Which 4 cities do u think will make the 2022 Short List?

[baron-pierreIV]

Or the IOC may just spare Sweden the angst, sturm and drung of a very problematic bid, and just cut them off.

[p85]

any idea when the draw to determine the presentation order will be held?

http://www.olympic.org/news/first-ioc-executive-board-meeting-under-president-bach/218358

The EB also participated in the drawing of lots for the order of the 2022 Applicant Cities, which was conducted by the IOC’s First Vice-President Nawal El Moutawakel. The cities were drawn in the following order:

1.Stockholm (Sweden);

2. Krakow (Poland);

3. Oslo (Norway);

4. Almaty (Kazakhstan);

5. Lviv (Ukraine);

6. Beijing (China).

This will now be the order for presentations and communications regarding the six cities until the election of the Host City in 2015.

[Olympic Fan Darcy]

If there's only three cities on the 2022 short-list, two out of the three are NOT going to be from Asia. Not when we have first-time ever back-to-back Asian Olympics (not to mention other variables that would favor traditional Winter European hosts). The IOC will want to go somewhere else. So I don't see three consecutive Asian Games, unless the IOC has absolutely no other choice in the matter. But that's not the case here. So if three, then it's Stockholm, Oslo & Beijing. If four, then add Krakow to the mix as a dark horse.

And LD, to quote you; "I'm 'certain' Stockholm would have a spot on the short-list. It won't necessarily win, though, no matter how compelling the bid is & the wealth of existing infrastructure & tradition". :-P

I understand your point about not having both Asian cities but with LD's valid points about Stockholm, do you think the IOC could just have 2 cities in the vote with Oslo obviously winning?

[Gold Coast Lions]

If there's only three cities on the 2022 short-list, two out of the three are NOT going to be from Asia. Not when we have first-time ever back-to-back Asian Olympics (not to mention other variables that would favor traditional Winter European hosts). The IOC will want to go somewhere else. So I don't see three consecutive Asian Games, unless the IOC has absolutely no other choice in the matter. But that's not the case here. So if three, then it's Stockholm, Oslo & Beijing. If four, then add Krakow to the mix as a dark horse.

And LD, to quote you; "I'm 'certain' Stockholm would have a spot on the short-list. It won't necessarily win, though, no matter how compelling the bid is & the wealth of existing infrastructure & tradition". :-P

hahahaha FYI the IOC don't care where the city is in the world the only thing matter is where they will be a great stable city to host and the Euro bids are not that great Norway and Sweden bid's don't have government support, The Norway government is more likely to support it then the Sweden government, Ukraine is not ready and the IOC don't allow joint bids the only time they allowed it was with Austria 2010 and 2014 bid with the other venue was already built just 25km away from the host city in Germany not a far distance of 180km that will be a no no.

The European bids are weak and if Norway and Sweden governments both say no then it will be Beijing China and Almaty Kazakhstan fighting it up each other the IOC was very impressed with Kazakhstan when they hosted the 2011 Asian Games and Beijing China hosted a great Summer Olympics and Paralympics Games back in 2008 so the IOC will be in safe hands with China and Kazakhstan they can trust them both and who cares that it will be the 3rd Asian Olympics Games in the row, Europe hosted 3 in a row in 1992 France, 1992 Spain and 1994 Norway. The World power is no longer dominated by Europe any more and about 50% of IOC members are from Europe and is decline it is like what is like what is happening in the Roman Catholic Church the decline of the Italians in power of the Roman Catholic Church there has been 3 Popes now not from Italy and 35% of the Cardinals are Italian. FYI the world is changing fast and no longer have a European centric mindset any more.

[StefanMUC]

hahahaha

That perfectly sums up the content of everything that came afterwards.

[Lord David]

If it's 3 cities it will be Almaty, Beijing and Oslo just so Oslo can clearly win by a landslide. If it's 4, then add Krakow or Stockholm in the mix.

I think it will be 4. The last race (2018) there was only 3 bidders so there was gonna be 3 candidates to split the votes or a lousy 2 candidate bid race. This time the IOC would want to make things interesting and mix it up a bit so they'll make it 4 candidates for sure.

[FYI]

the IOC don't care where the city is in the world

Right, that's why the IOC has done their darndest to spread the Games throughout the word since WWII bcuz they "don't care where the city is in the world.

the only thing matter is where they will be a great stable city to host

I would hardly classify Almaty as "a 'great' stable city" to host. First of all, what's so "great" about it. And second, If Erdogan made the IOC nervous, I can't see them getting all hot & bothered over Kazahkstan's political "stable" leaders.

the Euro bids are not that great Norway and Sweden bid's don't have government support,

Do you have proof of this. It may or may not be the case, but I really doubt that both of these NOC's would have applied for the Winter Games in the first if there really was no chance of government backing. Especially in Oslo's case where they had a referendum first to see if it was even okay to put the bid through. Until the actual applicant files are due, this is nothing but hearsay.

Ukraine is not ready

This is the only thing that you've gotten right in your entire, non-punctual post.

and the IOC don't allow joint bids the only time they allowed it was with Austria 2010 and 2014 bid with the other venue was already built just 25km away from the host city in Germany not a far distance of 180km that will be a no no.

Poland & Slovakia & are part of the E.U., so getting back & forth isn't going to be that much of a problem since it'll be more of an open border. And the distance of 109 miles from Krakow to Jasna is shorter than Beijing to Zhangjiakou at 127 miles & Oslo to Lillehammer at 114 miles. So stop making a mountain out of a molehill.

.

The European bids are weak and if Norway and Sweden governments both say no then it will be Beijing China and Almaty Kazakhstan fighting it up each other

This is the only part of your boombastic rhetoric where I could agree with you. IF, & again, that's an IF, Stockholm & Oslo were to bow out due to lack of government backing is the only way I could see the IOC allowing Almaty to compete, bcuz they would then get into a very desperate situation. And even then, the IOC would be much more comfortable with Beijing than with Almaty.

the IOC was very impressed with Kazakhstan when they hosted the 2011 Asian Games and Beijing China hosted a great Summer Olympics and Paralympics Games back in 2008 so the IOC will be in safe hands with China and Kazakhstan they can trust them both

So what, means nothing. I remember some people saying the same thing about Doha with the 2006 Asian Games, but the IOC told the Qatari's twice now to take a hike. I see Almaty as being no different. The IOC is also a diplomatic organization, & they will provide lip-service whenever they need to. Most of what they say should be taken with a grain of salt. Like when Rogge said that Havana "had just a good a chance to host the Games as anyone else". And the only of those two the IOC could "trust & be in safe hands" are the Chinese, which have already proven themselves as you just mentioned. The Kazahks would be a very, very big maybe, at best.

and who cares that it will be the 3rd Asian Olympics Games in the row, Europe hosted 3 in a row in 1992 France, 1992 Spain and 1994 Norway. The World power is no longer dominated by Europe any more and about 50% of IOC members are from Europe and is decline it is like what is like what is happening in the Roman Catholic Church the decline of the Italians in power of the Roman Catholic Church there has been 3 Popes now not from Italy and 35% of the Cardinals are Italian. FYI the world is changing fast and no longer have a European centric mindset any more.

Ummm, for Winter 1992, the IOC only had European hosts to choose from. And Summer 1992 was manipulated by JAS bcuz he wanted his hometown to be the host of those Games. And for 1994, the only non-European bid was a North American bid that the IOC was very impressed with. Again, the IOC does it's best to rotate the geography of the Games when they have the good, solid options to do so. And for 2022, they have a good couple of those other options. So three consecutive Asian Games is going to be a "no no" this time around. The rest of your post is just hyperbole, irrelevant nonsense, being looked at from very bias Asian-centric goggles.

.

[FYI]

*And for 1994, the only non-European bid was a North American bid that the IOC was 'not' very impressed with.

[FYI]

I understand your point about not having both Asian cities but with LD's valid points about Stockholm, do you think the IOC could just have 2 cities in the vote with Oslo obviously winning?

LD doesn't have valid point"S" about Stockholm. The only issue is the distance to Are. The only way the IOC could have two cities in the vote is if they do a similar approach like they did with 2006. At the session, have a seperate group take the best two bids & present them to the entire IOC body to vote on. But this was mostly done bcuz of the SLC scandal, so I don't really see this again. The IOC will want to include more than two cities so they could have emergency options just in case. All we have to do is look at the 2020 race to see how that approach came in handy.

That perfectly sums up the content of everything that came afterwards.

Doesn't it, though.

If it's 3 cities it will be Stockholm, Beijing and Oslo just so Oslo can clearly win by a landslide. If it's 4, then add Krakow in the mix.

There, fixed that for you.

[Lord David]

Fix what exactly? Why deny Almaty when they've technically got the best bid out there, simply due to the fact that you'd want to steer clear of another games based in Asia? You can do that in the actual vote.

They have numerous strengths including the fact that they would have made it as a candidate in 2014 if they only passed some benchmarks. Unlike Oslo or Stockholm there's assured government support, where in Oslo's and Stockholm's case it's been flaky even prior to announcing their official applications to bid. They have the most compact of all bidding cities and a good amount of existing venues to boot.

I'm certain that they will make it to the candidate stage, but as for winning, it will be Oslo (provided they don't cause embarrassment and bail out at some point).

[FYI]

Why deny Almaty when they've technically got the best bid out there, simply due to the fact that you'd want to steer clear of another games based in Asia? You can do that in the actual vote.

That's merely a matter of opinion, since that's what you also argued with Baku, but obviously the IOC didn't agree.

And it's not just a matter of "simply due to the fact of wanting to steer clear of another games based in Asia" (that's merely yet another layer of making things more difficult) but like I've also already mentioned earlier, the controversies surrounding Sochi 2014, & also the fact that we already have three non-traditional consecutive winter hosts on the schedule, isn't going to do Almaty any favors. Then add the Asia angle, with the Chinese in the mix to complicate things even further, then it becomes too many hurdles for the Kazahks to overcome.

And doing it in the "actual vote" is something I believe the Executive Board wants to avoid in order not to take any chances on cities that they are not too keen on, hence the omissions of Doha (& Baku) twice in a row now when they "technically" scored higher than the actual winner for 2016 & Istanbul for the 2020 short-list.

[Fox334]

Oslo and Almaty are the two most solid bids technically IMO and they should make the shortlist. Karkow and Stockholm should be the other two cities to make it. I don't think Lviv or Beijing have much of a bid.

[Tony E Loves Architecture]

In my personal Opinion i voted for, Beijing/Zhangjiakou (World Class Existing Facilities in Beijing), Stockholm (World Class Existing Stadiums), Oslo (Great Snow Facilities) and Lviv (Nice Modern Stadium and Strong Economy to Finance the Games). Good Luck to all 6.

[intoronto]

In my personal Opinion i voted for, Beijing/Zhangjiakou (World Class Existing Facilities in Beijing), Stockholm (World Class Existing Stadiums), Oslo (Great Snow Facilities) and Lviv (Nice Modern Stadium and Strong Economy to Finance the Games). Good Luck to all 6.

Ukraine is close to bankruptcy and you think that is a strong economy?

[Tony E Loves Architecture]

Ukraine is close to bankruptcy and you think that is a strong economy?

Woops. You are correct. My Mistake. Lviv has a nice Venue in Arena Lviv and has suitable location for Snow Events. You are Correct.

[Lord David]

That's merely a matter of opinion, since that's what you also argued with Baku, but obviously the IOC didn't agree.

And it's not just a matter of "simply due to the fact of wanting to steer clear of another games based in Asia" (that's merely yet another layer of making things more difficult) but like I've also already mentioned earlier, the controversies surrounding Sochi 2014, & also the fact that we already have three non-traditional consecutive winter hosts on the schedule, isn't going to do Almaty any favors. Then add the Asia angle, with the Chinese in the mix to complicate things even further, then it becomes too many hurdles for the Kazahks to overcome.

And doing it in the "actual vote" is something I believe the Executive Board wants to avoid in order not to take any chances on cities that they are not too keen on, hence the omissions of Doha (& Baku) twice in a row now when they "technically" scored higher than the actual winner for 2016 & Istanbul for the 2020 short-list.

I never argued that about Baku. With Baku I argued that with each bid it makes it will propose something better and stronger to the point where it will eventually make the shortlist, regardless of the playing field. Perhaps not for 2024, but maybe 2028 and beyond.

They dismissed Doha for good reason. In 2016, it was a good opportunity to nitpick the dates issue. For 2020 it was the same and to avoid looking like FIFA by awarding them the event based on corruption. I doubt that Doha can become the Middle East's first Olympics for quite some time, especially if another city from that region attempts a bid.

I still think Almaty has a candidate spot, but is not going to win, and I'm sure many here as well as some IOC members believe that too. You can fault Almaty for being in Asia, but you can't deny them a spot for that lone fault. Heck the IOC can nitpick Beijing based on poor infrastructure in that other city if it wanted to and deny them a spot if it's only 3 slots. But they will make it of course based on geopolitics and it will be 4 bids which become candidates.

Remember, it would have been 4 candidates for 2020 if Rome had not pulled out.

[Tony E Loves Architecture]

I never argued that about Baku. With Baku I argued that with each bid it makes it will propose something better and stronger to the point where it will eventually make the shortlist, regardless of the playing field. Perhaps not for 2024, but maybe 2028 and beyond.

They dismissed Doha for good reason. In 2016, it was a good opportunity to nitpick the dates issue. For 2020 it was the same and to avoid looking like FIFA by awarding them the event based on corruption. I doubt that Doha can become the Middle East's first Olympics for quite some time, especially if another city from that region attempts a bid.

I still think Almaty has a candidate spot, but is not going to win.

I 100 Percent agree with you Lord David and Qatar I will not lie has some great venues but like everyone else regardless of wealth they have to hold it in the Appropriate Time Period of July-August and for some reason, Fifa had double standards because you bid with the knowledge of knowing that World Cup is June-July.

[yoshi]

I like your avatar. Come on Arsenal!

[Tony E Loves Architecture]

I like your avatar. Come on Arsenal!

Thank You I will say I don't want to break rules and go off topic but Thank You. I personally are supporting Lviv for the lovely Architecture of Arena Lviv and the City if that is an appropriate reason if not then sorry.

[Sir Rols]

I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see a five-city shortlist. If Bach is serious about wanting bidders to show more flexibility and imagination, they'll have to put Stockholm (assuming it gets government backing) and Krakow through as a show of faith. Oslo (again assuming support) and Beijing are pretty well no-brainers in terms of ability to organise them, and I don't count out Almaty making the cut – like Baku, they have been delivering on the promises of past bids. Lviv's the only one I really discount from making it through at this stage.

[donutman88]

I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see a five-city shortlist. If Bach is serious about wanting bidders to show more flexibility and imagination, they'll have to put Stockholm (assuming it gets government backing) and Krakow through as a show of faith. Oslo (again assuming support) and Beijing are pretty well no-brainers in terms of ability to organise them, and I don't count out Almaty making the cut – like Baku, they have been delivering on the promises of past bids. Lviv's the only one I really discount from making it through at this stage.

Agreed. I've always seen this "shortlist" method as a way to get rid of cities the committee sees as non-credible (like Baku or as I believe Lviv) and a way to get rid of those without the infrastructure. And Let's be honest...Lviv is the only one without that infrastructure, so I could completely see 5 cities making the shortlist.

Plus, with Bach's new opinions on bidding, I tend to think that for 2024, the shortlist will be gone, so to a degree, I think he will lobby for a very flexible shortlist.

[intoronto]

I don't think the IOC will just cut one candidate. It will be a minimum of 2 imo.

[Sir Rols]

I've never seen the logic that they've got to cut more than one so no-one feels snubbed or hurt. If it's not up to snuff, but the rest are, so be it.

[FYI]

I never argued that about Baku. With Baku I argued that with each bid it makes it will propose something better and stronger to the point where it will eventually make the shortlist, regardless of the playing field. Perhaps not for 2024, but maybe 2028 and beyond.

Yeah, exactly. And that's what you said two years ago about Baku, bcuz of their 2016 attempt & their improvement with their 2020 effort that they were good for a spot for the 2020 short-list. You only said "perhaps 2024 or maybe beyond" once the IOC gave them the shove-off for a second time in a row.

They dismissed Doha for good reason. In 2016, it was a good opportunity to nitpick the dates issue. For 2020 it was the same and to avoid looking like FIFA by awarding them the event based on corruption. I doubt that Doha can become the Middle East's first Olympics for quite some time, especially if another city from that region attempts a bid.

But what do those issues have to do with anything "techincal", besides nothing, which is the basis for your Almaty argument. Why can you rationalize Doha's consecutive rejections but can't do the same with Almaty, only incessantly saying that "technically" they should get a spot. You're trying to conveniently argue both sides of the coin here. What outside non-technical factors the IOC had for shoving Doha to the wayside, I can easily see them doing the same with Almaty. There's nothing compelling about them for the IOC to take on the big risk. Not when there's better alternatives to pick from the 2022 applicant roster.

You can fault Almaty for being in Asia, but you can't deny them a spot for that lone fault. .

For the umpteeth time, that's NOT the "lone" fault, though. The Asia angle is yet ANOTHER hurdle for Almaty to overcome. Again, it's not compelling, the controversies surrounding Sochi 2014, we already are gonna have two consecutive Winter Olympics in non-traditional locales, the trouble in the Ukraine (another former Soviet Bloc state) etc, etc; ALL together, not "lone" or only about the Asia factor, are all the obstacles that Almaty has to overcome. Too many, TBH. Asia is merely yet another tackle against them.

Heck the IOC can nitpick Beijing based on poor infrastructure in that other city if it wanted to and deny them a spot if it's only 3 slots. But they will make it of course based on geopolitics and it will be 4 bids which become candidates.

You just said it, though. Because of strong geopolitics, the IOC isn't going to nitpick the Chinese. The IOC knows first-hand now that the Chinese can deliver on their promises, & without too much fuss, unlike the Russians.

Remember, it would have been 4 candidates for 2020 if Rome had not pulled out.

.Yeah, &? I'm not arguing that there's only gonna be three candidates. I've said all along that I could see as many as four; Stockholm, Oslo, Beijing & Krakow (as the dark horse).

[FYI]

I've never seen the logic that they've got to cut more than one so no-one feels snubbed or hurt. If it's not up to snuff, but the rest are, so be it.

That makes sense in theory, but there's precedence that shows it's always been more than one city that gets cut since the introduction of the short-list process for the 2002 Winter Games. Lets just go back two years ago, where the debate was that Baku was gonna be the only one cut from the Short-list bcuz it was the only one "not up to snuff". And others saying, me included, that both Doha & Baku are gonna be cut, no matter how much the Qatari's could throw at the damn thing. I see a similar situation here as well. Unless Executive Board would like to make drastic measures before next summer, I see both Lviv & Almaty being cut.