Stockholm/Are 2022?

[StefanMUC]

I think the question whether a ceremony takes place in a roofed stadium or not is not nearly as significant as whether a core part of the WOG is 600 km away instead of 200 and can only be reached by air transport.

Sweden would surey be great as WOG host, but this IS a major stumbling block.

[FYI]

Too many, it was a big deal having the ceremonies in a covered stadium for the first time.

From what I've read, four Alpine events would be slated for Are. While many Alpine events are marquee events at the Winter Olympics, the "core" of the Games would not take place there. That'd be in Stockholm.

No one is citing that this wouldn't be a hurdle. But it's not exactly as if the other bids don't have stumbling blocks of their own. We don't know yet how the Swedes would overcome this. Let's just wait & see what they propose before we start to make a dire judgment on a potential candidate that would have all of the other major boxes checked off.

It's not like Munich was proposing some major compact plan, yet a lot on here were all over them. Yeah, theirs was closer than 400 miles, but they had four spread-out clusters. At least in this case it's just two, even if they are farther apart.

[baron-pierreIV]

Melbourne should return the 1956 favor and offer to co-host 2022 with Stockholm. I mean between a 7 hour train-ride and a 12-hour flight where you can move around and sleep. what's the difference?? You even get Frequent Flyer points.

Edited November 13, 2013 by baron-pierreIV

[StefanMUC]

Did people really have issues with a ceremony under a roof? FGS, it's just a show...

Anyway, none of the candidates (including the refused Munich concept) would offer very compact bids. Even the Oslo "Games in the city" slogan is a smokescreen, given that alpine and sliding events would be held two hours or so away.

But it would certainly need a very strong persuasion to overcome the Stockholm/Åre distance, IMO.

[FYI]

But it would certainly need a very strong persuasion to overcome the Stockholm/Åre distance, IMO.

Uhh, well that's the crux of the matter here. IMHO, (& some others here too) Stockholm does have the great potential for a very strong persuasion to overcome the distance. A strong, traditional winter sports nations that's never hosted the Winter Olympics. A country that hasn't seen an Olympics in over a century.

Much like in Russia's case, another traditional winter sports power that had never hosted the Games, & Sochi's biggest weakness was that they had to build everything from scratch. Yet that's what the IOC chose. But in Stockholm's case, you would have the opposite. In a time where mega-expense is making the other traditional cities run away, the IOC would have a choice of sending the opposite message that you don't have to be another Sochi to host the Winter Games.

People made arguments against PyeongChang, with the lack of winter sports fervor, & how could the South Koreans really embrace the Winter Games outside speed skating. Well, they too had a strong persuasion & overcame that hurdle.

And Rio was the most spread out of all the 2016 bidders, not mention the seperation of the ceremonies & athletics for the first time ever. Questions of not being ready, etc. But they overcome all of their hurdles.

A traditional & viable country that has tried several times before & failed, but with their smaller villages. Now they may have a go at it with the their premier city, with a more practical approach, & with all their other positive attributes, could also have that power of 'strong persuasion' just like some of the others did.

[breathesgelatin]

Did people really have issues with a ceremony under a roof? FGS, it's just a show...

There were definitely people complaining about a ceremony under a roof before Vancouver, even right here on GamesBids... Some of them were straight crazy, now, but they were there.

[FYI]

*'very strong persuasion'

FGS, it's just a show...

Don't let Baron hear you say that!! Lmfao! :-D

[Gangwon]

What will IOC members think about being separated from each other? The IOC members only see each other once a year to begin with. Do they want to give up that opportunity with a 600 km separation? Even if they were to care less about the athletes and visitors, I don't think the IOC members themselves would want to be separated from each other.

[FYI]

Uhh, I think you're wayyyy over analyzing that. How much time do the members really spend with each other at the Games TBW. Other than the occasional get together & some meetings (which could [& mostly do] get taken care of right before or after the Games) I doubt it's very much.

You act as if they're all one big happy family with no spats or quarrels among themselves, & I can't see that as the case. Unless they're all big BFF's with one another, I can't see any of that as an issue. Especially in today's age of instant communication anywhere you are in world.

[baron-pierreIV]

FGS, it's just a show...

it is THE show!!

Anything over 200km TOTALLY defeats the purpose of a shared Olympic experience. And the IOC members w/ a special affinity for Alpine events would be FORCED to decamp for Are from Stockholm after their meetings. They might not be too crazy about that...therefore the Swedes shouldn't count on those votes going to them.

Edited November 13, 2013 by baron-pierreIV

[Gangwon]

Uhh, I think you're wayyyy over analyzing that. How much time do the members really spend with each other at the Games TBW. Other than the occasional get together & some meetings (which could [& mostly do] get taken care of right before or after the Games) I doubt it's very much.

You act as if they're all one big happy family with no spats or quarrels among themselves, & I can't see that as the case. Unless they're all big BFF's with one another, I can't see any of that as an issue. Especially in today's age of instant communication anywhere you are in world.

You may be right, IOC members may not care about being together. Though some probably will care and others won't.

But this same concern extends to athletes and visitors too. Athletes may want to be one big happy family, and visitors will want to watch both skiing and skating.

BUT getting back to the IOC members, because they are the ones who decide, I can see at least a handful of them voting against Sweden just on this ground alone.

[FYI]

BUT getting back to the IOC members, because they are the ones who decide, I can see at least a handful of them voting against Sweden just on this ground alone.

Then it becomes no different than any other issues that could or could not be negligible to any of the other bids. Remember how many others here cited that South Korea's lack of enthusiasm for most winter sports wouldn't go unnoticed by many in the IOC. Well, that proved to a non-issue in the end. I still think that all of the positive attributes of a Stockholm bid could far overcome what you're pointing out, which TBH, I think is still over-analyzing.

[baron-pierreIV]

Why don't they just put up virtual reality Alpine pavilions in downtown Stockholm...and thus have all the sports in the capital??

[Gangwon]

Then it becomes no different than any other issues that could or could not be negligible to any of the other bids. Remember how many others here cited that South Korea's lack of enthusiasm for most winter sports wouldn't go unnoticed by many in the IOC. Well, that proved to a non-issue in the end. I still think that all of the positive attributes of a Stockholm bid could far overcome what you're pointing out, which TBH, I think is still over-analyzing.

But it is different from the problems of Sochi/Rio/PC. Stockholm/Are 2022 is essentially 2 separate Olympics. That's different than having a different kind of ceremonies or going to a new frontier. You're pretty much saying any problem is similar to any other problem because it will affect how an IOC member votes regardless of the type of problem. Of course all bids will have a disadvantage. Even Oslo and Munich would have disadvantages. It's the nature of the disadvantage that matters.

[FYI]

But it is different from the problems of Sochi/Rio/PC. Stockholm/Are 2022 is essentially 2 separate Olympics. That's different than having a different kind of ceremonies or going to a new frontier.

In the sense of the Winter Olympics, Sweden IS a new frontier, though. We don't know yet how the Swedes are going to tackle this issue. With minimizing as much as can be minimized, with coordinated scheduling, & some sort of transport solution, it could be possible. And in a sense, we already have "essentially 2 separate Olympics" when it comes to the Winter Games. It's not like Turin, Vancouver & PyeongChang had/have the Alpine events right in their backyard.

You're pretty much saying any problem is similar to any other problem because it will affect how an IOC member votes regardless of the type of problem. Of course all bids will have a disadvantage. Even Oslo and Munich would have disadvantages. It's the nature of the disadvantage that matters.

No, I'm not. If there's no compelling element (which is not the case in Sweden's case. On the contrary), then any major problem is a non-starter. But that's not the case here. Again, look at how many were so vehement against PyeongChang's 2018 bid bcuz of "lack of fervor, lack of snow, it's not a 'traditional' winter sports nation", etc. If the IOC did indeed have ALL of those concerns with PyeongChang, they wouldn't have won 2018. Sweden has this one issue, albeit it's quite a biggie, but it's not insurmountable IMHO, considering all of the other positive attributes a Stockholm 2022 bid would provide. I said it in another thread yesterday, but Sweden is to the Winter Olympics what South Africa would be to the Summer Olympics: the Final Frontier.

[baron-pierreIV]

In the sense of the Winter Olympics, Sweden IS a new frontier, though. We don't know yet how the Swedes are going to tackle this issue. With minimizing as much as can be minimized, with coordinated scheduling, & some sort of transport solution, it could be possible. And in a sense, we already have "essentially 2 separate Olympics" when it comes to the Winter Games. It's not like Turin, Vancouver & PyeongChang had/have the Alpine events right in their backyard.

No, I'm not. If there's no compelling element (which is not the case in Sweden's case. On the contrary), then any major problem is a non-starter. But that's not the case here. Again, look at how many were so vehement against PyeongChang's 2018 bid bcuz of "lack of fervor, lack of snow, it's not a 'traditional' winter sports nation", etc. If the IOC did indeed have ALL of those concerns with PyeongChang, they wouldn't have won 2018. Sweden has this one issue, albeit it's quite a biggie, but it's not insurmountable IMHO, considering all of the other positive attributes a Stockholm 2022 bid would provide. I said it in another thread yesterday, but Sweden is to the Winter Olympics what South Africa would be to the Summer Olympics: the Final Frontier.

600 km is ridiculous. I wouldn't be surprised if the IOC stopped them before the Short List -- esp since there are 5 other saner bids.

[FYI]

esp since there are 5 other saner bids.

Not really. Only one would be "saner" than Stockholm's.

[Kenadian]

We're pretty early in this, but the Swedes are currently only proposing 8 alpine events for Are. Not half the games as some seem to be suggesting. I know that could change. Everything changes in Olympic circles.

And yes, 600 km is a big distance. But Munich to Kiel is 900 km. Atlanta to Miami is 1000 km. Beijing to Hong Kong is 2000 km. Los Angeles to Boston is 5000 km. And let's not even try to calculate Melbourne to Stockholm. There are plenty of cases in the summer games where a few Olympic sporting events have been held far outside the main Olympic city - football, sailing, equestrian. A compact Olympics isn't always possible. This would certainly be the furthest Alpine events have been from the rest of the Olympic events and maybe a bit strange for the 300 odd competitors, but it won't end the Olympic Movement as we know it.

So, I think we should wait and see what Sweden proposes in full. And then the IOC can decide if having one sport contended 600 km away from the main cite is too much.

Edited November 13, 2013 by Kenadian

[Gangwon]

Not really. Only one would be "saner" than Stockholm's.

There, I agree with you, in that despite all of Stockholm's shortcoming, I'd STILL choose them over any other bid apart from Oslo.

[gromit]

We're pretty early in this, but the Swedes are currently only proposing 8 alpine events for Are. Not half the games as some seem to be suggesting. I know that could change. Everything changes in Olympic circles.

And yes, 600 km is a big distance. But Munich to Kiel is 900 km. Atlanta to Miami is 1000 km. Beijing to Hong Kong is 2000 km. Los Angeles to Boston is 5000 km. And let's not even try to calculate Melbourne to Stockholm. There are plenty of cases in the summer games where a few Olympic sporting events have been held far outside the main Olympic city - football, sailing, equestrian. A compact Olympics isn't always possible. This would certainly be the furthest Alpine events have been from the rest of the Olympic events and maybe a bit strange for the 300 odd competitors, but it won't end the Olympic Movement as we know it.

So, I think we should wait and see what Sweden proposes in full. And then the IOC can decide if having one sport contended 600 km away from the main cite is too much.

Munich to Kiel = The Summer Games

Atlanta to Miami = The Summer Games

Beijing to Hong Kong = the Summer Games

Los Angeles to Boston = the Summer Games

Exactly when has there been a distance like this in the Winter Games???? .... and we are talking about the minor sports, not a major event like the Men's Downhill

Would you expect them to host the 100m final, hundreds of Kms from the rest of the games???

[yoshi]

The real shame is that Ostersund/Are 2022 would've been the perfect chance to "reset" the WOG after Sochi, & to a lesser extent, PC. It could've been a modern Lillehammer, showing you could still have a modern, yet sustainable, games.

[markun]

The problem is that they would have to use temporary venues to avoid white elephants and the IOC demand legacy.

Something has to give, if the games continue to grow and you want them to be hosted in a variety of countries - limited in number to begin with - there will have to be flexibility.

Stockholm's biggest threat isn't the distance to Åre, it's the naturally cautious attitude of the people and government. Stockholm can do this and I believe the IOC know it.

[baron-pierreIV]

Munich to Kiel = The Summer Games

Atlanta to Miami = The Summer Games

Beijing to Hong Kong = the Summer Games

Los Angeles to Boston = the Summer Games

Exactly when has there been a distance like this in the Winter Games???? .... and we are talking about the minor sports, not a major event like the Men's Downhill

Would you expect them to host the 100m final, hundreds of Kms from the rest of the games???

Agreed. And in the Summer Games, if it is an inland city, then it goes without question that the nearest port/ocean has to be used. And the soccer games are precisely throw-away pieces to share/"dump" with far-flung cities to sort of "bring the whole country" together. AND THE MAIN CRITERION is...IOC members can visit the distant satellite cities in the SUmmer Games WITHOUT hazard or danger of travel. It's not like them / sponsors / VIPs / press / visitors will encounter a fog bank, a blizzard or an avalanche in a northern July /August. That is the main consideration of trying to keep the Winter Games as compact as humanly possible.

[FYI]

The problem is that they would have to use temporary venues to avoid white elephants and the IOC demand legacy.

Something has to give, if the games continue to grow and you want them to be hosted in a variety of countries - limited in number to begin with - there will have to be flexibility.

Stockholm's biggest threat isn't the distance to Åre, it's the naturally cautious attitude of the people and government. Stockholm can do this and I believe the IOC know it.

Agreed.

It's not like them / sponsors / VIPs / press / visitors will encounter a fog bank, a blizzard or an avalanche in a northern July /August.

No, just mudslides, torrential rain & brush fires. And you can still have fog even in the summer.

[Athensfan]

Stockholm/Are isn't viable. Period. Any argument otherwise is based on denial. The distance is too great. I don't believe the bid will be shortlisted -- certainly not as proposed.

I also suspect that Oslo will either pull out before the vote due to lack of government support or be heavily criticized by the Evaluation Commission for an unrealistically low budget.

I think this could well come down to Almaty, Krakow, Beijing.