Does the Winter Olympics just need a rotating roster of hosts?

[AustralianFan]

correction:  

The extra time between now and a likely double awarding of 2030 and 2034 in 2025 wil hopefully give Sapporo enough time to sort itself out and/or another quality entrant to the race who has existing games infrastructure.  Failing that, SLC is the backup for 2030.

[AustralianFan]

On 12/7/2022 at 6:49 PM, Australian Kiwi said:

Given it has only ever (and seems it only will) be staged in three continents why not spread hosting responsibility amongst cities that are the most prepared and in countries that are the most successful at these Games. When you put it on paper its barely noticeable...

2022 - Beijing

2026 - Milano-Cortina

2030 - Sapporo

2034 - Salt Lake City

2038 - Lillehammer

2042 - Calgary

2046 - Innsbruck

2050 - Sapporo

2054 - Salt Lake City

2058 - Lillehammer

2062 - Calgary

2066 - Innsbruck

Thoughts?

While it’s fun to fantasise about multiple awarding of Olympic/Paralympic Winter Games on a mass scale, the IOC would be extremely unlikely to award Games probably more than two Games into the future, a double awarding at max, even with a rotating hosting pool, should it be adopted.

Too many variables into the future, changes of governments, funding available, condition and useability of infrastructure, change of public and political support, and the big one, a warming climate.  

Once “admitted” or “selected” into this exclusive pool, it would be expected that the existing continuous/targeted dialogue process would be used by the Future Host Commssion to recommend the next Olympic/Paralympic Winter Games host from the available candidates in the pool.

What could be interesting is to look at and speculate who would present a good case for inclusion in the Rotating Hosting Pool, including those from the above list.

Things like minimum average snow venue temperatures being below freezing over previous 10 years and existing competition infrastructure.

[AustralianFan]

CULLING THE CANDIDATES:   ROTATING HOSTING POOL

Step 1:  Who’s in or out on the climate temperature rule ?

Albertville                           IN     Min Ave Temp     -7.3C

Beijing (Yanqing)                IN     Min Ave Temp    -9.5C

Calgary                               IN     Min Ave Temp   -11.0C

Chamoix                             IN     Min Ave Temp    -5.9C

Garmisch-Partenkirchen  IN    Min Ave Temp    -3.0C

Grenoble                             IN    Min Ave Temp    -0.3C

Innsbruck                            IN    Min Ave Temp     -3.6C

Lake Placid                         IN    Min Ave Temp     -12.0C

Lillehammer                        IN    Min Ave Temp     -8.3C

Cortina d’Ampezzo            IN    Min Ave Temp     -8.0C

Nagano                                IN    Min Ave Temp      -3.7C

Oslo                                     IN    Min Ave Temp      -4.7C

PyeongChang                     IN    Min Ave Temp      -10.0C

Salt Lake City                      IN    Min Ave Temp      -4.0C 

Sarajevo                               IN    Min Ave Temp      -2.6C

Sochi (Rosa Khutor)           IN    Min Ave Temp       -1.0C

Sqaw Valley                         IN    Min Ave Temp        -8.0C

St. Moritz                             IN    Min Ave Temp        -14.0C

Torino                                  IN    Min Ave Temp        -2.0C 

Vancouver (Whistler)        IN    Min Ave Temp         -4.0C

 

• The climate rule under consideration by the IOC is the minimum average temperature (0 degrees Celcius) at snow venues must be below freezing over the previous 10 years

• above is a broad theoretical assumption for discussion only, that each of the above hosts wants to be in the Pool,

• leaving aside also, for now, the actual useability/condition of competition infrastructure

• Source of temps:  “location minimum average temperature february” google search

So, if the new temperature rule is adopted by the IOC, all of the above awarded Games hosts are estimated to meet this requirement.

[Australian Kiwi]

Who are you talking to?

[AustralianFan]

@Australian Kiwi  @Sir Rols  @StefanMUC  @krow  @Nacre  @fusilli  @Circle  @Brekkie Boy  @world atlas  @SeriousPotato  @FYI  @TorchbearerSydney  @stryker  @baron-pierreIV  @WD96  @munichfan  @Olympianfan  @Roger87  @Tulsa  @thatsnotmypuppy  @Quaker2001  @Hightowerio86  @mountainboarder_530@yahoo.  @ofan  @Booville  @yoshi  @anthonyliberatori  @arwebb  @Zhou Jiaming  @Shadowriver  @AjayLopez25List  @George_D  @Kenadian  @Karenina  @Durban Sandshark  @iceman530  @Victorian  @Tejas57  @ulu  @SportLightning  @RooBlu  @BigVic  @Hansfromdenmark  @Olympian2005  @Lord David    @Chris_Mex  @R__  @cfm Jeremie  @spectator12  @fatixxx  @jawnbc  @2018  @Bear  

 

CULLING THE CANDIDATES:   ROTATING HOSTING POOL

Step 1:  Who’s in or out on the climate temperature rule ?  Answer:  all are IN.

then, 

Step 2:    From the Games Hosts below, who is believed to have existing useable Olympic / Paralympic competition infrastructure?   
 

Albertville ?                         Min Ave Temp     -7.3C

Beijing (Yanqing) ?              Min Ave Temp    -9.5C

Calgary ?                             Min Ave Temp   -11.0C

Chamoix ?                                  Min Ave Temp    -5.9C

Garmisch-Partenkirchen?  Min Ave Temp    -3.0C

Grenoble ?                            Min Ave Temp    -0.3C

Innsbruck ?                         Min Ave Temp     -3.6C

Lake Placid ?                       Min Ave Temp     -12.0C

Lillehammer ?                     Min Ave Temp     -8.3C

Cortina d’Ampezzo ?         Min Ave Temp     -8.0C

Nagano ?                             Min Ave Temp      -3.7C

Oslo ?                                   Min Ave Temp      -4.7C

PyeongChang ?                  Min Ave Temp      -10.0C

Salt Lake City ?                   Min Ave Temp      -4.0C 

Sarajevo ?                            Min Ave Temp      -2.6C

Sochi (Rosa Khutor) ?          Min Ave Temp       -1.0C

Sqaw Valley ?                      Min Ave Temp        -8.0C

St. Moritz ?                           Min Ave Temp        -14.0C

Torino ?                                Min Ave Temp        -2.0C 

Vancouver (Whistler) ?       Min Ave Temp         -4.0C

 

• The climate rule under consideration by the IOC is the minimum average temperature (0 degrees Celcius) at snow venues must be below freezing over the previous 10 years

• above is a broad theoretical assumption for discussion only, that each of the above hosts wants to be in the Pool,

• Source of temps:  “location minimum average temperature february” google search

So, Step 1 has shown that in rough temperature estimations and if the new temperature rule is adopted by the IOC, all of the above awarded Games hosts are estimated to meet this climate requirement - for theoretical discussion purposes only.

——————————-

Step 2:    From the Games Hosts above who meet the climate rule at snow venues, who is believed to have existing useable Olympic / Paralympic competition infrastructure?   

[Sir Rols]

WHO would have though the IOC has ALWAYS chosen cold places for the winter games???

My mind is blown!

So if it’s not climate, why else does nobody want to pay for them host them???

Edited January 8, 2023 by Sir Rols

[Bear]

We're all seeing the new temp rule and applying it to just February (understandably, as that's what the IOC is asking for). But we need to remember that the event isn't just the Olympics, but also come with the Paralympics.

For example, we saw with Beijing that the weather in Zhangjiakou is not adequate for competition in March, with melting snow and athlete discomfort being a reoccurring issue throughout the Paralympic competitions.

Either the set is shifted to January-February instead of the current February-March time slot to accommodate the temperatures, or we further reduce the list to a host that can have low enough temperatures in March as well.

[AustralianFan]

2 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

WHO would have though the IOC has ALWAYS chosen cold places for the winter games???

My mind is blown!

So if it’s not climate, why else does nobody want to host them???

What we dont have are the scientifically confirmed the warming temperature trajectories at snow venues.

What we do know is that the Climate is Warming.

The Climate is Warming at such a rate that it is forecast to impact or is impacting snow venues.

This data which we don’t have is enough to have the International Olympic Committee in a spin and who are givimg serious consideration to introducing Temperature Rules before any interested party even gets a look in.

Have a look at the list.  Even on this raw data, there are several hosts which are very close to Freezing Level,  ie within a couple of degrees.   

So yes, the IOC has is worried and looks to be about to introduce hisotric new minimum temperature data rules for snow venues,  even for prospective hosts who have never ever hosted a Winter Games before.

[Sir Rols]

4 minutes ago, Bear said:

Either the set is shifted to January-February instead of the current February-March time slot

Wouldn’t that clash with Super Bowl? 

[AustralianFan]

2 minutes ago, Bear said:

We're all seeing the new temp rule and applying it to just February (understandably, as that's what the IOC is asking for). But we need to remember that the event isn't just the Olympics, but also come with the Paralympics.

For example, we saw with Beijing that the weather in Zhangjiakou is not adequate for competition in March, with melting snow and athlete discomfort being a reoccurring issue throughout the Paralympic competitions.

Either the set is shifted to January-February instead of the current February-March time slot to accommodate the temperatures, or we further reduce the list to a host that can have low enough temperatures in March as well.

You’re absolutely right.

 March or Janaury has to be considered as well to fit in the Paralympics.

Might we see a fixed climate-compelled “hosting window “ introduced for the Winter Games, much like we see for the July/August hosting window for the Summer Games.

 

[Bear]

2 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Wouldn’t that clash with Super Bowl? 

I believe NBC has a deal where if the Super Bowl clashes with the Olympics, then they get to broadcast the Super Bowl that year, so there's no issue on that end. Plus, Beijing 2022 already clashed with the SB and not much happened because of it (and MiCo 2026 is also set to clash with SB 2026)

[Sir Rols]

Assuming warming is limited to the 1.5 degree goal the UN is shooting for, the riskiest locations on that list are Grenoble and Turin - which are cities rather than the actual snow venues, and Sochi - which was always a risk by the Russkis to build their snow resort in one of the most temperate zones in the entire country.

But even that’s simplistic - the temperatures are only one factor. It also needs to be seen how weather patterns and cycles are impacted, and what that does to snowfalls in the long term. I still am sceptical that even the best climate scientists can reach consensus in the 2020s about predictable snow patterns in the 2050s and beyond.

[Sir Rols]

7 minutes ago, Bear said:

I believe NBC has a deal where if the Super Bowl clashes with the Olympics, then they get to broadcast the Super Bowl that year, so there's no issue on that end. Plus, Beijing 2022 already clashed with the SB and not much happened because of it (and MiCo 2026 is also set to clash with SB 2026)

What’s the reasoning then for the February-March time period? I note that in the distant past they often started in January, but since 1968 have all started in February. 

[AustralianFan]

19 minutes ago, Bear said:

We're all seeing the new temp rule and applying it to just February (understandably, as that's what the IOC is asking for). But we need to remember that the event isn't just the Olympics, but also come with the Paralympics.

For example, we saw with Beijing that the weather in Zhangjiakou is not adequate for competition in March, with melting snow and athlete discomfort being a reoccurring issue throughout the Paralympic competitions.

Either the set is shifted to January-February instead of the current February-March time slot to accommodate the temperatures, or we further reduce the list to a host that can have low enough temperatures in March as well.

 

14 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

You’re absolutely right.

 March or Janaury has to be considered as well to fit in the Paralympics.

Might we see a fixed climate-compelled “hosting window “ introduced for the Winter Games, much like we see for the July/August hosting window for the Summer Games.

 

or should I say, a January/February compulsory hosting window to accommodate both the Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games (not March)

[AustralianFan]

12 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

What’s the reasoning then for the February-March time period? I note that in the distant past they often started in January, but since 1968 have all started in February. 

If you’re asking about the Olympics, it’scprobably because Feb was the coldest month for the Winter Olympics from way back with the Paralympics “added on” later last century in March.   I’m just guessing here

[Sir Rols]

I would NEVER underestimate the desire and influence of US broadcasters to have them scheduled in the slot most advantageous to them. And I just noted February is a sweeps month in the US. Any insights @Quaker2001?

Edited January 8, 2023 by Sir Rols

[Quaker2001]

13 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

What’s the reasoning then for the February-March time period? I note that in the distant past they often started in January, but since 1968 have all started in February. 

Here's my best guess.  Climate and broadcasting considerations aside, it's probably the sweet spot for each sport's respective world cup season.  Not too late that they can't wrap things up with some events afterwards.  Not too early that it's in the middle of the season.  Plus it gives some time to hype things up after Christmas and New Year's.

13 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

I would NEVER underestimate the desire and influence of US broadcasters to have them scheduled in the slot most advantageous to them. And I just noted February is a sweeps month in the US. Any insights @Quaker2001?

It sure is, which is why NBC and previous Olympic broadcasters are more than happy for the Olympics to be exactly where they are.

To delve further into the Super Bowl issues that you and @Bearwere mentioning.. NBC had the 2018 Super Bowl, which was the Sunday before the opening ceremony in PyeongChang.  They were thrilled to have both events so close together and they actually traded Super Bowl years with CBS so they could get the 2022 game.  The interesting thing there is that the game was originally scheduled for February 6th, which would have been the first Sunday of the Beijing games, which were a week earlier than normal.  However, the NFL decided to add a week to the schedule, going from 16 regular season games to 17.  So that pushed the Super Bowl back to February 13th.  That only happened in March of 2021.  And yes, there were a couple of changes to the Olympic schedule as a result to accommodate the new Super Bowl date (I believe 1 of the morning figure skating sessions got moved so it could air after the Super Bowl)

New TV contracts for the NFL come into play next year and instead of 3 networks rotating who has the Super Bowl (CBS, NBC, Fox), now ABC is back into the mix so it will rotate every 4 years.  Almost certainly by design, that gives NBC the Super Bowl in 2026, 2030, and 2034 to line up with Winter Olympic years (rights to the 2034 Olympics have yet to be awarded, so those don't belong to NBC just yet).  The 2026 Super Bowl is scheduled to be played on February 8th, so that would be the first Sunday of the Milano-Cortina games.

Will be interested to see what happened when Salt Lake gets their games, whether that's 2030 or 2034.  I can't imagine the NFL will change their plans to accommodate the Olympics (although it's very possible in the future they add yet another regular season game pushing the Super Bowl later into February), so the SLC games may have to work around that.

So, short answer to your question.. NFL schedules will likely dictate the preferences of US television, especially for a games held in the United States.  For Olympics held elsewhere, more likely they'll just have to manage that conflict and it'll be on NBC to make it work.  Should be noted that on Super Bowl Sunday last year, NBC had coverage in the morning, but nothing in the afternoon until after the game.  Not surprisingly, that was the most watched night of the Olympics for NBC in what was otherwise a very poorly rated Olympics

[Bear]

If the Olympics take place in January there shouldn't really be any concerns about a Super Bowl conflict anymore, right?

[Quaker2001]

41 minutes ago, Bear said:

If the Olympics take place in January there shouldn't really be any concerns about a Super Bowl conflict anymore, right?

Not a Super Bowl conflict, but then you're going up all of the playoffs.  That's not really a better scenario.  Those games obviously don't have the same viewership as the Super Bowl, but there's a lot more of them

[FYI]

^I would say that there still would be an issue with the winter Olympics still clashing with all the final NFL games right before the Olympics. More teams still playing in the playoffs before the big game.

What's interesting, before 2002, all the Superbowls were played in January. And the IOC & NFL never had to worry before about taking each others spotlight (that was probably a consideration then), until now. And as noted upthread, since 1968, the Winter Olympics have been held in February, right after the first Superbowl in 1967. Coincidence? Maybe not.

[FYI]

19 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

While it’s fun to fantasise about multiple awarding of Olympic/Paralympic Winter Games on a mass scale, the IOC would be extremely unlikely to award Games probably more than two Games into the future, a double awarding at max, even with a rotating hosting pool, should it be adopted.

Too many variables into the future, changes of governments, funding available, condition and useability of infrastructure, change of public and political support, and the big one, a warming climate.  

 

Things like minimum average snow venue temperatures being below freezing over previous 10 years and existing competition infrastructure.

Considering Europe this year is having their warmest January on record, wouldn't that already negate the 10-year minimum snow venue temperature rule. I'd say it does. 

That's why I would agree that anything more than a double-allocation at this point is not that practical. Too many other considerations, aside from the climate one, to manage such a complex permanent roster. As things stand now, we're already going into repeat-host territory. There aren't too many other virgin Winter Olympic territories left that are that viable anyway for the IOC to grasp on a permanent basis with.

[Quaker2001]

23 minutes ago, FYI said:

^I would say that there still would be an issue with the winter Olympics still clashing with all the final NFL games right before the Olympics. More teams still playing in the playoffs before the big game.

What's interesting, before 2002, all the Superbowls were played in January. And the IOC & NFL never had to worry before about taking each others spotlight (that was probably a consideration then), until now. And as noted upthread, since 1968, the Winter Olympics have been held in February, right after the first Superbowl in 1967. Coincidence? Maybe not.

Fairly certain those 2 things are not related to each other and yes, it's very much a coincidence.

The date of the Super Bowl has progressively moved later on the calendar as the season has expanded.  The interesting thing about 2022 is that it was set to be the first time the events ever conflicted.  And then less than a year out, the NFL decides to change the date of the game, clearly not caring about what that meant for NBC or the IOC.

Yes, it would be a major issue for US television if the NFL playoffs were still going on by the time the Olympics had started.  Not even a contest which side would win the viewership battle in that one.  And unlike the Super Bowl, which now officially belongs to NBC in the next 3 Winter Olympics years, they don't own the rest of the playoffs.  Easier for them to convince the IOC to work the schedule around their needs.  Much tougher if those football games are on another network and they have no control.

[BigVic]

Last year's Winter Olympics clash with the Super Bowl for the first time and this will be the same thing for Milano-Cortina in 2026

[AustralianFan]

3 hours ago, FYI said:

Considering Europe this year is having their warmest January on record, wouldn't that already negate the 10-year minimum snow venue temperature rule. I'd say it does. 

That's why I would agree that anything more than a double-allocation at this point is not that practical. Too many other considerations, aside from the climate one, to manage such a complex permanent roster. As things stand now, we're already going into repeat-host territory. There aren't too many other virgin Winter Olympic territories left that are that viable anyway for the IOC to grasp on a permanent basis with.

I agree.  I’d like to see what scientific data or projections the IOC might release in the next little while.  But as you said, they may well have to look at science based warming temperature trajectories into the future for those currently in dialogue and any newbies or potential hosting pool candidates as well.  

With so many moving parts, they’ll have their work cut out for them.

[Sir Rols]

3 hours ago, FYI said:

Considering Europe this year is having their warmest January on record, wouldn't that already negate the 10-year minimum snow venue temperature rule. I'd say it does. 

That's why I would agree that anything more than a double-allocation at this point is not that practical. Too many other considerations, aside from the climate one, to manage such a complex permanent roster. As things stand now, we're already going into repeat-host territory. There aren't too many other virgin Winter Olympic territories left that are that viable anyway for the IOC to grasp on a permanent basis with.

What I’ve ben saying exactly. And meanwhile North America had it’s record setting snow bomb over Xmas-NY. The best the climatologists can predict is the future weather patterns will be more volatile and extreme. How on earth is the IOC better placed to allocate a host for 2074 in the 2020s rather than in the 2060s????

Meanwhile, in light of the news out of Japan today: 67% in Sapporo Oppose 2030 Winter Olympics in New Survey, the IOC could well find it a struggle to get anyone interested in permanent hosting slot anyway, considering the extra burden it would place on maintenance, and a village, between games.