France, USA, France, USA

It's all but official that four of the six Olympics over the next decade will be in either France or the United States.  In 2017, the IOC made that historical double-awarding of the next two Summer Games to Paris and Los Angeles.  And in Paris, we're poised for another double-awarding, with the 2030 Winter Games going to the French Alps, followed by Salt Lake City in 2034.

Salt Lake City taking a second turn at hosting the Winter Olympics in 2034 is not a surprise.  They'd long been considered the favorite for those Games, so much so that there weren't even any other bidders.  There was some initial talk about Salt Lake stepping up for 2030 after Sapporo dropped out and there didn't appear to be any other viable candidates, but their preference was always 2034, with good reason.  The 2030 Winter Games are roughly 18 months after the 2028 Summer Games in LA.  That's simply too close.

So, 2034 it is, and Salt Lake City's second time hosting the Winter Olympics will be six years after the U.S. hosts the Summer Games--just like the first time, when they hosted six years after Atlanta.  Those spectacular 2002 Games, which are widely considered one of the best Winter Olympics ever (if not THE best) turned a profit, which has been used to maintain the Olympic venues.  The venues have all remained in regular use over the past 20 years, with many of them becoming the home base of the U.S. National Team in numerous winter sports.

That fits right in with the IOC's policy of using existing venues to keep costs down.  It shouldn't come as a surprise, then, that Salt Lake 2034 will use the same venues as Salt Lake 2002.  There are more sports now, so there will obviously be some new ones used, but, for the most part, it'll be the same venue plan.  And, since the 2002 Olympics were before the IOC put the kibosh on building new venues, they'd actually be fairly compact, an idea that has become a distant memory when it comes to Winter Olympic hosts.

Frankly, Salt Lake City could host the Winter Olympics again tomorrow if asked.  The IOC knows that.  And, with all the problems they've had securing Winter Games hosts for 2022, 2026 and 2030, they know that Salt Lake City will give them some stability.  Which is exactly what the IOC needs and wants.  They don't have to worry about Salt Lake City, just like they don't have to worry about Paris and LA.

The selection of the French Alps for 2030, meanwhile, does come as a bit of a surprise.  France didn't even enter the race until a few months ago, when the IOC was getting desperate to find a host.  Sweden, which for a while was the sole bidder, missed out again (although, you'd figure there's still a pretty good chance the Winter Olympics will eventually be held in Sweden).  A bid from Switzerland, meanwhile, was given the inside track at hosting in 2038, and will have exclusive discussions with the IOC regarding their bid until 2027.

Over the next four years, the Swiss will have an opportunity to fine-tune their bid and make some changes that the IOC recommended.  The Swiss bid was somewhat disorganized, with no official host "city."  Instead, their plan was to use existing venues scattered across the country.  That will still likely end up being what they do, but the biggest problem was that there was no centralized Olympic Village.  Assuming they get everything straightened out, you'd have to assume the IOC will rubber stamp Switzerland as the 2038 host sometime before the end of that exclusive window (it should be noted that IOC headquarters are in Lausanne, Switzerland, so this would be a "home" Olympics for the IOC).

France has hosted the Winter Olympics three times--the first-ever Winter Olympics in Chamonix in 1924, Grenoble in 1968 and Albertville in 1992.  All three of those cities are located in the Alps and not really that far from each other.  They all figure into the 2030 venue plan along with the Mediterranean coast city of Nice, which will host the skating events and be the site of the main Olympic Village.  That's the biggest positive of the French plan.  Once again, they'll be using the existing venues that have been regular stops on the World Cup circuit since the Albertville Games 30 years ago.

What's ironic is that one of the biggest criticisms of those Albertville Games was that they were so spread out.  A lot of athletes said they felt like a bunch of individual World Championships rather than an Olympics, where the opportunity to mingle and be teammates with athletes in other sports is one of the most memorable parts of the experience.  However, with the IOC's new "don't build anything" approach that emphasizes using only existing venues, even if they're far outside the host city, the Albertville Games don't seem so spread out anymore.  Especially when compared to Beijing and Milan-Cortina.

While most of the 1992 venues will be reused, there's still a big one that's missing.  Perhaps the most breathtaking venue in Albertville was the outdoor speed skating track.  That outdoor track also led to numerous problems with wind and sun glare causing multiple delays.  It was also the reason why the IOC and ISU decided that all world-class speed skating venues should be indoors moving forward.  Which means they obviously can't use the same one as 1992.  And, since there are no world-class speed skating venues in France, they'll likely need to build a temporary facility for the competition (or cross the border into Italy and use the Turin 2006 track).

There have been a few half-hearted French Winter Olympic bids since Albertville, but their focus was primarily on finally getting another Summer Games in Paris.  Now that Paris is hosting next summer, making a Winter Games bid for the Alps made sense.  And, I'm sure riding the momentum of the Paris Games, the French citizens were overwhelmingly in support of a 2030 bid.  More importantly, many of the sponsors for next summer also signed on for another Olympics six years later, which you know the IOC liked.

In that sense, I can see what the IOC is doing here.  Yes, four out of six Olympics over a 10-year period in the same two countries seems a bit redundant on paper.  But when those two countries are France and the United States, two of the most important countries in the Olympic movement, it's a safe bet, both organizationally and financially.  Especially since it gives the two host nations an opportunity to sell potential sponsors on the exposure of two Olympics in six years.  That's a win-win for everybody.

You've gotta love the symmetry, too!  They'll be awarding France the 2030 Winter Olympics while in France next summer just before the Paris Games start.  Talk about riding the momentum!  Was that the reason why the IOC made its decision about 2030?  I doubt it.  It might've been in the back of their minds, but it probably wasn't THE reason.  More likely, the IOC saw an opportunity in France that may not come around again and they wanted to capitalize on it, knowing there was minimal risk involved (I wouldn't be surprised if some members of the Paris organizing committee transition to the 2030 organizing committee sometime next fall after the Paralympics are over.)

They certainly threw Switzerland a bone, too.  Instead of simply rejecting the bid outright, they're giving them four years to tailor it into exactly what they're looking for.  It's not a promise that they'll host in 2038, but it may as well be.  Which, again, is the smart strategic move for the IOC.  They want the 2038 Winter Olympics in Switzerland, so they're gonna do what they need to do in order to make it work.  And that'll set them up with four more traditional hosts, the United States and three neighbors in Western Europe, to give them some stability and a presence in important markets after the East Asia back-to-back.

After the three straight Olympics in the same part of Asia, we'll have five out of six in either the same part of Western Europe (two in France, one in Italy) or the United States.  The only outlier during the next decade will be the 2032 Summer Games in Brisbane, Australia.  This is a direct result of the IOC reforms, but it's also an effort by the IOC to revive interest in the Olympic Movement in important stakeholders.  They're also putting the Winter Olympics in the trusted, capable hands they've already been working with for the next two Summer Games.  So, I think it might actually be a good thing.

Back when the Winter Olympics first started, the host nation of that year's Summer Games was given the option if they wanted to host the winter edition also.  That only lasted until World War II because they realized it was too much, but I can see this six-year model becoming a regular thing moving forward.  Because it really does seem smart to make the Summer and Winter Olympics a package deal, for both the host nations and the Olympic Movement.