Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
breathesgelatin

Lviv 2022

Recommended Posts

What you mean?

Oslo - Lillehammer - 136km

Lviv - Volovets - 184km

Krakow - Jasna - 185km

Like I said, the Lviv CLUSTER, not the whole plan, the Cluster is planned around the Arena Lviv.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like I said, the Lviv CLUSTER, not the whole plan, the Cluster is planned around the Arena Lviv.

Sorry, I misunderstood you.

As far as I remember Arena Lviv is located in the middle of nowhere. Does it mean all venues and infrastructure are going to be build from scratch here? And budget of Lviv bid is only 3 bln USD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I misunderstood you.

As far as I remember Arena Lviv is located in the middle of nowhere. Does it mean all venues and infrastructure are going to be build from scratch here? And budget of Lviv bid is only 3 bln USD?

The Ice events, so Ice Hockey, Speed Skating and Curling E.T.C, are proposed to be constructed around the Arena Lviv, if Lviv wins. The Snow events will be in The Carpathian Mountains. Also, as we all agree that Lviv won't win, I could see Kiev Bidding for 2024 Summer Olympics, with Olympic Stadium in Kiev as the main Stadium in the Bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I remember Arena Lviv is located in the middle of nowhere.

I might actually defend that middle-of-nowhere location.

It's near to the Lviv's Main Bypass Road, just next to the junction with M06 road, that directly heads towards Tysovets Ice Zone. Plus it's placed only 8 km from the Lviv Airport.

Planty of undeveloped space near to the Lviv Arena, and the multipurpose arena is just being built there for 2015 EuroBasket Championship.

Does it mean all venues and infrastructure are going to be build from scratch here? And budget of Lviv bid is only 3 bln USD?

Planty of venues in Lviv Zone are proposed to be built from scratch. The only existing are Lviv Arena, that being-constructed multipurpose venue, and "Ukraina Stadium" as a freestyle venue.

I think it looks way worse when it comes to the Ice Zone based in Tysovets. The only venue that could be used (after a major renovation) is a biathlon track. And the Alpine skiing venue in Volovets of course should be built from the very scratch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez, these people are in SUCH denial.

IKR! But the logo looks pretty damn good!

lviv 2022 bid logo

81964.jpg

58081c3d8b6b7fe50779ee1d5954657570b9866d

That's beautiful! Also here were the others: fa59cf42a6c8dc5dbfacbcc858ecd6da_main.pn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IKR! But the logo looks pretty damn good!

That's beautiful! Also here were the others: fa59cf42a6c8dc5dbfacbcc858ecd6da_main.pn

Very nice choice of logo. Quite distinctive. Too bad the bid is DOA.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many friends does Bubka have in the IOC???

Apparently not that many, considering his least amount of votes in the final round in the presidential election last September.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's rather irresponsible of the Lviv municipal government to not immediately rescind its bid. There is no chance of Lviv being chosen to host the 2022 Olympics; indeed, current events suggest Ukraine may be out of the running for the next few rounds of bidding. The national government is collapsing, protests are massive and countrywide, the president is intransigent and the country is on the verge of a civil war that would serve as a proxy war between the EU and Russia. There are only 4 legitimate bids left: Almaty, Krakow, Beijing and Oslo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends how one defines "legitimate". But if we're gonna go by the strict technical sense, then there's really only one option here, & that's Oslo. After the mess that is becoming Sochi 2014, the IOC truly needs to go "back to basics" to quote member Heidberg.

Krakow could be a second option in that sense, but even there the Poles would have quite a bit to do. And Beijing isn't really all that attractive either, only a last resort option if the IOC were to get backed into a corner (like Oslo perhaps withdrawing too, for example). And Almaty, well, not really legitimate in the definitive sense. The IOC really needs to put things back into proper perspective for a change. They've pushed the envelope far enough with the last few elections. Time to get back to & reality & practicality before diving into pool of uncertainly with new locales again. At least until we see how they actually play out as hosts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends how one defines "legitimate". But if we're gonna go by the strict technical sense, then there's really only one option here, & that's Oslo. After the mess that is becoming Sochi 2014, the IOC truly needs to go "back to basics" to quote member Heidberg.

Krakow could be a second option in that sense, but even there the Poles would have quite a bit to do. And Beijing isn't really all that attractive either, only a last resort option if the IOC were to get backed into a corner (like Oslo perhaps withdrawing too, for example). And Almaty, well, not really legitimate in the definitive sense. The IOC really needs to put things back into proper perspective for a change. They've pushed the envelope far enough with the last few elections. Time to get back to & reality & practicality before diving into pool of uncertainly with new locales again. At least until we see how they actually play out as hosts.

I am really surprised by the number of people who don't consider Almaty's bid to stand much of a chance. Indeed, it's why I signed up to this site. In reading what little there is written thus far about 2022 (aside from extensive articles on Stockholm's dropping out and Norwegian ennui towards the games), Almaty appears to be seen as the only threat to Oslo. Rather than go over the reasons again, you can see the posts I provided over the last couple hours in the Oslo and Almaty threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually surprised by your vehement support of Almaty despite myself & others highlighting the concerns, over your posts, an Almaty games could/would bring. You've pointed out many superficial & technical points about Almaty, but none of them really explain "why" Almaty should get the Games. Like Rio's "it's time for South America", or China's "it's time to give 1/5 of humanity the Games".

You call Almaty "exotic", but I would attach that label to mystical Krakow instead, really. I won't go over my counter points again either, since I & others have already done so & you can go over them again as well. At this point, I just have to wonder what's your big partiality with Almaty, TBH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually surprised by your vehement support of Almaty despite myself & others highlighting the concerns, over your posts, an Almaty games could/would bring. You've pointed out many superficial & technical points about Almaty, but none of them really explain "why" Almaty should get the Games. Like Rio's "it's time for South America", or China's "it's time to give 1/5 of humanity the Games".

You call Almaty "exotic", but I would attach that label to mystical Krakow instead, really. I won't go over my counter points again either, since I & others have already done so & you can go over them again as well. At this point, I just have to wonder what's your big partiality with Almaty, TBH.

You act as if it's a certain science, and given the proper variables you can determine the outcome with certainty. I'm merely arguing that - as I see it - Almaty is seriously underestimated. Oslo is the most likely to receive the games, but I believe - for reasons I've given and can expand upon - that Almaty is likely the current runner-up with Krakow being the only other serious contender. If I come off overly enthused about Almaty, part of that is attributable to a personal interest in seeing regions and cultures of the world that have generally been ignored given this level of attention and part of it that I simply believe that people generally strongly underestimate the significance of Kazakhstan's rise and the seriousness of Almaty's bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You act as if it's a certain science, and given the proper variables you can determine the outcome with certainty. I'm merely arguing that - as I see it - Almaty is seriously underestimated.

I'm doing no such thing. 'I'm merely arguing (as have others, too) as I see it' as well. I don't think that it's really a matter of "underestimating" Almaty, but one where you're overestimating them.

Oslo is the most likely to receive the games, but I believe - for reasons I've given and can expand upon - that Almaty is likely the current runner-up with Krakow being the only other serious contender.

You've only cited statistic-like reasons. But nothing compelling as yo WHY you think that a country with an extremely low Winter Sports tradition, with a less than democratic government in a relatively isolated part of the world, should get the Winter Games. Nothing that you've 'expanded' upon gives any reason to do so whatsoever, other than "I'm a believer of the Olympics going to new places". So am I, but there still needs to be a strong narrative of doing so in the first place.

If I come off overly enthused about Almaty, part of that is attributable to a personal interest in seeing regions and cultures of the world that have generally been ignored given this level of attention and part of it that I simply believe that people generally strongly underestimate the significance of Kazakhstan's rise and the seriousness of Almaty's bid.

Again, so am I. I would like to see Africa hosts it's very first Olympics ever. But unlike Africa (or South America or China) for that matter, there still isn't enough to send the Winter Olympics to an obscure part of the world simply just for the sake of it. Which seems the basis of your argument, TBH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm doing no such thing. 'I'm merely arguing (as have others, too) as I see it' as well. I don't think that it's really a matter of "underestimating" Almaty, but one where you're overestimating them.

That's fine, then - and if I misconstrue what you're arguing I, again, apologize. My whole interest in the topic currently stems from the dynamics between what I see as viable cities and I do believe that many arguments I've read do not appear aware of the tremendous and fundamental shift we're currently witnessing in international politics, where the interest of the developing world in general, and major developing powers (of which recent/future hosts China, Brazil and Russia are apart) in particular, are now competitive with the interests of traditional, western developed-countries. The IOC, as I understand it, includes voters who have extremely varied interests and are increasingly from and/or have vested interests in non-European economies/regions. European countries are no longer the foregone conclusion they were two decades ago and there are only going to be greater, not weaker, pressures to bring the games elsewhere as the emerging powers take their place on the world stage. Almaty is now the non-European choice and I think that will attract a lot of votes.

Perhaps I'm too cynical, but the notion of what voters 'should' vote for and what they actually will vote for, what their interests 'should' be and actually are are are the same just doesn't seem realistic. Almaty, with a viable and likely impressive bid, will provide a very compelling non-European, non-Western alternative to IOC voters.

You've only cited statistic-like reasons. But nothing compelling as yo WHY you think that a country with an extremely low Winter Sports tradition, with a less than democratic government in a relatively isolated part of the world, should get the Winter Games. Nothing that you've 'expanded' upon gives any reason to do so whatsoever, other than "I'm a believer of the Olympics going to new places". So am I, but there still needs to be a strong narrative of doing so in the first place.

I am, as is apparent by now, a believer that political and economic calculations are significant motivators behind IOC votes. I believe that on it's own, Almaty is an attractive choice. It's a city in an 'up-and-coming' energy superpower that is clean, organized and can quickly and efficiently be built-upon and prepared for the games. It's nestled in the Altai mountains, untouched by the Olympics, and it is more consolidated than any of the competitor's bids. There is little reason to fear political instability or that the games wouldn't be fully funded and construction would fall behind - the funds exist and the state has the capacity. It's the last region on earth to be forced into becoming part of a modern state and - as a sovereign state - it has only been independent since 1991 with a culture of nomadism and city-states along the Silk Road. All legitimate reasons to allow a country to step onto the global stage, in my opinion, and reasons to give preference to a bid that is from a country - and region - never before represented in the Games. I also believe that being an Olympic Power should improve your right to host the games. It seems to me that this would be a way of perpetuating a viscious cycle in which countries host the games which makes their citizens more interested and them win more medals and therefore more likely to host the games while those that don't host have less capacity to improve interest in sports which leads to fewer medals and so on, and so forth.

But that misses the point. I don't believe Almaty should necessarily receive the games. I'm interested in which country will win, which will be truly viable from a political perspective. I believe that there are a number of political forces favoring Almaty right now, many of which I've articulated, and I don't think the Western media has done a very good job of illustrating how these forces are reshaping the world.

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...