Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 610
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think this situation is ripe for an exception; a) a weak field outside of Oslo (Norway being a recent host) it being Sweden, a traditional winter sport nation that also is a top hockey nation (R

No government financial support No hope of success Especially when considering the utterly ridiculous distances between Stockholm and Are After all, Oslo can always be persuaded to use Norefjell wh

It wouldn't be called Stockholm/Are anyway. It would just be Stockholm 2022 regardless, since the Olympic Charter that only one city be designated as host. Just like it was only Vancouver 2010, &

I have a practical question. I'm not a hardcore ski-buff (though I enjoy watching it). By moving some ski events (or only the downhill, as other bids seem to propose) to another location, doesn't this mean that some athletes will have to pick and choose which events they participate in? I realize this is often an issue in other sports as well, but it seems that long distances could create especially severe scheduling problems.

What happens if somebody qualifies for slalom in Stockholm and downhill in Are? Somehow they have to squeeze in a 7 hour drive in between? I know the slalom/downhill pairing is not super common, but it's not unheardof either. Surely this scenario is not in the best interests of the athletes.

That is correct. Usually the athletes compete in slalom/giant slalom which would be held in diff venues, and this is usually thw two events the weaker nations qualify to compete. So moving upward of 60 nocs back and forth will be a headache.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mens' Alpine Scheduel for Sochi...

Feb 9 - Downhill

Feb 14 - Supercombined

Feb 16 - Super G

Feb 19 - Giant Slalom

Feb 22 - Slalom

There is plently of time for getting around. Note - you build a slalom track for the combined up by the downhill instead of using the Olympic slalom hill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But with the distance and logistics, it just makes more sense to have all the Alpine events at the Are site. I mean, we're only talking one more event per gender with basically the same competitors, fans, supporters and media.

Edited by Kenadian
Link to post
Share on other sites

But with the distance and logistics, it just makes more sense to have all the Alpine events at the Are site. I mean, we're only talking one more event per gender with basically the same competitors, fans, supporters and media.

Yes, I don't get the point why they would make a huge effort by artificially increasing a hill when all the facilities are there (and would need to be used for the other events) in Are anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mens' Alpine Scheduel for Sochi...

Feb 9 - Downhill

Feb 14 - Supercombined

Feb 16 - Super G

Feb 19 - Giant Slalom

Feb 22 - Slalom

There is plently of time for getting around. Note - you build a slalom track for the combined up by the downhill instead of using the Olympic slalom hill.

The Supercombined alone though, poses problems. How do the athletes get back and forth quickly enough?

And even if one can squeeze in the travel, the scenario does not create conditions that are conducive to turning in one's best performances.

Yes, I don't get the point why they would make a huge effort by artificially increasing a hill when all the facilities are there (and would need to be used for the other events) in Are anyway.

That's what I was thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mens' Alpine Scheduel for Sochi...

Feb 9 - Downhill

Feb 14 - Supercombined

Feb 16 - Super G

Feb 19 - Giant Slalom

Feb 22 - Slalom

There is plently of time for getting around. Note - you build a slalom track for the combined up by the downhill instead of using the Olympic slalom hill.

Hey hyperbrains, the Alpine events are spaced out like that to ALLOW for cancellation/resked days in-between...and in tandem with OTHER events scheduled (including the women's races) so probably there isn't a crush of egress and in the roads to and from the various venues...NOT because it gives others plenty of time "...for getting around." :rolleyes: U're using your cerebellum too much.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I don't get the point why they would make a huge effort by artificially increasing a hill when all the facilities are there (and would need to be used for the other events) in Are anyway.

With this recent news I returned my doubts of the project and my thoughts are exactly the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey hyperbrains, the Alpine events are spaced out like that to ALLOW for cancellation/resked days in-between...and in tandem with OTHER events scheduled (including the women's races) so probably there isn't a crush of egress and in the roads to and from the various venues...NOT because it gives others plenty of time "...for getting around." :rolleyes: U're using your cerebellum too much.

Well then the answer is simple. Bundle all Alpine events in Are and tell spectators who want to watch the Alpine sports/disciplines to stay in Are for the duration of such and such and such and such. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supercombi as such is not a problem, they could just use parts of the other slopes in Are for the slalom bit. Which in turn, again leads to the question of why splitting Alpine in two locations anyway...

Again, I wouldn't dismiss this bid easily, but there are aspects that really make me wonder at this stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then the answer is simple. Bundle all Alpine events in Are and tell spectators who want to watch the Alpine sports/disciplines to stay in Are for the duration of such and such and such and such. :P

Of course, they can. But that still doesn't overcome the BASIC flaw of their bid - SPLITTING the Olympic community who gather together once every 4 years for a shared experience over 500km apart. While they may not meet on the FOP, it removes the possibility of a Chilean skier sharing a Village dining table with a curler from the Ukraine. It defeats one of the basic aims of the quadrennial Olympic Games - the coming together of distant individuals and possibly forging new relationships across the continents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But split villages are nothing new. Vancouver and Whistler each had their own athletes' village.

U don't get it, do you? That distance wasn't so daunting as to really pose problems for officials who wanted to visit the alpine venues part of the day and be back...safely before dark. And I believe, the athletes who stayed at Whistler had the option to join their colleagues back at the main village in Vancouver once space opened up. It did not involve planning a 7-hour trip. Wow, is it really so difficult to grasp the concept that negotiating 528km in the mountains in the winter is not like a 2-hour drive on the beach with the top down???

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't change the fact that split villages are nothing new.

And doesn't change the fact that the other bids present better alternatives.

If I am shopping for a house with the locations of my kids' schools in mind...would I pick a home that is 30 mi away from, say the 2 schools (if the boy & girl go to different schools)? Or should I maybe pick a house that is equidistant from both schools?? I mean, it's a no-brainer.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Supercombined alone though, poses problems. How do the athletes get back and forth quickly enough?

.

Note - you build a slalom track for the combined up by the downhill instead of using the Olympic slalom hill.

But if the bid organizers have not even considered these fundamental issues, what does that say about the quality of their planning? I think it's unlikely this bid will become competitive.

What makes you think they haven't considered these fundamental issues? These guys plan world cup ski events all the time. I suspect they've thought vastly more about the logistics than we have.

Of course, they can. But that still doesn't overcome the BASIC flaw of their bid - SPLITTING the Olympic community who gather together once every 4 years for a shared experience over 500km apart. While they may not meet on the FOP, it removes the possibility of a Chilean skier sharing a Village dining table with a curler from the Ukraine. It defeats one of the basic aims of the quadrennial Olympic Games - the coming together of distant individuals and possibly forging new relationships across the continents.

The Alpine skiiers don't stay in the main villiage with the curlers. Everybody coming together doesn't happen today. It won't happen at any of the proposed 2022 sites. Do you honestly think it does? That's a serious question... do you honestly think this happens?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Distance between Hong Kong and Beijing 1963km

Beijing to Qingdao is 670km

So 600 athletes were further from Beijing than the 300 athletes would be from Stockholm.

Well, HK wasn't part of the bid but later added for political reasons (with a pretext as disguise, of course).

And 300 out of less than 3000 is more significant than 600 out of 10500.

I think there's loads of pros and cons about this bid, but some comments here seem too dogmatic, on both sides. But maybe that's because I'm still quite new here and not yet used to everyone's tone ;-)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hong Kong comparison is apt. Beijing organizers choose to use Hong Kong instead of building a new facility near or in Beijing because there was already a history of Equestrian in Hong Kong, Hong Kong met international standards and had facilities in place to run the competition. It also provided better conditions for the horses. In almost every way using Hong Kong was the most logical, pragmatic choice.

If the IOC wants to go to Sweden, the distance between Stockholm and Are is going to amount to nothing. And all things being equal, which they aren't, I think that Sweden will be able to overcome the distance between the alpine venues and Stockholm better than Krakow will overcome their binational bid. Krakow has already made the mistake of making this a joint bid, instead of just saying, look we are going to use this venue that is a hop, skip and a jump across a boarder that doesn't really exist anymore. Which Salzburg did with their two bids.

Sweden is now the final frontier in the Olympic Winter Games, if the IOC rejects the Stockholm/Are option, you will likely never see a Swedish bid again. It also sends the wrong message, Sweden providing a sensible, pragmatic option to host getting out-right dismissed compared to building orgies and dodgy countries. The prevailing winds make Stockholm's bid a lot more achievable than it would have been if it had been in competition with Torino, Vancouver or Sochi.

Edited by faster
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sweden is now the final frontier in the Olympic Winter Games, if the IOC rejects the Stockholm/Are option, you will likely never see a Swedish bid again. It also sends the wrong message, Sweden providing a sensible, pragmatic option to host getting out-right dismissed compared to building orgies and dodgy countries. The prevailing winds make Stockholm's bid a lot more achievable than it would have been if it had been in competition with Torino, Vancouver or Sochi.

Agree entirely. If Munich or St Moritz was bidding I would accept that Stockholm has the odds stacked against it. But given the circumstances, that after a run of new frontiers and rejections from the heartlands of winter sport, the IOC can make a real statement by selecting Stockholm. A Swedish winter olympics would represent responsibility, sustainabilty, and an openess to considering creative possibilities in a world of ever shrinking options for hosts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...