Jump to content

PyeongChang 2018's affect


Triffle

Recommended Posts

It's an angle they should play up. "It's different, and it's a blast to the past, a return to WOG roots and the time is right." If they fed me that I would eat that up.

Isn't this exactly the pitch both Munich and Annecy used for 2018?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Isn't this exactly the pitch both Munich and Annecy used for 2018?

Yes, but the time wasn't right.

I don't think the WOG should go to new horizons ALL the time. Just when it suits me. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why, because PC was bidding? :) What would "make the time right"?

Well, short answer is yes. The IOC made it quite clear today with a 2/3 majority vote that they weren't willing to go back to Europe consecutively when there was another alternative which may be worse in some aspects, but beneficial in others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...add to that with Asia checked off the Winter list now, the playing field is quite open for the European bidders for 2022. As always, it's all in the timing & dynamics of the cycles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without Paris or Durban in the mix, I really wouldn't care who in Europe gets 2020. And with 2018 going to Asia, that just opens the European window for 2022. Bet as many as half-dozen Euro applicants could be in the fray.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without Paris or Durban in the mix, I really wouldn't care who in Europe gets 2020. And with 2018 going to Asia, that just opens the European window for 2022. Bet as many as half-dozen Euro applicants could be in the fray.

Actually, I think 2022 plays very strongly for a US winter bid. If 2020 will be Europe, then there would be a tendency to tilt 2022 away from Europe. That's exactly what they've done with 2016, now 2018, back to Europe 2020, so a different continent for 2022 which would leave only the USA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^ 2020 being in Europe may mean that the 2022 winner won't be, but the bid process will still go on the assumption that it could be a strong year for Europe. The 2022 bids will be much more clear and organized by the time the 2020 winner is announced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I think 2022 plays very strongly for a US winter bid. If 2020 will be Europe, then there would be a tendency to tilt 2022 away from Europe. That's exactly what they've done with 2016, now 2018, back to Europe 2020, so a different continent for 2022 which would leave only the USA.

Perhaps, so long as the US don't stuff it up with Reno!

All I can see as already existing is the Reno Events Center (can it even fit an ice rink?), Lawlor Events Center (would need radical alterations to first tier to add an ice rink), the Convention Center (which could serve as either IBC/MPC or both in an upgraded capacity), the ski slopes at Lake Tahoe and perhaps a cross country skiing course.

New Zealand would be logical to try for 2022. If the World Cup in Qatar is moved to January, then perhaps a mid year Winter Olympics is the answer to avoid a clash with the World Cup having the event just start soon after. It would be interesting to see what a NZ bid would bring as it would definitely promote the idea of the Southern Hemisphere not having hosted ever and an attempt to try and persuade the IOC to bend the rules a little and let a city like Christchurch host mid year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course that will have to be NZ's strategy, but I have a feeling the IOC will be concerned about television audiences in the more populous and winter-sports-loving northern hemisphere not really being in the mood to tune into figure skating and ski jumping in July...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think you can read PC's victory in different ways.

First you can try to understand why the IOC has chosen PC.

If you understand as a victory of perseverance, then Madrid, Tokyo and Istanbul would be inspired in trying again. Although Rome has bid for 2004, it has been more than 15 years since the last time they have tried.

You could also see as a clear display of the IOC's will to seek for new frontiers. In that case, Istanbul and a possible South African bid might be lining up. However, this new frontier preference might be only a reflection of the current economic scenario.

You can also look on how it will affect the next bid cycle in terms of geopolitics. This would mean a more difficult time for Tokyo, even though the existence of continental rotation across SOGs and WOGs is disputable. It is quite easy to refute that as a tradition.

In my opnion, PC does not affect significantly the 2020 race. It has been shaping up as an European battle with the early candidate Rome as a front-runner. I think Tokyo and Madrid will show up, but I don't bet strongly on that. Nevertheless, a strong Istanbul bid might gain momentum and turn things around in the same way the 2016 race was radically changed by Rio. 4 years ago, all attentions were concentrated to Chicago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think you can read PC's victory in different ways.

First you can try to understand why the IOC has chosen PC.

If you understand as a victory of perseverance, then Madrid, Tokyo and Istanbul would be inspired in trying again. Although Rome has bid for 2004, it has been more than 15 years since the last time they have tried.

You could also see as a clear display of the IOC's will to seek for new frontiers. In that case, Istanbul and a possible South African bid might be lining up. However, this new frontier preference might be only a reflection of the current economic scenario.

You can also look on how it will affect the next bid cycle in terms of geopolitics. This would mean a more difficult time for Tokyo, even though the existence of continental rotation across SOGs and WOGs is disputable. It is quite easy to refute that as a tradition.

In my opnion, PC does not affect significantly the 2020 race. It has been shaping up as an European battle with the early candidate Rome as a front-runner. I think Tokyo and Madrid will show up, but I don't bet strongly on that. Nevertheless, a strong Istanbul bid might gain momentum and turn things around in the same way the 2016 race was radically changed by Rio. 4 years ago, all attentions were concentrated to Chicago.

I think you need a combination of all three to create a perfect storm. Pyeongchang was a case of perseverance, new markets and geopolitics all at once. And their improving performances at the actual Games in 2006 and 2010 (especially 2010) only helped. It also didn't hurt to have the ideal star as the face of your bid in a 20 year old figure skating champion who just happens to ooze charm.

Best of luck to future bidders in creating your perfect storm. As we've seen before, perseverance alone will not usually cut it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I feel 2020 will not have any real bearing on eliminating Euro bids for 2022. Athens/Turin and London/Sochi have proven the IOC is comfortable returning to Europe consecutively. I think consecutive summer and winter hosts for the other continents has a greater effect, but by no means would eliminate their chances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sochi isn't really a "European games" in the traditional sense though...the Caucuses are as close to Central Asia, and this is a first time hosting for post-Soviet Russia, a "new horizon" as far as the World Cup was concerned when it selected the country for 2018. The rotation is more than just straightforwardly continental.

If the Euro bids are in traditional locations in the Alps the calculus will be different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In essence though, Russia is mainly a European country with a "suffiently" European image. And Sochi is in Russia which technically is in Europe. Eastern Europe, but it's still Europe, nonetheless.

Part of Sochi's bid was also "that they were the only major Winter Sporting power that has yet to host the Winter Games". So in that aspect, they certainly were trying to follow their "traditional" angle.

And for FIFA, Russia was a "new horizon". Since the World Cup has never been played in Eastern Europe & soccer is not as predominant in Russia as it is in Western Europe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case, Russia's argument was similar to China's for 2008 or Brazil's for 2016. "We are a power, we haven't hosted this specific thing, give it to us."

It's absolutely a new horizons argument in that respect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, but isn't your argument something else? In saying that Sochi really isn't a "European Games" simply because the Caucusus are close to Central Asia? I mean, what does that have to with anything.

Still doesn't change the fact that Sochi is technically on the European side of Russia, which therefore would make them a European Winter Games, regardless. And apparently, the IOC thought so as well yesterday, when they overwhelmingly chose an Asian bid over 2 two other "traditional" Winter European candidates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 2022 is wide open for Europe. Even if Sochi were more quintessentially European like Munich or Annecy -- I still think that Europe will have a good shot at 2022.

PyeongChang's win means that North America (if they bid) will face off against Europe.

PyeongChang's defeat would have meant that North America (if they bid) would face off against Harbin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, Sochi is pretty close to the Middle East, but it is in Western Russia, and I think most classify western Russia as part of Europe. Sochi's proximity to London is about the same distance as Chicago to LA, so it is not like it is across the planet.

Even if you want to make the new horizons argument about Sochi, the IOC has gone back to back summer and winter games in Europe as recently as Athens/Turin and Albertville/Barcelona/Lillenheimer, so I certainly wouldn't rule out Euro bids for 2022, if a Euro city wins 2020.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you can never rule out a back-to-back Euro Games 2 years apart. That's fair, the Summer and Winter Games run on different cycles and the number of Euro choices out there means there will be times when Euro hosts just need to collide at the same time, like 2004-2006.

Similarly, a back-to-back North American games in the form of 2020-2022 or 2022-2024 should not be frowned upon either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just posted in one of the GB newswire threads about how I see the potential for much more interest in 2022 than there was for 2018. I can easily see 2022 as a huge European cat-fight (like 2012 was for the Summer race), with the possible likes of Switzerland, Germany, France, Norway or Sweden & an Eastern Euro bid or two in there as well.

I also don't think that a Euro 2020 Summer win would impede a Euro city getting 2022, either. Since the only main competition coming outside Europe for 2022 could be from the U.S., parallel to Summer 2012. And we all where 2012 is taking place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just posted in one of the GB newswire threads about how I see the potential for much more interest in 2022 than there was for 2018. I can easily see 2022 as a huge European cat-fight (like 2012 was for the Summer race), with the possible likes of Switzerland, Germany, France, Norway or Sweden & an Eastern Euro bid or two in there as well.

I also don't think that a Euro 2020 Summer win would impede a Euro city getting 2022, either. Since the only main competition coming outside Europe for 2022 could be from the U.S., parallel to Summer 2012. And we all where 2012 is taking place.

I'm pretty excited to see what the 2022 race has in store. We may finally see a shortlist of 5 again. As a PC supporter, I appreciated the short shortlist of 2014 and 2018. As a more neutral observer, the race would be way more fun with more candidates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...