Jump to content
Chrishigh765

Calgary 2026 and Salt Lake 2030?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

What's there to formalize?  Again, look at the current bids.  Nothing prevents a city/country from offering something like what you're suggesting.  But if there are going to be logistical challenges, then they're not going to put that bid forward in the first place.  If they do (as each of the current bidders has), then it's up to the IOC to decide what they like best.  It's not disqualifying for, say, Stockholm to offer up alpine events in Are.  Might hurt their chances, but don't mean they can't make that bid.

What I am suggesting is separate bids. So a traditional alpine resort would bid for the skiing and snowboarding while a city would bid for the ice events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Is Minneapolis actually interested in hosting or are you just throwing that out there as a hypothetical? 

They have been interested in the past, but there is an obvious lack of mountains to make it work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minneapolis has shown interest in the somewhat recent past for Summer Olympics, not the Winter Games recently. I’ve always said then, though, that Minneapolis would make a perfect host for the Winter Olympics (not so much summer) if it not for the fact that there are no mountain ranges anywhere near the Twin Cities. So looks likes either way, they’re out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, large distant “separate bids” would dilute the Games experience all around & would also create other sorts of headaches. So I don’t see that as the solution either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention when the IOC wants to cut the cost of the already expensive bid process, & create ‘less losers’, so I don’t see how adding yet another, totally separate bid race to the same table helps at all in that aspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, FYI said:

Not to mention when the IOC wants to cut the cost of the already expensive bid process, & create ‘less losers’, so I don’t see how adding yet another, totally separate bid race to the same table helps at all in that aspect.

The ice and snow events being tied together is one of the causes of the winter games being problematic.

There are very, very few big cities that need lots of arenas in the mountains. Even Vancouver and Denver are not actually in the mountains. Ski areas like Lake Placid or Vail would be great for the snow events, but once you force them to build a bunch of arenas the winter Olympics won't work for them.

Similarly there are cities like Milwaukee, Minsk, etc that have winter weather, an existing speed skating rink and arenas but don't have the mountains needed. IIRC Milwaukee could host the ice events for the winter games without needing to build any new sports venues.

It's all well and good to complain that this would make the logistics hard, but look at the bids the IOC is getting now. Calgary wants to use the ski jumps in Vancouver. Stockholm wants to use a sliding rink across the Baltic Sea and have the skiing 600 km away. Cortina is a five hour drive from Milan. The IOC isn't going to get a compact winter Olympics anyway.

Edited by Nacre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Nacre said:

Similarly there are cities like Milwaukee, Minsk, etc that have winter weather, an existing speed skating rink and arenas but don't have the mountains needed. IIRC Milwaukee could host the ice events for the winter games without needing to build any new sports venues.

It's all well and good to complain that this would make the logistics hard, but look at the bids the IOC is getting now. Calgary wants to use the ski jumps in Vancouver. Stockholm wants to use a sliding rink across the Baltic Sea and have the skiing 600 km away. Cortina is a five hour drive from Milan. The IOC isn't going to get a compact winter Olympics anyway.

Yes, but how far away is Milwaukee from the closest ski/luge resorts? Certainly a heck of a lot farther than a five-hour drive from Milan to Cortina, or just 300 miles from Stockholm to Are or Latvia. Plus, why bother with Milwaukee when you can still have it all in Salt Lake City, or even Tahoe, for that matter?

And you know who would complain? The athletes & spectators, that’s who. They’ll be the first ones to say - “what was the IOC thinking?!” Let’s remember how highly criticized the 1992 Albertvile Winter Olympics were for being too spread out. And that was over a small, regional area in comparison to a trans-continental one that you’re suggesting. Also, let’s not forget that there’s already objection coming from Alberta to using the venues in Whistler. Their gripe is if Calgary’s mostly going to be paying for it, then why not just have the whole thing IN Calgary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nacre said:

What I am suggesting is separate bids. So a traditional alpine resort would bid for the skiing and snowboarding while a city would bid for the ice events.

55 minutes ago, Nacre said:

The ice and snow events being tied together is one of the causes of the winter games being problematic.

There are very, very few big cities that need lots of arenas in the mountains. Even Vancouver and Denver are not actually in the mountains. Ski areas like Lake Placid or Vail would be great for the snow events, but once you force them to build a bunch of arenas the winter Olympics won't work for them.

Similarly there are cities like Milwaukee, Minsk, etc that have winter weather, an existing speed skating rink and arenas but don't have the mountains needed. IIRC Milwaukee could host the ice events for the winter games without needing to build any new sports venues.

It's all well and good to complain that this would make the logistics hard, but look at the bids the IOC is getting now. Calgary wants to use the ski jumps in Vancouver. Stockholm wants to use a sliding rink across the Baltic Sea and have the skiing 600 km away. Cortina is a five hour drive from Milan. The IOC isn't going to get a compact winter Olympics anyway.

Okay, so what's wrong with that?  That's a far cry from, say, Calgary bidding for the ice events and Whistler offering a completely separate bid for the snow events.  There needs to be one entity that's offering an entire package, even if 1 or more of the venues is split off elsewhere.  It's never going to work to have 1 city/country bid for the ice package and another potentially unrelated city/country bid for the snow package.  They need to work together.  If 1 organizing committee wants to offer those 2 separate pieces in some form, they're more than welcome to.  But if the IOC has a choice between something like that and a bid which is a little more condensed, more than likely they'll choose the latter.

Oh, and Milwaukee?  That have everything they need without having to build any new venues?  Not really.  They just built a new NBA arena for the Bucks, but they're going to tear down Bradley Center.  They have the UW-Milwaukee arena for hockey.  Not sure where they'd put the 2nd hockey venue or curling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, FYI said:

Plus, why bother with Milwaukee when you can still have it all in Salt Lake City, or even Tahoe, for that matter?

 

14 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

But if the IOC has a choice between something like that and a bid which is a little more condensed, more than likely they'll choose the latter.

Except that the IOC may soon not have a choice for a compact bid. I agree that it would be ideal for them, for the athletes and the fans. But building a bunch of ice arenas for small mountain towns is often ruinous for the hosts. And there will soon be no winter Olympics at all if the IOC can't make the games work for the host communities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, a bid from Salt Lake City is a reality at this point in time. While something from Minneapolis, or especially Milwaukee, is nothing but a pipe dream for the Winter Olympics. There’s no way the USOC would even go for it ITFP, let alone present it to the IOC for approval.

That said, I could see something like Denver & Park City working (which would be something very similar to what Sweden, Italy, or even Canada, are all offering up right now for 2026). But anything beyond that would be setting yourself up for big logistical headaches. And in the end, a lot of logistics still cost money, too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nacre said:

Except that the IOC may soon not have a choice for a compact bid. I agree that it would be ideal for them, for the athletes and the fans. But building a bunch of ice arenas for small mountain towns is often ruinous for the hosts. And there will soon be no winter Olympics at all if the IOC can't make the games work for the host communities.

Look at what's potentially available for the IOC in 2030 and behind.  The USOC will almost certainly put a bid.  Sapporo will likely come into play.  Lillehammer will consider.  So will Almaty.  None of those are the kinds separate Olympics you're advocating for.  Sure, those are mostly prior hosts there, but returning to those cities will be the solution before splitting the Olympics in 2.  And yea, it seems oddly optimistic to be talking about a positive future given the circumstances that the IOC are dealing with right now.  It could totally come crashing down on them.  I still think this element of the Winter Olympics will start to work itself out much more organically (as it is already with 2026) rather than the need to do something drastic.  Because at the end of the day, someone would have to be okay with drastic, and I don't think that's going to help the problem.  After all, if Colorado could get their act together, you'd have Denver (which very much has all the infrastructure they need) plus the ski areas of Colorado and maybe they'd get some help from Utah.  Less compact than what we've seen in the past, but certainly not 2 separate entities.  I doubt though that it would make either the city portion or the mountain portion of their bid more appealing if they didn't have to deal with the other half.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×