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

[baron-pierreIV]

I think the Winter Olympics should just be the Arena events.  That way there is no need to depend on the mountains!! 

[Sir Rols]

12 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

I think the Winter Olympics should just be the Arena events.  That way there is no need to depend on the mountains!! 

That was possibly/probably in jest, but it’s not that far off the hard truth. All the fiddling with the peripherals - tweaking the selection bureaucratic process, trying to achieve “no losers”, making gestures towards the climate crisis - is still not drawing anybody to want to host the winter games and ignoring the central and obvious reason cities and countries are running scared of them: the IOC has let them grow to become a monster that’s become far too expensive to stage with a cost benefit that’s increasingly not worth it.

Once upon a time, not too very long ago, these were the modest games that could be staged in small towns and existing resorts comfortably - Lake Placid, St Moritz, Cortina, Albertville, Lillehammer etc. Now, they require a major metropolis with a requirement for a mountain zone thats starting to need to be located, by geography and necessity, further and further away from the centre. They’re adding sports right left and centre, and unlike the summer games, not trying to offset that by cuts in other disciplines. Most of the facilities are prohibitively expensive to build and to maintain, and most of the sports are more for elitist and well-off enthusiasts rather than grass root participants (unless perhaps you’re a Scandinavian or Canadian).  

Somethings gotta give. They have to trim the games, dramatically, rather than tinker at the peripherals. But of course that’s the last thing the IOC, or probably even many of us, want to hear.

And, yes, I know that’s easier said than done. It would be difficult  to get rid of traditional blue riband events like the downhill or cross country (which is actually one of the few true “grass roots” alpine events). And to turn back away from the newer “sexy” sports - freestyles, boarding, ski and board cross etc - would be ceding that all important younger generation of viewers and participants to the X Games and their ilk (which is why the IOC started adding them in the fist place). But these aren’t modest gams anymore - they’re Taj Mahals for big cities and nearish-by exclusive resort playgrounds for the rich. No wonder taxpayers aren’t keen on hosting them anymore! 

Edited January 10 by Sir Rols

[yoshi]

That's probably a line that should be developed further - a full scale split of ice and snow. Ultimately those ice events, what Baron calls arena events don't need mountains or even snow. They could be held in London or Melbourne, or any big city with a few arenas. The snow events don't need a big city, they can go back to the ski resorts. They'd have to be held completely separated, maybe in the odd years on either side of the summer games.

Failing that, if it's the Olympic brand that's the problem, maybe the time has come for the IOC to abandon the Winter games & leave it to the federations to organise a World Winter Games themselves, like how the European Championships work. It's not like there's many federations involved, and they're obviously getting hosts for their World Cups etc. Whatever happens it's clear now that the Winter Olympics don't have a future as a combined event at this scale under the IOC - it's time to start thinking about sustainable long term replacements rather than tinkering quick fixes. 

Edit: you mention competition from the X Games, could the IOC take control of them & put the new extreme sports (which I love watching btw especially in the Winter games) in there? Would that do any good for solving the problem?

Edited January 10 by yoshi

[StefanMUC]

2 hours ago, yoshi said:

 

Edit: you mention competition from the X Games, could the IOC take control of them & put the new extreme sports (which I love watching btw especially in the Winter games) in there? Would that do any good for solving the problem?

Not very familiar with how the X Games are run or actually interested in those new sports myself, but generally speaking, the idea of the IOC taking control of *anything* these days sounds rather scary, if not irresponsible.

[Nacre]

2 hours ago, yoshi said:

That's probably a line that should be developed further - a full scale split of ice and snow.

Yes.

I think it's also important to note that the split has already happened informally. If it's already OK for Beijing and Zhangjiakou to host together when they are 200+ km apart, why not formally allow 600+ km with an extra day for travel for athletes to get from the ceremonies to the mountains?

[FYI]

Then that causes extra travel expenses for everyone involved, & would also technically end that special Olympic "atmosphere" that made the Olympics so special ITFP. On TV that aspect wouldn't really matter. But for the athletes, spectators, officials & the like, it certainly will.

[krow]

1 hour ago, FYI said:

Then that causes extra travel expenses for everyone involved, & would also technically end that special Olympic "atmosphere" that made the Olympics so special ITFP. On TV that aspect wouldn't really matter. But for the athletes, spectators, officials & the like, it certainly will.

we just had an olympics where foreign spectators were banned. i'm not sure the special olympic atmosphere is feasible or a priority.

[StefanMUC]

Just now, krow said:

we just had an olympics where foreign spectators were banned.

Two even

[FYI]

2 minutes ago, krow said:

we just had an olympics where foreign spectators were banned. i'm not sure the special olympic atmosphere is feasible or a priority.

And in that sense, Tokyo 2020ne (& to a lesser extent, Beijing 2022) was a disappointment. Even many athletes complained that it "didn't feel" like the Olympics to them because of it. 

So if the Olympic atmosphere is not feasible or a priority anylonger, then from now on, we should just have vacant stadiums & arenas for all other Olympics left on the schedule, shouldn't we. :-/

[FYI]

And I'd further add, that even on television, seeing a packed stadium/arena, definitely says that what you're watching is the Olympic Games. Seeing all those empty stadia during Tokyo 2020ne was surely a let down. It just seemed that all one was watching was just a simple dress rehearsal/practice run instead of actual Olympic competition. 

[yoshi]

Well by a full scale split I wasn't envisaging something like Milan Cortina, but a truly full scale split - completely separate Games, held in separate countries (for example the Netherlands, famously without mountains, could host the ice event with no problems at all) & most likely in separate years (if they got going now, they could have it set up for 2031 & 33). 

It's really a version of what Baron said and Rols agreed with - I know it's quite radical but the 26 & especially 30 saga has made it clear IMO that the Winter Olympics as they are can't continue. This split feels to me like the only way to preserve a form of Olympic event for winter sports. When something is beyond all fixing, you start work on replacing it, you don't keep hitting it until it starts again. 

Edited January 10 by yoshi

[FYI]

That would effectively & truly distort how we know the Winter Olympics today (& have known them). They'd then probably need to be called something else, other than the Winter Olympics. 

[Sir Rols]

I wasn’t so much advocating a split between snow and ice events, but more some wholesale cutting of events and sports to make the whole thing a bit more manageable. And the cuts probably need to be ruthless and painful. 

[Quaker2001]

2 hours ago, FYI said:

And I'd further add, that even on television, seeing a packed stadium/arena, definitely says that what you're watching is the Olympic Games. Seeing all those empty stadia during Tokyo 2020ne was surely a let down. It just seemed that all one was watching was just a simple dress rehearsal/practice run instead of actual Olympic competition. 

It helped after the initial awkwardness wore off and they figured out to have some people in the stands (especially at some place like the swimming venue where they allowed other athletes to watch) so at least it didn't sound hollow.  But yea, as someone who can recall all the empty stadiums for baseball and football in 2020 that started to fill back up in 2021, it was definitely jarring to lose that atmosphere, especially at a venue like the Olympics where it needs that scene in order to feel big.

Thankfully that was a one off out of everyone's control.  You look at a future host like Brisbane which obviously isn't as prominent on the world stage.  But I don't doubt that Aussies will pack the venues and fully embrace the event

[Quaker2001]

51 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

I wasn’t so much advocating a split between snow and ice events, but more some wholesale cutting of events and sports to make the whole thing a bit more manageable. And the cuts probably need to be ruthless and painful. 

And yet they keep going in the other direction, adding more events plus a new sport for 2026. 

The Sydney games have 10,600 athletes from 199 countries and 300 events.  Those numbers didn't really jump up that much until Tokyo and it's already getting scled by for Paris.  The LA 2028 games are likely to have the same number of athletes as Atlanta 1996.

Contrast that to the Winter Olympics.  Calgary 1988 had less than 1500 athletes and 46 events.  It only took until Sochi for those numbers to double.  And the last Olympics in Italy had 84 events.  Milano-Cortina is slated for 116.  That's nearly a 40% jump in just 20 years.  And they wonder why they're having trouble finding potential host cities/countries

[baron-pierreIV]

Clarification on my idea:

Some of the Nordic events can actually be retained - those requiring flat terrain are easy enough to flood with artificial snow (so Biathlon, some X-country, the half-pipes, etc.  Ski jumping can also be held with artificial snow.  It's just the Alpine and sliding events that are a drag on a more feasible set of Winter Games -- unless the sliding sports can just use the ski jumps -- after all there's a choice of the smaller or the higher jump!  

Edited January 10 by baron-pierreIV

[Australian Kiwi]

13 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

That was possibly/probably in jest, but it’s not that far off the hard truth. All the fiddling with the peripherals - tweaking the selection bureaucratic process, trying to achieve “no losers”, making gestures towards the climate crisis - is still not drawing anybody to want to host the winter games and ignoring the central and obvious reason cities and countries are running scared of them: the IOC has let them grow to become a monster that’s become far too expensive to stage with a cost benefit that’s increasingly not worth it.

 

TBH the "arena events only" argument then leads to another idea - the Olympics going back to the beginning and the 'Summer' Olympic Games absorbing the indoor elements of the Winters. It might stretch the host city, so a good thing is that they've supposedly made things more flexible for the host country (eg. Brisbane 2032 speed skating at Rod Laver; ice hockey at Homebush). 

[Sir Rols]

1 minute ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Clarification on my idea:

Some of the Nordic events can actually be retained - those requiring flat terrain are easy enough to flood with artificial snow (so Biathlon, some X-country, the half-pipes, etc.  Ski jumping can also be held with artificial snow.  It's just the Alpine and sliding events that are a drag on a more feasible set of Winter Games.  

And the thing is with these alpine events, once upon a time all the host needed was a single mountain. Now they require whole mountain ranges with multiple resorts to accommodate the whole wide panoply of rich kids’ gravity assist sports from downhill to freestyle to moguls to cross etc.

[baron-pierreIV]

1 minute ago, Australian Kiwi said:

TBH the "arena events only" argument then leads to another idea - the Olympics going back to the beginning and the 'Summer' Olympic Games absorbing the indoor elements of the Winters. It might stretch the host city, so a good thing is that they've supposedly made things more flexible for the host country (eg. Brisbane 2032 speed skating at Rod Laver; ice hockey at Homebush). 

Nah.  The IOC won't want to lose one stream of income.  Besides, adding them to the SOG would eat up all availalbe indoor arenas.  Also, bad mix of summer and winter sponsors. 

[Australian Kiwi]

& and mountain events can become a separate series of events perhaps continuously staged in one location in the February of each Olympiad (perhaps Switzerland). 

so in each Olympiad: 

• Alpine events take place in Feb in one designated location that the IOC and relevant sports feds support (switching between an Alps location, North America or Japan makes sense). Separate location and 'event' to the main host city later in the year, but still part of the 'Olympiad' (think Stockholm 1956)
• Indoor flagship winter sports become part of the SOG itself . As above, if this places too much pressure on a city's infrastructure then like the Olympic Football tournament it could be shared amongst other cities in the host country (eg Sydney and Melbourne in 2032). 
• Winter Olympic Games abolished. While we are at it get rid of the YOGs too then we have a nice and neat Games of the Olympiad every four years as they were intended to be. 

[Australian Kiwi]

2 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Nah.  The IOC won't want to lose one stream of income.  Besides, adding them to the SOG would eat up all availalbe indoor arenas.  Also, bad mix of summer and winter sponsors. 

As i said, other locations in the host country could step in. 

France could do this effortlessly in 2024, as could the US in 2028, Australia in 2032,etc. If they are focused on 'national' bids as much as the New Norm says it is then this should not be an issue (unless you are Qatar or Singapore). 

[yoshi]

23 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

And the thing is with these alpine events, once upon a time all the host needed was a single mountain. Now they require whole mountain ranges with multiple resorts to accommodate the whole wide panoply of rich kids’ gravity assist sports from downhill to freestyle to moguls to cross etc.

Is that really a big problem? I can't imagine there's many ski resorts that don't have others nearby to host other stuff. That national scale idea is interesting but wouldn't it just make (what would be) the Olympics even more unwieldy and lead to a problem with them instead?

[Sir Rols]

14 minutes ago, yoshi said:

Is that really a big problem? I can't imagine there's many ski resorts that don't have others nearby to host other stuff. That national scale idea is interesting but wouldn't it just make (what would be) the Olympics even more unwieldy and lead to a problem with them instead?

It’s still half a dozen more locations, with all the facilities, transport and logistics required of them.

[yoshi]

So is it the newer extreme sports in the winter games that are the main source of the problem? Are you saying they should be left to the X Games, to bring the Winter Olympics back to just traditional sports in the snow section? Only that doesn't solve the problem of needing a megacity for the indoor stuff. 

[Sir Rols]

It’s not any particular sport(s). It’s the continuing unending addition of new sports. It’s just keeps making the WOGs bigger and costlier.