baron-pierreIV Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 You're talking about the pre-corporate sponsorship days. Sorry, but the drugs were in the hands of the organizing committee. The taxpayers were the sane ones. Look at Montreal. So what r u saying? That maybe they should take a look at Montreal again? I DON'T get your rebuttal to my comment. If you're talking Montreal, then their taxpayers were INSANE whereas the Denverites turned out to be the sane ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiveRingFever Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 So what r u saying? That maybe they should take a look at Montreal again? I DON'T get your rebuttal to my comment. If you're talking Montreal, then their taxpayers were INSANE whereas the Denverites turned out to be the sane ones. No, I was saying exactly what you said in your reply. The Denver taxpayers got it right. The Denver organizing committtee was completely clueless. My intial response was to your comment that Denver was drug-induced for rejecting the Games; at least, that's how I interpreted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spectator12 Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 Thoughts? hope not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted June 26, 2011 Report Share Posted June 26, 2011 LA won't be a real option until 2028 at the earliest and probably 2032. I don't think it's totally fair to compare LA to SLC because there's so much less competition for Winter Games. I agree with Baron that a new city will be more appealing to the IOC than SLC. That still doesn't make me excited about Reno though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanisMinor Posted June 26, 2011 Report Share Posted June 26, 2011 But had San Francisco not withdrawn because their stadium deal with the 49'ners fell apart on the 11th hour, I believe San Francisco would've been the 2016 USOC candidate instead of Chicago, because the USOC strongly favored to have a West Coast candidate (another reason why L.A. was close, too). Well, it is pure speculation, as we don't really know how viable a final San Francisco bid would have been, how solid there financing plans would have been, or how they would have dealt with all the "special interest" groups that would have opposed the games. However, given the little bit that I know about those that supported LA, my impression was that their vote was attracted by the low cost, low risk proposition of an LA games. Both Chicago and San Francisco would have been higher cost, higher risk. Thus, in my speculative opinion, had San Francisco remained in, it would have drawn initial support from Chicago component and not from LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2015 Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 Just for curiosity and considering that I do not know well the geography of the US, is there any other US city which would be suitable for WOG and may have even a small chance of winning? BC here it seems it revolves always between Reno, SLC and Denver. The first being ugly and unispiring, the second having hosted already and too soon and the third with the 76' curse. A country as large as the US does not have any other palatable and suitable choices? At the end of the day you need a midsized city with a few slopes somewhat nearby (not even too much, given the current trend) to compete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 The first being ugly and unispiring, How do you know that? Based on certain posters' views here? Not every city in the world can be Paris. There are Vail and Aspen, etc., beautful ski towns but a whole Olympic package is MORE than just a beautiful town. That helps but it must have other technical considerations and maybe Reno's homeliness is off set by its being the closest metropolitan area over 150,000, that is NEXT DOOR to amongst the most breattaking winter scenery. So, like everything in life, you compromise and settle for a trade-off. Why, when Squaw Valley 1960 was chosen, there was NOTHING there! At least there is a modest-sized city of about 220,000 there in Reno now. It's the BIGGEST LITTLE CITY IN THE WORLD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2015 Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 How do you know that? Based on certain posters' views here? Not every city in the world can be Paris. There are Vail and Aspen, etc., beautful ski towns but a whole Olympic package is MORE than just a beautiful town. That helps but it must have other technical considerations and maybe Reno's homeliness is off set by its being the closest metropolitan area over 150,000, that is NEXT DOOR to amongst the most breattaking winter scenery. So, like everything in life, you compromise and settle for a trade-off. Why, when Squaw Valley 1960 was chosen, there was NOTHING there! At least there is a modest-sized city of about 220,000 there in Reno now. It's the BIGGEST LITTLE CITY IN THE WORLD! Sorry I was just reporting the views in the forum, as you correctly said. I never was in Reno so I cannot judge it. My question was more on the subject if - given the possibility - the US could bid to the WOG with other cities other than Reno, SLC and Denver. Here in Europe skying in the US is usually connected to Aspen and Vail/Beaver Creek. I have been actually in the latter and I believe with some imagination these two resorts could even do without Denver even with the more complex WOG of the 21 century. Don't know about Aspen or any other US winter sport facility in the rockies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulsa Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 How do you know that? Based on certain posters' views here? Not every city in the world can be Paris. There are Vail and Aspen, etc., beautful ski towns but a whole Olympic package is MORE than just a beautiful town. That helps but it must have other technical considerations and maybe Reno's homeliness is off set by its being the closest metropolitan area over 150,000, that is NEXT DOOR to amongst the most breattaking winter scenery. So, like everything in life, you compromise and settle for a trade-off. Why, when Squaw Valley 1960 was chosen, there was NOTHING there! At least there is a modest-sized city of about 220,000 there in Reno now. It's the BIGGEST LITTLE CITY IN THE WORLD! It's funny, about Reno you are like me about Annecy... The city of Reno isn't a very Beautiful but Reno bid with Lake Tahoe will be very strong, Ski venue will be amazing and Finally I don't think Reno will have some difficult because the city isn't very "sexy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 The main thing is though, that it doesn't matter how many cities a particular conutry has that could host Summer or Winter Games. If those cities don't want to bid in the first place, then it doesn't matter anyway. You can't force cities to bid. Reno wants to bid. They're not dilly-dallying around, dragging their feet, ho-humming along, they really WANT to bid. So at the end of the day, it doesn't matter if the U.S. has 30 cities that could host the Winter Games if 29 of them don't want to bother to begin with. However, given the little bit that I know about those that supported LA, my impression was that their vote was attracted by the low cost, low risk proposition of an LA games. Both Chicago and San Francisco would have been higher cost, higher risk. Thus, in my speculative opinion, had San Francisco remained in, it would have drawn initial support from Chicago component and not from LA. Yeah, & we all know too well how much the IOC just loves low-cost, low-risk Games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USA Gold Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 So what r u saying? That maybe they should take a look at Montreal again? I DON'T get your rebuttal to my comment. If you're talking Montreal, then their taxpayers were INSANE whereas the Denverites turned out to be the sane ones. It would be great to see Reno/Tahoe get the Winter Olympics. Lake Tahoe is one of my favorite places in the country. But the major problem is that the Reno/Tahoe currently doesn't have a single indoor arena that could be used for any winter sports. You will need three arenas of various sizes with international size rinks...not to mention a speedskating oval. I just can't see Reno or Sparks or South Lake Tahoe financing three 10-18,000- seat arenas. At least a city like Vancouver had three of their arenas already in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2015 Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 Maybe I am not able to make myself clear Given that Reno WANTS to BID just as a speculation which cities/sky areas are fitting for a WOG in the US besides Reno, SLC and Denver/Vail? My curiosity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soaring Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 A few "possibles" if the stars aligned, and infrastructure upgrades were not as much of an issue - Anchorage and Lake Placid. Lake Placid would be more appropriate for a YOG, and Anchorage has not expressed any real interest since their failed bids for 1992 and 1994. Interesting enough, they received 23 votes in the first round for '94, but were knocked out in the second round. To be honest, I think the greater problem is the lack of cities who can actually handle a WOG in the US. By my count, only 4 or 5 metros could actually do it with moderate to extensive upgrades. Eliminate two who hosted in the last 30 years, you only have a couple of options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 Which then leads us back to Reno, & maybe someone else. I wonder how much of an option it could be if Lake Placid (for Alpine) were teamed up with Albany as the main hub instead. It's a 140 miles between Albany & Lake Placid. A bit of a stretch, but maybe an option that could be looked into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soaring Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 I remember looking through SF's bid plan, and it certainly was inferior to what Chicago was offering. Things were just too spread out IMO. I agree, that had they resolved the stadium issue, they could have very well beat Chicago one-on-one. The USOC's tie to California was strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 Here in Europe skying in the US is usually connected to Aspen and Vail/Beaver Creek. I have been actually in the latter and I believe with some imagination these two resorts could even do without Denver even with the more complex WOG of the 21 century. Don't know about Aspen or any other US winter sport facility in the rockies The thing w/ Vail, Aspen, Jackson Hole, the well-established ski resorts I think are fine just the way they are...i.e., they are not too crazy about getting bigger which means more crowding, the hoi polloi, higher taxes, ever-higher real estate values, etc. Thus, I think they are Olympics-shy, so one can cross those off the list. It's more the middle-class areas like those around Tahoe that want the publicity and boosterism that come with an Olympic Games. I remember looking through SF's bid plan, and it certainly was inferior to what Chicago was offering. Things were just too spread out IMO. I agree, that had they resolved the stadium issue, they could have very well beat Chicago one-on-one. The USOC's tie to California was strong. Well, SF is much smaller than Chicago both in area (only like 44 sq.m.) and population (city is only like 884,000) -- so the bid had to branch out to other existing venues outside the City which were all around the Bay. It was dictated by geography and BART to a certain extent...NOT by choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 It would be great to see Reno/Tahoe get the Winter Olympics. Lake Tahoe is one of my favorite places in the country. But the major problem is that the Reno/Tahoe currently doesn't have a single indoor arena that could be used for any winter sports. You will need three arenas of various sizes with international size rinks...not to mention a speedskating oval. I just can't see Reno or Sparks or South Lake Tahoe financing three 10-18,000- seat arenas. At least a city like Vancouver had three of their arenas already in place. I'm guessing things might just all click into place for Reno for 2022 in terms of the hard venues: - Mackay Stadium - (Opening & Closing; currently 31k; can probably be expanded to 45k) - temporary new stadium for Figure Skating (a la London basketbal arena (20-21,000) - a new long-track speedskating stadium (8,000 seats) - Rodeo arena or Reno Events Center (9,000 ea) - Curling - Lawlor Events Center - short-track skating (11,000) - the 2 stadia in Sacramento (the present ARCO Arena & the proposed NEW KINGS arena) - for ice hockey. (So Sacramento State dorms might serve as the Hockey-only village.) (or some of those can still be switched around.) - a new luge/bobsled run; and - a ski-jump bowl. Reno Convention Center can be the IBC. (USA Fencing is holding its 2011 national championships there next weekend.) And it looks like there are one or two other smaller halls to spare. Main Village will be the UN-Reno campus with upgraded & expanded dorms. So there, as far as existing venues, the Reno-Tahoe area has like 70% of the venues built. With 11 years, that is plenty of time to get things in place. Athensf - the above is just my conjecture...if I were to do it. Financing? If the TV revenues for the US Broadcast rights alone get near $1.3 billion (+ other worldwide rights), I'm guessing that Reno can safely set aside at least $600 million for temporary and permanent venues. The rest of its income stream would come from licensing and ticket sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2015 Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 The thing w/ Vail, Aspen, Jackson Hole, the well-established ski resorts I think are fine just the way they are...i.e., they are not too crazy about getting bigger which means more crowding, the hoi polloi, higher taxes, ever-higher real estate values, etc. Thus, I think they are Olympics-shy, so one can cross those off the list. It's more the middle-class areas like those around Tahoe that want the publicity and boosterism that come with an Olympic Games. oi polloi So to finalize, there are no other mid-sized cities with ski slopes nearby that COULD bid except the usual suspects? it kind of surprises me. Even in a country as small as Italy there would be at least 4-5 options Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 oi polloi So to finalize, there are no other mid-sized cities with ski slopes nearby that COULD bid except the usual suspects? it kind of surprises me. Even in a country as small as Italy there would be at least 4-5 options There was talk of Boise and Anchorage...but those don't seem interested. Santa Fe? I don't know how close or how high the skiing areas in New Mexico are. Many years ago, Klamath Falls, ORE, spoke of bidding...but I don't think they're big enough PLUS w/ Oregon's environmental sentiments the strongest in the U.S., it would be ANOTHER Denver 1976. I used to ski in Killington, VT...but I think the highest peaks in the US N.E. are the Adirondacks near Lake Placid. Plus the NE snow is wetter than the Rockies or Sierra Nevada snows -- so an adult WOGs is better in the West. And since the WOGs have become pretty huge, there really aren't viable anchor cities other than Anchorage, Denver, Reno and Salt Lake. Thus the highest peaks and best snowfalls are, as I just said, in Rockies and the Sierra Nevadas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USA Gold Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 That's not exactly true. Lawlor Events Center can't support an NHL size rink much less an international ice surface, although they building has hosted ice show. If they attempt to use ARCO for hockey, they will lose and it's an awful hockey venue as more seats have obstructed views than unabstructed views of the entire ice. Reno Events Center can't support 9,000 seats and an ice rink. It's seats 7,000 for basketball. The current indoor facilities in both Sacramento and Reno just aren't first class venues that will woo the IOC for ice events. I'm guessing things might just all click into place for Reno for 2022 in terms of the hard venues: - Mackay Stadium - (Opening & Closing; currently 31k; can probably be expanded to 45k) - temporary new stadium for Figure Skating (a la London basketbal arena (20-21,000) - a new long-track speedskating stadium (8,000 seats) - Rodeo arena or Reno Events Center (9,000 ea) - Curling - Lawlor Events Center - short-track skating (11,000) - the 2 stadia in Sacramento (the present ARCO Arena & the proposed NEW KINGS arena) - for ice hockey. (So Sacramento State dorms might serve as the Hockey-only village.) (or some of those can still be switched around.) - a new luge/bobsled run; and - a ski-jump bowl. Reno Convention Center can be the IBC. (USA Fencing is holding its 2011 national championships there next weekend.) And it looks like there are one or two other smaller halls to spare. Main Village will be the UN-Reno campus with upgraded & expanded dorms. So there, as far as existing venues, the Reno-Tahoe area has like 70% of the venues built. With 11 years, that is plenty of time to get things in place. Athensf - the above is just my conjecture...if I were to do it. Financing? If the TV revenues for the US Broadcast rights alone get near $1.3 billion (+ other worldwide rights), I'm guessing that Reno can safely set aside at least $600 million for temporary and permanent venues. The rest of its income stream would come from licensing and ticket sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 That's not exactly true. 1. Lawlor Events Center can't support an NHL size rink much less an international ice surface, although they building has hosted ice show. 2. If they attempt to use ARCO for hockey, they will lose and it's an awful hockey venue as more seats have obstructed views than unabstructed views of the entire ice. Reno Events Center can't support 9,000 seats and an ice rink. 3. It's seats 7,000 for basketball. The current indoor facilities in both Sacramento and Reno just aren't first class venues that will woo the IOC for ice events. Well, since you know other numbers, then Y did you ask? I got some of the # from WorldStadiums.com. Blame them if their figures do NOT match yours. (I also DON'T know the exact dimensions of say, Reno Events Center. And that's why I said, some of those venues could be interchanged.) Y don't u visit the RenoTahoeWinterGames Coalition website if you want to learn more. The above are just MY conjectures. Their plan isn't set in stone; it is in a state of flux UNTIL they got them nailed down. 1. Lawlor - Short-track skating does NOT REquire an int'l hockey-sized ice rink. Because it is SHORT track, therefore, I think the ice surface it requires (I'm guessing) might be just 2/3rds and preferrably in a circular fashion) of a hockey-sized rink. Of course, all these venues if they are to be used, will not be kept in SUBSTANDARD condition. They will BE UPGRADED extensively. The organizers realize that. 2. You & somebody else said that the ARCO Arena is a loser...and U're probably right. That's why Sacramento is looking to build another one. But you know, the Delta Center in Salt Lake was far from ideal for Figure and Short-track skating...yet, Salt Lake won and Delta Center played host to those 2 sports. Everything DOESN'T have to be PERFECT...unless you're a Sochi building a whole new city overnight. But for a U.S. Games, a slightly imperfect arena, like maybe a refurbished ARCO Arena, especially if it's for the less popular women's hockey Games, might just do. Remember, it's just for TWO WEEKS -- not for eternity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 I don't know anything about Reno other than what a friend of mine has told me having been there a bunch of times for work. Obviously it all depends on the other candidates they'd be bidding against, but is Reno really the best the United States can offer? I mean, if they need to rely on arenas in Sacramento, a city more than 100 miles away, that seems like a pretty flimsy plan to me. We know it's not going to be like Sochi, but at least it should be at least somewhat like Salt Lake where much of the infrastructure is there (and/or just needs minor improvements) or what gets built/upgraded will go to good use after the games. Do they really need to spend $100 million on a sliding track that may or may not be of any use after the games that there's one currently less than a decade old nearby in Utah? I know the perception is that the U.S. is lacking on suitable host cities for hosting a Winter Olympics, but is that really a shocker considering how little people in this country care about most Winter sports? I'd rather let Denver take their chances in spite of the curse of 1976 because the bid they'd probably put forth would likely blow Reno's out of the water. Does it make them more likely to win? Maybe not, but I'm less than convinced that Reno is the city that gives us the best chance at landing a Winter Olympics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTimeOnly Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 Well, since you know other numbers, then Y did you ask? I got some of the # from WorldStadiums.com. Blame them if their figures do NOT match yours. (I also DON'T know the exact dimensions of say, Reno Events Center. And that's why I said, some of those venues could be interchanged.) Y don't u visit the RenoTahoeWinterGames Coalition website if you want to learn more. The above are just MY conjectures. Their plan isn't set in stone; it is in a state of flux UNTIL they got them nailed down. 1. Lawlor - Short-track skating does NOT REquire an int'l hockey-sized ice rink. Because it is SHORT track, therefore, I think the ice surface it requires (I'm guessing) might be just 2/3rds and preferrably in a circular fashion) of a hockey-sized rink. Of course, all these venues if they are to be used, will not be kept in SUBSTANDARD condition. They will BE UPGRADED extensively. The organizers realize that. 2. You & somebody else said that the ARCO Arena is a loser...and U're probably right. That's why Sacramento is looking to build another one. But you know, the Delta Center in Salt Lake was far from ideal for Figure and Short-track skating...yet, Salt Lake won and Delta Center played host to those 2 sports. Everything DOESN'T have to be PERFECT...unless you're a Sochi building a whole new city overnight. But for a U.S. Games, a slightly imperfect arena, like maybe a refurbished ARCO Arena, especially if it's for the less popular women's hockey Games, might just do. Remember, it's just for TWO WEEKS -- not for eternity. If Reno is the host city you might get away with alpine events being held in Tahoe across the state border but there is no way in hell any events will be allowed to take place in another city in another state that is also 132 miles away. Give - me - a - break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 If Reno is the host city you might get away with alpine events being held in Tahoe across the state border but there is no way in hell any events will be allowed to take place in another city in another state that is also 132 miles away. Give - me - a - break. Re Reno-Sacto, well, why not? HongKong (where the equestrian events were held) is 1,225 mi from Beijing. Yachting events have always been held hundreds of miles from inland Summer host cities. And that's why satellite villages are also created. The point is...it's NOT impossible; it's NOT a deal-breaker and that's what was informally shared with me. And logically, Maybe Reno can come up with another $700 mil to build 2 more arenas in the city? Re the alpine events, a good 2/5ths of the Lake periphery is on the Reno side. I imagine they might try to keep most of those on the Nevada side of tings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTimeOnly Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 Re Reno-Sacto, well, why not? HongKong (where the equestrian events were held) is 1,225 mi from Beijing. Yachting events have always been held hundreds of miles from inland Summer host cities. And that's why satellite villages are also created. The point is...it's NOT impossible; it's NOT a deal-breaker and that's what was informally shared with me. And logically, Maybe Reno can come up with another $700 mil to build 2 more arenas in the city? Re the alpine events, a good 2/5ths of the Lake periphery is on the Reno side. I imagine they might try to keep most of those on the Nevada side of tings. Dream on about using Sacramento....to say you're really stretching it is an understatement. P.S. all the best Skiing in Lake Tahoe is on the California side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.