty poor. 6) The USA weren't even bidding against the English or Spanish bid so how can you compare votes for two different competitions. It was a fact the Oz were going to struggle because their stadia aren't suited to football. The USA sent the most powerful man on the planet to secure 2016 and he ended up with egg on his face and a temper tandrum from the USOC. Whilst in 2012, NYC also barely avoided not being rejected in the first round,.

In defence of Reno. If they are moving away from their casio, gambling driven economy and can actually suggest the range of developments proposed in 2015 (if they are USOCs candidate) then they could offer up a challenge though I think it could be a preliminary bid prior to 2026. There is clearly Squaw Valley - the only time there was no bobsleigh at the games in 1960 - whose hill could be updated and provides for the alpine events The Bighorns at the Reno Events Center (7,500) provide one venue, and if the Reno Raiders ECHL finally get an arena (12,000?) you've got the Ice Hockey sorted. The Nevada Wolfpack are the other factor. Can the Mackay Stadium be expanded from 29,993 to 40,000+? If yes then you've got the opening ceremonies sorted. The Wolfpack basketball team use the Lawler Events Center (11,784) could potentially be expanded for the figure skating and ice hockey final, A speed skating venue could be redeveloped into a conference facility post games - all you now need is somewhere for Curling and a bobsleigh run. Doable yes, but in many ways the USOC need to stick with the same venue rather than chop and change bidders every single games.

I think there are too many potential hosts under 200km for the IOC to be reluctant to change their criteria. And some criteria like the Downhill requirements can only be altered if there are some significant environmental alternations which would have some up in arms. Finland need to build a mountain, Quebec need to extend the moutain as the only other site is 500km away. Even with high speed rail of 250km per hour it would still be stretch for Osterstund. And of course games are awarded to cities not countries. Osterstund could probably justify a ski jumping facility and bobsleigh run as Sweden don't really have any comparable venues so they have that legacy sorted. The SkiJump site could double for opening ceremonies too. A speed skating track could be utilised as a conference facility/other events in much the same way as the Richmond Oval but retain the track for future competition. There is an existing arena which could be used for curling. The local basketball team could use the smaller of two icehockey arenas, but that leaves 2 appropriate sized arenas for figure skating and ice hockey which may have to be temporary and reassembled elsewhere unless Ostersund can attract an ice hockey team. Having been to Ostersund it would be a great location, but the Swedes would need to be really creative in developing their bid. I've been and liked Ostersund but it's only 60,000 in size and within the local large county, the next biggest town Brunflo is only 4,000 people in size. Unfortunately all other major populations in Northern Sweden are on the coast

and politically the USA are loathed by large numbers in the world. You think Venezuela will vote for you, or the Yemen? How much overseas aid do you give to Rwanda? Far less than the always generous Norwegians I can bet. You have voting blocs who won't think of voting for you for political reasons hence why Chicago 2016 did so well. As of today, the finance issue has not been settled between the USOC and the IOC. And unlike other countries who have accepted the IOCs invitation to bid for games, the USOC have encouraged potential candidates not to, by saying they will not receive their support. So the USOC think they are immediately going to walk in and win first time around? And because it will be privately financed, any USA bid raises the prospects of unbridled commercialism. You won't be able to buy the games like Salt Lake City did in 2002. Contrast the restrained patriotism of the Norwegians when supporting all competitors with the in your face nationalism at USA games bellowing Oo-S-ay making you believe the rest of the world did not exist. and consider where the rest of the world would like the games. Trashy, overly commercialised, white elephants unused after the event. The Winter equivalent of Atlanta who were told 'Well Done' rather than received the standard 'Best Ever Games' compliment that the IOC President has given to every other games

the issue with Switzerland is that such expendature has to go to a public referendum. Which is why Berne pulled out of 2010. Difficult to be overlooked The IOC want no white elephants. Can Osterstund with a population of 60,000 have 4 venues of 8,000 seats+ especially with no major icehockey team and a 130km to the next nearest city. The IOC have rejected bids due to distance between the events. And Munich has political opposition which has already forced it to move some of its events to more weather risky venues. I've already mentioned Oslo's risk of using some of the 1994 venues, but think they'll revert to their original ideas in their 2018 bid proposal