Jump to content

2022: A troubling scenario


stryker
 Share

Recommended Posts

The silver lining in Munich's rejection is that we may see a Swedish bid. We never would've had both.

I don't know if that's correct. Remember that bid organizations have a self-interest of promoting a bid even if the competition is tough. I'd rather say that the NOlympia will give the swedes stronger incentives to take the internal battles.

I was told in another thread that if Oslo doesn't get governmental, financial support after having "formally declared its intention to bid" (14th nov deadline), the country will be punished by IOC for decades. In other words, bid cities need governmental guarantees already before this deadline.

If that is correct, Stockholm will be in an even worse position than Oslo, given that governmental support is probably even more controversial in Sweden at this stage.

I would welcome a bid from Sweden; unfortunately for them, the geography and the distances between the large cities and winter sports venues aren't really favourable for an olympics. They can still figure something out, but they need to be creative, with perhaps artificial slalom hills near Stockholm etc. It's not ideal if the main city of the bid only hosts indoor events, although that has become the norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I posted this on this forum earlier, but has anybody heard anything from Sarajevo in a long time? I know there is virtually no chance of them bidding, but I was just curious since we still aren't considering them "eliminated" from bidding contention, and I hadn't heard anything in almost a year...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet with the alpine events to be staged hundreds of miles from Stockholm, I don't see this bid as a serious threat.

This is the bids only weakness, though. And they could work on a good solution for this. Compared to what we have left, Stockholm 2022 could be the most compelling choice & most practical. I believe some on here are seriously underestimating the Swedes here. I believe that they could take this, if they want to, that is.

I think this has helped Beijing more than anyone. As I said, the one thing Beijing has is total public support, even though it'd be forced. The IOC would surely value that over all that's been happening in Munich, Oslo or Stockholm.

I'd agree, but only if Oslo isn''t in it. But it looks like they are, so I say this decision today in Bavaria helps Oslo the most.

It's not going to be a runaway with Oslo. Been there-done that. I think Almaty and Krakow will be the strong bids.

Almaty would be too controversial, especially after Sochi, doubt the IOC want to go down that road again. Plus, it's still greatly untested. Sure, they've hosted some things here & there, but like Baku, I don't think that it's gonna get too far.

Krakow I could agree with, if they're creative & feasible enough, I could see them becoming a contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bavarian voters have sure changed the complexion of the race, eh?

To me, at this stage it's almost like 2020 again - all the ones left standing have some baggage to overcome.

I'm not hot for Beijing at all. My personal feelings play a large part in that, but beyond that, when the IOC appears to be struggling to re-build interest in the West in hosting, I think sending it to the largest metropolis in the world in a strictly-controlled society is sending the wrong message. Sure, it may not have a lot to build in Beijing itself, but doesn't the Zhangjiakou site need developing from scratch? And most people will just see "Beijing" and consider that it takes a mega-metropolis with no concerns about money to organise a WOGs now. besides, as has been mentioned often enough here, is three consecutive Asian games in a row a likely sequence?

Lviv, Almaty and Krakow are untried and will have to convince they're up to it. I'm not saying they can't be strong contenders, but they're going to have to build their case. It's going to be interesting to see the short list evaluation report and how they rate Krakow's venue spread and Almaty's capabilities. I think all three are definite host material in the future, but 2022 could still be too early. We'll see.

And that leaves the Scandinavians. We'll know in a few days, but I still wouldn't be surprised if neither Oslo or Stockholm eventuate. For all their NOCs' willingness to go, from what I am seeing it still seems the political backing is not locked in. And Stockholm? I WANT to believe, but I'm not confident the Stockholm-Are split is such an easy handicap to overcome. Maybe I'm just being too cautiously pessimistic, and I'll jump on the bandwagon if the Swedes do go for it, but not with any great confidence.

Assuming all the above go ahead with bids (and even allowing for a last minute surprise like a Borjomi), I guess I'd put Oslo in the front, with Stockholm, Krakow or Almaty as potential viable challengers. But I wouldn't put money on any of them yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the bids only weakness, though. And they could work on a good solution for this. Compared to what we have left, Stockholm 2022 could be the most compelling choice & most practical. I believe some on here are seriously underestimating the Swedes here. I believe that they could take this, if they want to, that is.

I'm amused that we both seem to have completely switched our usual stances on the Swedish WOG issue! Seems we can never see eye-to-eye on it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the bids only weakness, though. And they could work on a good solution for this. Compared to what we have left, Stockholm 2022 could be the most compelling choice & most practical. I believe some on here are seriously underestimating the Swedes here. I believe that they could take this, if they want to, that is.

I'd love to see a bid from Sweden, but to say that the long distance to Åre is the only weakness of a Stockholm bid is a bit naive I'm afraid.

The swedes have problems with getting governmental support. From the perspective of an olympics enthusiast that might be a "bad" thing, but it only goes to show that the current swedish government sets responsibility extremely high. The newest, governmental quotes I've been able to find are from june, where after a meeting between the NOC and the government, they concluded negatively with regards to governmental support, http://www.svt.se/sport/regeringen-nobbar-svensk-os-ansokan . The minister of sports says that a minimum of government expenditures of 1,2 billion euros is too much, but didn't give a lower limit.

Secondly, I think Sweden would be better off with Östersund or somewhere more traditional. Why? Stockholm is the most beautiful scandinavian capital, but there are really no outdoor venues established anywhere close to it.

Short summary regarding venues that will have to be in the Stockholm area. Everything is taken from the pre-bid assessment ordered by the SOK and performed by Jöran Heggelund http://www.sok.se/download/18.3e7f4ba7140fff9e8b31626/Utredning+Stockholm+2022.pdf.

Ice Hockey, figure skating, curling and short track - This is where Stockholm excels. Stadiums and facilities are basically finished and ready, with some moduling necessary of course for the different sports. Very good capacity.

Slalom - The proposal is to artificially extend Flottsbrobacken with about 100 meters. My question: Doesn't the combination usually take place on the same day? A bit far to travel Åre for the downhill, even if it's the next day.

Snowboard (halfpipe, cross etc) and freestyle - Various hills in Stockholm, one of which will have to be extended artificially. Might be just Flottsbrobacken, but it seems a lot of activity in just one hill. Could be logistically difficult.

Ski jumping - no existing hills. Needs to be close to XC for nordic combined. One idea is to build them on the back side of Flottsbrobacken that is getting the artificial extension. Stadiums and facilities from the scratch.

Cross country skiing - no existing stadiums, though there's ski terrain close to Stockholm. Stadiums and facilities from the scratch.

Biathlon - Stadiums and facilities from the scratch.

Bob - No existing up to date track in Sweden. The idea is Hammarbybacken, but it's 25 meters too low, so an artificial structure on the top is necessary.

Alpine events except slalom: Åre - Everything's great there, but it's over 500 km from Stockholm. I wouldn't oppose two distant centres as long as the centres themselves are compact. This is imo better than Vancouver where none outdoor events took place in the major centre, but were spread around 100-150 kms in different satelites.

And the reason the report concludes so positively is the low amounts of necessary investments required before the games (in other words, gov support not necessary, just a guarantee). That amount is 2,5 billion SEK, which should be around 300 million euros. Now call me cynical, but that just doesn't sound like a number from the real part of the world.

I feel for the swedes and they should definitely host (as should Germany and ideally Finland although we know that's difficult), but I do think that this Stockholm bid in the end is not realistic, but that it definitely needs a bit more spending and governmental support. Please prove me wrong, but isn't Östersund more suited? I guess the problem is that the Ice events really should be in Stockholm no matter what.

I'd love to see a bid from Sweden, but to say that the long distance to Åre is the only weakness of a Stockholm bid is a bit naive I'm afraid.

The swedes have problems with getting governmental support. From the perspective of an olympics enthusiast that might be a "bad" thing, but it only goes to show that the current swedish government sets responsibility extremely high. The newest, governmental quotes I've been able to find are from june, where after a meeting between the NOC and the government, they concluded negatively with regards to governmental support, http://www.svt.se/sport/regeringen-nobbar-svensk-os-ansokan . The minister of sports says that a minimum of government expenditures of 1,2 billion euros is too much, but didn't give a lower limit.

Secondly, I think Sweden would be better off with Östersund or somewhere more traditional. Why? Stockholm is the most beautiful scandinavian capital, but there are really no outdoor venues established anywhere close to it.

Short summary regarding venues that will have to be in the Stockholm area. Everything is taken from the pre-bid assessment ordered by the SOK and performed by Jöran Heggelund http://www.sok.se/download/18.3e7f4ba7140fff9e8b31626/Utredning+Stockholm+2022.pdf.

Ice Hockey, figure skating, curling and short track - This is where Stockholm excels. Stadiums and facilities are basically finished and ready, with some moduling necessary of course for the different sports. Very good capacity.

Slalom - The proposal is to artificially extend Flottsbrobacken with about 100 meters. My question: Doesn't the combination usually take place on the same day? A bit far to travel Åre for the downhill, even if it's the next day.

Snowboard (halfpipe, cross etc) and freestyle - Various hills in Stockholm, one of which will have to be extended artificially. Might be just Flottsbrobacken, but it seems a lot of activity in just one hill. Could be logistically difficult.

Ski jumping - no existing hills. Needs to be close to XC for nordic combined. One idea is to build them on the back side of Flottsbrobacken that is getting the artificial extension. Stadiums and facilities from the scratch.

Cross country skiing - no existing stadiums, though there's ski terrain close to Stockholm. Stadiums and facilities from the scratch.

Biathlon - Stadiums and facilities from the scratch.

Bob - No existing up to date track in Sweden. The idea is Hammarbybacken, but it's 25 meters too low, so an artificial structure on the top is necessary.

Alpine events except slalom: Åre - Everything's great there, but it's over 500 km from Stockholm. I wouldn't oppose two distant centres as long as the centres themselves are compact. This is imo better than Vancouver where none outdoor events took place in the major centre, but were spread around 100-150 kms in different satelites.

And the reason the report concludes so positively is the low amounts of necessary investments required before the games (in other words, gov support not necessary, just a guarantee). That amount is 2,5 billion SEK, which should be around 300 million euros. Now call me cynical, but that just doesn't sound like a number from the real part of the world.

I feel for the swedes and they should definitely host (as should Germany and ideally Finland although we know that's difficult), but I do think that this Stockholm bid in the end is not realistic, but that it definitely needs a bit more spending and governmental support. Please prove me wrong, but isn't Östersund more suited? I guess the problem is that the Ice events really should be in Stockholm no matter what.

I forgot:

Speed skating - No current stadiums for that, but could be part of a proposed bandy stadium.

Is there no way to edit one's posts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to see a bid from Sweden, but to say that the long distance to Åre is the only weakness of a Stockholm bid is a bit naive I'm afraid.

The swedes have problems with getting governmental support. From the perspective of an olympics enthusiast that might be a "bad" thing, but it only goes to show that the current swedish government sets responsibility extremely high. The newest, governmental quotes I've been able to find are from june, where after a meeting between the NOC and the government, they concluded negatively with regards to governmental support,

Secondly, I think Sweden would be better off with Östersund or somewhere more traditional. Why? Stockholm is the most beautiful scandinavian capital, but there are really no outdoor venues established anywhere close to it.

Åre - Everything's great there, but it's over 500 km from Stockholm. I wouldn't oppose two distant centres as long as the centres themselves are compact.

The distance to Are is the only "main" weakness once well into the bidding campaign. What you're citing are after the fact matters that are faced with ANY bid that's looking to get the green light. Just look at what happened today with Munich's.

What I meant is if Stockholm were to get all it's ducks in a row, & it goes without saying that includes the full government backing that any bid requires nowadays, Stockholm then becomes a compelling contender. If the swedes can find an innovative way to overcome this, & considering the narrative that is virtually there, this bid could be a winner, IMHO.

And as far as Ostersund, it has been a topic of debate here, case in point, which Sir Rols just mentioned that we never can agree when it comes to which Swedish city it should be. But it's too small now. What is sparsely populated Ostersund & region going to do with so many new indoor arenas & new added infrastructure that would be required for a 21st century Olympics, not to mention how much more investment would be required there versus Stockholm.

Cities are already running away (again, look at Munich), from the Olympics citedly from the immense expense. So what kind of message does it send it another over price bid gets favored over a more practical one. For a 21st century Winter Olympics, Stockholm makes the most practical sense as far as Sweden is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The distance to Are is the only "main" weakness once well into the bidding campaign. What you're citing are after the fact matters that are faced with ANY bid that's looking to get the green light. Just look at what happened today with Munich's.

What I meant is if Stockholm were to get all it's ducks in a row, & it goes without saying that includes the full government backing that any bid requires nowadays, Stockholm then becomes a compelling contender. If the swedes can find an innovative way to overcome this, & considering the narrative that is virtually there, this bid could be a winner, IMHO.

And as far as Ostersund, it has been a topic of debate here, case in point, which Sir Rols just mentioned that we never can agree when it comes to which Swedish city it should be. But it's too small now. What is sparsely populated Ostersund & region going to do with so many new indoor arenas & new added infrastructure that would be required for a 21st century Olympics, not to mention how much more investment would be required there versus Stockholm.

Cities are already running away (again, look at Munich), from the Olympics citedly from the immense expense. So what kind of message does it send it another over price bid gets favored over a more practical one. For a 21st century Winter Olympics, Stockholm makes the most practical sense as far as Sweden is concerned.

Well, I would say a second main weakness not taking gov support into the matter, is the fact that of all the outdoor venues only the ones in Åre (Downhill, Super G, giant slalom) are ready, or even exist. That's it. Also, there's no speed skating stadium.

If all those venues are going to be up to date olympic standards, big enough and all that jazz, it's going to cost a ton of money. It's not like in vancouver where very few bothered to show up for these events, people are coming from Sweden, Norway, Finland, Germany etc.. tons of people. Hundreds of thousands. It costs money and I don't know how practical it would be, seeing as Sweden actually have winter sports facilities in other parts of the country. I thought this was the situation and signal we didn't want to send... building most things from scratch.

If only Sweden could combine Stockholm (everything indoor) with one traditional centre like Östersund, it could be something. That's not realistic, so in the future I'm afraid we're looking at more spread out games for (most) of the traditional winter hosts. All events taking place at established winters sports places. I don't see any other way to lower the cost or seek more practical solutions. You'll never see a europe where many (not even) large cities have winter sports facilities in the city. There's really only Oslo, and Stockholm could be added to the list although it would cost a ton of money and it doesn't have the most suitable terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this was the situation and signal we didn't want to send... building most things from scratch.

IYou'll never see a europe where many (not even) large cities have winter sports facilities in the city. There's really only Oslo, and Stockholm could be added to the list although it would cost a ton of money and it doesn't have the most suitable terrain.

We're not talking about all of Europe. It's only about the potential 2022 competitors (& Ostersund). In that sense, Stockholm would be the most practical & compelling choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Secondly, I think Sweden would be better off with Östersund or somewhere more traditional. Why? Stockholm is the most beautiful scandinavian capital, but there are really no outdoor venues established anywhere close to it.

I had always hoped for an Ostersund bid, but if it doesn't happen for 2022, I don't think it ever will. If Stockholm is what it takes for Sweden to host, I'm fine with that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had always hoped for an Ostersund bid, but if it doesn't happen for 2022, I don't think it ever will. If Stockholm is what it takes for Sweden to host, I'm fine with that too.

Well, it's not going to happen.

The day you'll see two ski jumping hills with 30 000+ capacity on the back side of a 100 metre artificially extended hill in Stockholm (+ all the other brand new venues that don't really fit into the landscape), I'll do handstands all the way to the swedish olympics.

I don't understand how 'practical' comes into play..

Well, it's not going to happen.

The day you'll see two ski jumping hills with 30 000+ capacity on the back side of a 100 metre artificially extended hill in Stockholm (+ all the other brand new venues that don't really fit into the landscape), I'll do handstands all the way to the swedish olympics.

I don't understand how 'practical' comes into play..

I'm much more optimistic for Östersund/Sthlm/Åre some time in the future, when it's acceptable with three centres out of necessity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's not going to happen.

The day you'll see two ski jumping hills with 30 000+ capacity on the back side of a 100 metre artificially extended hill in Stockholm (+ all the other brand new venues that don't really fit into the landscape), I'll do handstands all the way to the swedish olympics.

I don't understand how 'practical' comes into play..

I'm much more optimistic for Östersund/Sthlm/Åre some time in the future, when it's acceptable with three centres out of necessity.

I agree that Oslo is the clear favourite, with or without Stockholm in the race. 600 km is just far. It's far, inconvenient and possibly even detrimental to use both Stockholm and Are. But I do like the *idea* of a Swedish games that I can personally overlook the distance. Lucky for the IOC, I don't make that decision.

I fully expect Oslo to win, and I will be very happy with an Oslo games, but I really hope Stockholm will bid too. They may not be the favourite, but I also do not ever see Sweden having better chances than 2022. I think they owe it to themselves to try one last time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sweden can definitely win internationally when they find the right configuration, also over Oslo.

I just don't find the current plans for Stockholm realistic at all sadly, neither practically nor financially.

I believe they will not bid before the 14th, but that they will try again with Östersund if Oslo loses or doesn't get gov support.


Sweden can definitely win internationally when they find the right configuration, also over Oslo.

I just don't find the current plans for Stockholm realistic at all sadly, neither practically nor financially.

I believe they will not bid before the 14th, but that they will try again with Östersund if Oslo loses or doesn't get gov support.

Read: Guessing wildly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Oslo is the clear favourite, with or without Stockholm in the race. 600 km is just far. It's far, inconvenient and possibly even detrimental to use both Stockholm and Are. But I do like the *idea* of a Swedish games that I can personally overlook the distance. Lucky for the IOC, I don't make that decision.

That's just it, though. I believe that many in the IOC could very well feel the same way you do. If only what's absolutely necessary gets put in Are, making the "inconvenience" as minimal as possible, then I think the distance could be overlooked. Before Rio 2016, who would've thought they we'd ever see the ceremonies & the athletics seperated for the first time ever. Who'd thought that we'd see our first indoor Olympic ceremonies in Vancouver 2010.

Stockholm & Sweden potentially have that nostalgic & sentimental value, especially with all of their previous big disppointing losses, that it's almost akin to the "Africa factor" in the winter category. And I agree that they at least owe it to themselves to try one more time, especially now that Munich is out.

Oslo & Norway has so much of the "been there, done that" factor that I don't see them as the "clear favorite", unless Stockholm ultimately says no on Tuesday as well. Then it's all the Norwegians, unless they too bow out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if Krakow were to be technical about it, there has been an Olympic Games that was played split between 2 countries. For Antwerp 1920, the finals of one of the yachting events was held in Dutch waters and just up the coast from Antwerp becuz the only 2 finalist boats were both Dutch. (Of course, this was before there were visa and immigration considerations.) So there is a precedent -- and the IOC Charter allows it anyway for the Winter Games.

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

Beijing 2008 was also on territories from two different NOCs

Beijing did a Melbourne they had everything apart from the equestrian events inside the country and another country hosted the equestrian events Stockholm Sweden 1956 equestrian Olympics Games and Hong Kong 2008 equestrian Olympics Games.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...