When they first announced the bid cities for the 2026 Winter Olympics, I thought they very well might end up in Erzurum, Turkey by default. It seemed entirely possible that Erzurum would be the only bid left, since all of the others were subject to either lukewarm governmental support or the dreaded public referendum. And, as we all know, once an Olympic bid reaches that point, it's over. That's why Graz, Austria and Sion, Switzerland withdrew their bids over the summer.
So it came as a bit of a surprise when the IOC reduced the list of final candidates for 2026 to three, eliminating Erzurum from the race. There were some security concerns, but the IOC's main reasons for cutting Erzurum were more logistical. They have some work to do with the overall infrastructure and venues would need to be upgraded, and the IOC simply doesn't think Erzurum would be ready to host an Olympics in 2026.
That leaves us with three candidates, all of which have hosted the Olympics before--1988 host Calgary; Stockholm, which hosted the 1912 Summer Games; and the confusing Italian bid including Milan and Cortina d'Ampezzo, the 1956 Winter host. Torino was supposed to be involved in that one, too, but they withdrew last week basically because of a power struggle with Milan over which city would be the focal point. That was probably for the best. Because the two remaining co-hosts are far enough apart. Milan and Cortina are 450 miles from each other!
Here's why the IOC cutting the Turkish bid is incredibly risky, though. The citizens of Calgary are all but begging to give the public a say in whether or not they move forward. The Swedish government can't decide if they want to throw their support behind the Stockholm bid, and that one might come down to who wins the upcoming election. And the Italian bid is still working out the actual logistics of their plan.
They all fit into the IOC's Olympic Agenda 2020. Calgary would use many of the same venues as 1988, while Stockholm and Cortina regularly host World Cup events in a number of winter sports. And with the remaining bids coming from Canada and Europe, it also fulfills the IOC's unspoken goal of returning to a "more traditional" location after back-to-back Winter Games in the Far East.
I've long thought that Stockholm is probably the favorite, as long as the Swedes get their act together between now and next year's vote (which was supposed to be in Milan, but will likely be moved to IOC headquarters because of the obvious conflict of interest with Milan as one of the bid cities). It's crazy to think that the Winter Olympics have existed for nearly a century, yet have never been in Sweden, one of the top winter sports nations in the world. In fact, the only time the Olympics have ever been held in Sweden was in 1912, when Stockholm hosted the legendary Jim Thorpe Summer Games. (A successful bid would make Stockholm the second city all-time, and in a row, to have hosted both a Summer and Winter Olympics.)
Although, while it's being touted as a "Stockholm" bid, it's extremely spread out. Stockholm's on the coast, so the mountain events would be held in Are, which is more than three hours away. They're also talking about holding the sliding events across the border in Latvia. Yet, despite all this, Stockholm is still the bid I support. I think a Swedish Winter Olympics is long overdue.
Logistically, Calgary is probably the safest option. The facilities are still in great shape. In fact, most of them serve as training centers for both the Canadian and American teams. But, my big concern with Calgary is the World Cup. The 2026 World Cup has already been awarded to North America, and Edmonton will be one of the host cities. Will the IOC want to put both of the major international sporting events in 2026 in the same country? And how much money can the Alberta government reasonably be expected to shell out for both events?
As for the Italian bid, I'm not even sure they know the details. I'm assuming it's outdoor sports in the beautiful Alpine city of Cortina, with the indoor sports in one of Europe's largest cities. The Opening Ceremony would probably be in the 80,000-seat San Siro, home of AC Milan and Inter Milan. On paper, a Milan/Cortina bid seems solid. But Rome's favored bid for the 2020 Summer Games was withdrawn because of a lack of government support. They support this one, but aren't putting any money behind it. Instead, it's up to the cities and regions to come up with the money themselves through public and private investments. I'm also worried the same issues that led Torino to back out could come between the remaining two cities, as well.
All three have their risks. Which is why I'm surprised they cut the Turkish bid. Ultimately, the IOC must feel comfortable that one, two or even all three of the remaining candidates will survive to the final vote. Which is obviously something the IOC badly needs after the disaster of 2022 and the 2024/2028 dual awarding.
The silver lining is that each of the remaining cities is a capable host that would do a fine job. Calgary's Winter Olympics 30 years ago were extremely well-organized. The Italians could honor the 60th anniversary of the previous Cortina Games while also capitalizing on the sexiness of one of Europe's most beautiful cities. Stockholm, meanwhile, has a great legacy plan. And just imagine how amazing Olympic hockey on Swedish ice would be!
We're still a long way away from the awarding of the 2026 Winter Olympics next September. Hopefully all three remain in the race until then. That would be a positive first step for the Olympic Movement. (There haven't even been three cities in the final vote since Tokyo's election in 2013.) Then the host needs to deliver. They need to prove that you can host the Winter Olympics without your city going bankrupt. Which all three of these candidates are capable of doing.
No comments:
Post a Comment