Stockholm/Are 2022?

[Barcelona_'92]

Regardless of the number of competitors, I can't understand equating alpine skiing with sailing or equestrian. Alpine skiing is one of the most important events of the Winter Games. Sailing and equestrian are relatively minor events that don't receive a lot of media attention. What Stockholm is proposing would be the equivalent of staging swimming or gymnastics 600km from the host city of the Summer Games.

[markun]

What Stockholm is proposing would be the equivalent of staging swimming or gymnastics 600km from the host city of the Summer Games.

No it isn't. Because, as has been said about a million times, the skiing events are almost always completely away from the host city these days as no resorts can cope with the enlarged winter games. You can't compare the summer and winter olympics, they are completely different and as I have said, the Olympic charter recognises that.

[baron-pierreIV]

Regardless of the number of competitors, I can't understand equating alpine skiing with sailing or equestrian. Alpine skiing is one of the most important events of the Winter Games. Sailing and equestrian are relatively minor events that don't receive a lot of media attention. What Stockholm is proposing would be the equivalent of staging swimming or gymnastics 600km from the host city of the Summer Games.

EXACTLY. And because the WOGs are so climate-dependent, the vagaries of distance,etc.....oh, why am I even bothering.

No it isn't. Because, as has been said about a million times, the skiing events are almost always completely away from the host city these days as no resorts can cope with the enlarged winter games.

But not at 528 km away.

Edited November 15, 2013 by baron-pierreIV

[Lord David]

Just reviewing the Östersund 2002 bid books.

Why couldn't the Swedish Olympic Committee just go with that again (but at a larger scale)?

The city has an existing Biathlon/Cross Country Skiing venue and the slopes at Are are more than sufficient to host not only Alpine events, but Snowboard and Freestyle Skiing as well.

A Speed Skating Oval and Sliding Centre would certainly be more useful in such a legacy location (which is already the base for Swedish winter sports anyways).

So what if Stockholm has the arenas and hotel capacity. The 2002 bid (and I'm sure with past bid attempts) proposed that Östersund and Are build much of such infrastructure from scratch. You propose that legacy arena in Are, which would be downsized from say 5,000 to 3,000 or 2,000. That 2002 proposal of a multipurpose indoor arena complex solely for Ice Hockey with a major 10,000 arena, a down-sizable (perhaps converted to a multifunctional hall) 6,000 seater arena and that 1,000 seater training rink. Figure Skating/Short Track could be held at a temporary arena built for the games. Speed Skating will be held at a legacy new Oval.

It could be done, so why don't they just stick to this but boldly propose more than what the previous bids offered.

I wouldn't be surprised if this experiment with Stockholm fails to make it to the Candidacy and they go with a more logical Östersund bid for 2026.

[Kenadian]

Yes, there are some sports that appear more central to the Olympics than others, but the mistake with not 'equating' sports like equestrian and sailing with alpine skiing is the 'I' you are talking - that's projecting your personal opinion into the debate. The only 'I' that is relevant is the IOC and sometimes they can be surprisingly flexible (equestrian in Hong Kong, Rio's ceremonies stadium, Albertville's spread out plan) and other times not (Doha's heat, the February timeline for the Winter Games).

Anyway, to put my own 'I' into this, I would like to see Sweden as a Winter Olympic host some day, but like Quebec, Finland, the Netherlands, and a few other wintery lands, I know that mountains are a problem and the growing size of the Games compounds this (a reason why small sized Ostersund won't work anymore). But for now, this is Sweden's proposal. And timing is everything in Olympic cycles. If I were an IOC member facing this rather strange list of applicants, I would accept it going into the candidate phase. But if it were a case of going up against Salt Lake, Oslo, Torino, Munich and Vancouver, I would probably cut it.

Edited November 15, 2013 by Kenadian

[Barcelona_'92]

Just reviewing the Östersund 2002 bid books.

Why couldn't the Swedish Olympic Committee just go with that again (but at a larger scale)?

Even if Ostersund could build all of the venues, where would they house all of the officials, media, and sponsors, and spectators? Finding accommodations for thousands and thousands of people in a city of 60,000, with no other decent-sized cities nearby, would be virtually impossible. Lillehammer worked in 1994 because most of the spectators stayed in Oslo and took the train 2 hours each way to the venues. Even then, accommodations were extremely tight, and the Winter Games were only 2/3rds the size they are now. Any other city in Sweden with decent capacity is at least 500km away from Ostersund. Trondheim, Norway, is the only city that is even remotely close. I just don't see how that would be feasible.

[Gangwon]

Oh very interesting, I didn't know most spectators stayed in Oslo in 1994.

[Lord David]

Even if Ostersund could build all of the venues, where would they house all of the officials, media, and sponsors, and spectators? Finding accommodations for thousands and thousands of people in a city of 60,000, with no other decent-sized cities nearby, would be virtually impossible. Lillehammer worked in 1994 because most of the spectators stayed in Oslo and took the train 2 hours each way to the venues. Even then, accommodations were extremely tight, and the Winter Games were only 2/3rds the size they are now. Any other city in Sweden with decent capacity is at least 500km away from Ostersund. Trondheim, Norway, is the only city that is even remotely close. I just don't see how that would be feasible.

Oslo is different to Stockholm mind you. The distance from Oslo to Lillehammer is closer, much closer at at 183 km. Not to mention that Lillehammer's 1992 bid and successful hosting of the 1994 games emphasized the use of Oslo as a transport and additional accommodation base (after all most people were coming in from the capital). The 2022 bid will emphasize the success Oslo played in Lillehammer 1994.

Ostersund on the other hand proposed in 2002 to have it's airport dramatically upgraded and emphasized the availability of up to 140,000 beds within a travel time of 2 hours (radius) from the city. In essence, it proposed to be self sufficient (where the likes of the capital Stockholm would serve only as a major airport hub with connecting flights to Ostersund) and I think it still could be self sufficient in a future Olympics. The distance of 610 km from Stockholm is just too much, especially when (as mentioned before) the highlight events of Alpine Skiing won't be anywhere near the city which is hosting the games .

[Barcelona_'92]

Does anyone know what alpine venue was proposed when Falun bid for the 1988 and 1992 Games? Falun is at least close enough to Stockholm (about 220km) to be feasible.

[FYI]

It was actually Are as well. But the '92 winter race was going to be handed over to spread-out Albertville no matter what due to JAS. And for '88 Calgary was a good option after Cortina had already hosted in '56 & Sarajevo was already slated for Europe for '84.

[FYI]

Regardless of the number of competitors, I can't understand equating alpine skiing with sailing or equestrian. Alpine skiing is one of the most important events of the Winter Games. Sailing and equestrian are relatively minor events that don't receive a lot of media attention. What Stockholm is proposing would be the equivalent of staging swimming or gymnastics 600km from the host city of the Summer Games.

Well, regardless if Equestrian & Sailing don't get as much media attention, the logistics involved can't be that much different, like security which you tried to use as an argument against, if the number of athletes involved are very similar.

And the Alpine events are already held away from the winter host city nowadays anyway, unlike swimming & gymnastics which still takes place within the Summer Host City. So that mirage of everything being all right there has already been diluted.

[baron-pierreIV]

FYI, are of Swedish descent by any chance??

The SOGs are 2/3rds larger than the WOGs, therefore it is only natural that as much as 20% of their events (including the football matches) are held elsewhere...and because of the season, it is easy enuf for the IOC poobahs to fly from one satellite city back to Ground Zero in the same day. The WOGs are a third smaller, therefore it TOTALLY dilutes the experience for the athletes if some of the marquee events are held over 7 hours away by travel.

#1 - As already explained, the vagaries of travel in the winter, whether by land or air, cannot be underestimated in terms of not only the hazards but of the scheduling impact when things are delayed.

#2 - Additfionally, for example, I am an ice Winter Olympian. I want to watch my best gf/bf...or my brother/sister..compete up in Are...but I have my own speedskating event back in Stockholm in 2 days. Well, what if I get stranded up there for whatever reasons, or the event is postponed for a day or so? So, it's either I miss sharing the Olympic experience with my fellow Olympian OR miss my own event becuz the FRIGGIN' layout of the Games is too stupid to comprehend. Whereas if the Alpine venues were w/in 2 hours of the village and the anchor city, then I can go watch, lend support to my sibling/gf/bf's events and, similarly, my gf/bf/sibling can also share my events in Stockholm WITHOUT the great risks of missing out on his/her events if they have to go back up to Are for the Grand Slalom events in another day or two??

And if a plane carrying Olympic people/spectator crashes to or from travel to Are? With memorials, etc., wouldn't they delay everything for a day or 2 and throw the ENTIRE schedule into TOTAL chaos, even with postponement days already built into the Alpine events' calendar??

Does the above explain the extreme downside of splitting the fewer events of a WOG so far away? And all those summer comparisons are really just ridiculous and hold no water whatsoever. I hope the IOC will have the guts to stop this insanity at the gate. It's a non-starter.

Edited November 15, 2013 by baron-pierreIV

[zekekelso]

The SOGs are 2/3rds larger than the WOGs, therefore it is only natural that as much as 20% of their events (including the football matches) are held elsewhere.

The WOG's of today are much bigger than the SOG's of yore. If it was OK to have an event or two far away for the smaller SOG's, then there is no size arguement saying the WOG's can't do it.

The WOGs are a third smaller, therefore it TOTALLY dilutes the experience for the athletes if some of the marquee events are held over 7 hours away by travel.

How does it *totall* dilute the "experience for the athletes." That makes zero sense.

#1 - As already explained, the vagaries of travel in the winter, whether by land or air, cannot be underestimated in terms of not only the hazards but of the scheduling impact when things are delayed.

Unlike you, the Swedes know how to move people around in Winter.

Does the above explain the extreme downside of splitting the fewer events of a WOG so far away?

No.

[baron-pierreIV]

/\/\ Oh, it's just you then. Can't explain anything to a rock. Ignore.

Edited November 15, 2013 by baron-pierreIV

[FYI]

FYI, are of Swedish descent by any chance??

No, I'm not. I actually have some Latin, though, so going with what you're implying, one would think that I would've been all hot & bothered over Madrid's candidacy. Instead, I got incessantly 'attacked' of "hating & despising" Spain by the Spaniards on here over my objective points about their 2020 Olympic bid.

I don't see what's wrong with having an enthusiastic POV over a bid that has the great potential of being a compelling contender like in Stockholm's 2022 case. I had the same type of insight with PyeongChang 2018, Beijing 2008 & understanding why Rio got 2016, & it's also what both you & I share when it comes to South Africa. I see this as being no different, IMHO.

It's a non-starter.

That's what many here also say when Reno comes into the discussion. But that doesn't curtail you from your passionate support for them. I'd agree that had Munich, St Moritz, Barcelona all said yes, & then throw in Oslo, Annecy & Salzburg into the 2022 mix, then I'd say that Stockholm's goose is very likely cooked. But considering that all of the actual 2022 applicants have main issues of their own, Stockholm then actually becomes a contender. If the IOC really has a problem with the 400 miles, then it becomes a no-brainer. It should go to Oslo then.

And Munich's somewhat surprising exit is probably what gave the Swedes that extra push to go forward with their 2022 plans. Had Munich said yes, I bet Stockholm would've then refrained. I think that they're picking their battles with this & seeing a good chance here now.

[baron-pierreIV]

That's what many here also say when Reno comes into the discussion.

But technically, it's NOTHING against Reno-Tahoe. It just fails to meet the aesthetic standards of ONE party here. It's NOT like "No Ambience (per Athensfan, a Self-appointed Ambience Expert)" is a legitimate item on the Evaluation Committee's checklist which would equate to "Over 250 km/5hours' distance from the main Village or IOC hotel". item on the same checklist. I can see your passion for the bid but I don't understand how that 528-km distance makes it a bid with any promise.

Edited November 15, 2013 by baron-pierreIV

[FYI]

But technically, it's NOTHING against Reno-Tahoe. It just fails to meet the aesthetic standards of ONE party here. .

It's more than just 'one' party here. There's quite a few that say Reno isn't really a contender. Especially when they have to rely on venues 150 miles away in Sacramento bcuz they don't have enough of their own. That in itself IS a 'technical' deficiency that would also be a legitimate item on an Evaluation Committee's checklist.

[baron-pierreIV]

It's more than just 'one' party here. There's quite a few that say Reno isn't really a contender. Especially when they have to rely on venues 150 miles away in Sacramento bcuz they don't have enough of their own. That in itself IS a 'technical' deficiency that would also be a legitimate item on an Evaluation Committee's checklist.

Uhmmm ....179km in the flatlands v. 528km in the mountains?? A 2-hour drive vs. a 7.25 hour drive??

Hway 80 rarely clogs up AND they can keep that open during a Games. And the Sacramento events are in arenas, so they are NOT weather-dependent. People from Reno-Tahoe can easily get a midday game in Sacto and be back in the PM in Tahoe for some other evening event...w/o having to fly. And a lot of spectator lodging will actually be scattered in the various Tahoe resorts...so it would be midway and you don't have to negotiate the full end-to-end distance. That would be cut in half.

If u REALLY can't tell the difference, then I can't help you.

Edited November 15, 2013 by baron-pierreIV

[FYI]

Not that I wanna derail this thread into another Reno debate here, but you really think that had Reno been in this 2022 application line-up that their low-budget "SactoReno" venue plan would've been up to snuff. Not in the slightest. You seem to be enamored now with Krakow & Lviv, & even they would be proposing to spend more than Reno ever could've.

[baron-pierreIV]

Not that I wanna derail this thread into another Reno debate here, but you really think that had Reno been in this 2022 application line-up that their low-budget "SactoReno" venue plan would've been up to snuff. Not in the slightest.

You seem to be enamored now with Krakow & Lviv, & even they would be proposing to spend more than Reno ever could've.

Reno question: only Almaty presents a more compact bid of the real 2022 candidates. And again, the distant/Sacto venues for a Reno-Tahoe bid are weather-proof; will NOT jumble the overall schedule unlike cancellations in Are..or even some extent to the Jasna end of the Krakow bid.

I like the Krakow bid. As you yourself said, it could be the dark-horse. And if I were an IOC'er, I'd consider going to Poland over the Scandinavian countries where the IOC has already been numerous times -- both Winter and Summer. I am NOT enamoured of it. It would be my bet.

And really...would you be feeling better after travelling 7+ hours...or after 2.5 hours?

Edited November 16, 2013 by baron-pierreIV

[FYI]

Geez, stop being "soooooooo defensive" over a SactoReno bid, especially when they're not even bidding.

[zekekelso]

And if I were an IOC'er, I'd consider going to Poland over the Scandinavian countries where the IOC has already been numerous times -- both Winter and Summer. I am NOT enamoured of it. It would be my bet.

And really...would you be more up to snuff after travelling 7+ hours...or after 2.5 hours?

The Olymics have been in Scandinavia once in the past 60 years.

And people won't do a lot of traveling back and forth.... any more than they do to distant SOG locations.

[baron-pierreIV]

Geez, stop being "soooooooo defensive" over a SactoReno bid, especially when they're not even bidding.

You brought it up. I didn't.

[StefanMUC]

Technical question: There's this talk about artificially increasing a hill for the slalom races. Where is that hill and how would they do that? Isn't that also one of the riskier aspects of the bid? Might work, but I'd like to know how.

[markun]

Technical question: There's this talk about artificially increasing a hill for the slalom races. Where is that hill and how would they do that? Isn't that also one of the riskier aspects of the bid? Might work, but I'd like to know how.

It is Flottsbro. The plans call for extending it by 210 metres but I don't know how they would do it.

http://www.flottsbro.se/