We've officially transitioned to winter sports season. How do I know? Well, for one, it's late November. But the most obvious way to tell is because Olympic Channel is now only showing winter sports. No swimming or track & field or gymnastics in sight. All weekend, it was figure skating and skiing and luge.
Speaking of luge, a friend of mine was watching it this morning, which led (as it often does) to an extended series of text messages between us. The crux of the discussion was that there are zero sliding tracks in the entire country of Italy, which is a problem seeing as Milan and Cortina are bidding for the 2026 Winter Olympics. Against Stockholm. There aren't any sliding tracks in Sweden either, so they're proposing holding the bobsled, luge and skeleton events in Latvia.
That inspired me to do some research, which led to my finding out that there's a grand total of 17 bobsled/luge/skeleton tracks in the world (18 once the track in Beijing is completed). Four of those are in Germany! There are a bunch of "natural" luge tracks, which are built directly into the side of a mountain or along a road, but those can't be used for Olympic competition, so, for all intents and purposes, there are 17 tracks they have to choose from.
They've said that Italy's lack of a sliding venue is definitely something that could be held against the Milan-Cortina bid. (The track in Cortina, which was used for the 1956 Winter Games, closed in 2008.) The closest one is 250 miles away across the Austrian border in Igls. So, if Milan-Cortina does win the bid and they don't reopen the Cortina track (which I'm not even sure is possible), you'd have to assume that's where they'd hold the Olympic sliding competitions. (By the way, the distance between Stockholm and the track in Latvia is 350 miles and the Baltic Sea.)
Venues for bobsled/luge and, to a lesser extent, ski jumping, will always be a problem for potential Winter Olympic bid cities. And Olympics Agenda 2020, which is designed to help reduce costs, hasn't helped. In fact, it's had the opposite effect. Because they don't want them to build a bobsled/luge track they don't need, but there are only so many existing bobsled/luge tracks out there...and most of them are nowhere near the proposed host city!
What to do then? I get the idea behind Olympic Agenda 2020 and I like many of the things it proposes. We'll see that in full force at the Paris and LA Games, where they'll make use of existing venues all over the city.
But for the Winter Olympics, that's simply impractical. These cities don't have an existing sliding track or ski jump that they can use. Which means their only options are building one or using one that's ridiculously far away. And, frankly, building one makes a lot more sense than having those events in a completely different country!
And that brings us back to the original problem. These cities may have little to no practical use for a sliding track or ski jump after the Olympics, and maintaining these types of facilities are ridiculously expensive. But how is it better to tell these cities that they don't have to build one at all and can instead ship those events out to another city (or country) hundreds of miles away?
It's quite the catch-22. And it's one of the IOC's own making. They're struggling to find willing bidders to host the Winter Olympics as it is. And they're not doing themselves any favors by limiting themselves to areas that are near enough to a sliding track and ski jump.
I understand that they're trying to help by eliminating that requirement and the cost associated with it. But that should be left up to the bidding cities. If they want to build a sliding track and/or ski jump as part of their plan, more power to them. If they're close enough to an existing one to use it, even better. But it's asinine to suggest that they should have bobsled/luge hundreds of miles away...in another country...just so the organizing committee can save a few bucks.
Sochi's $51 billion price tag is still scaring everyone off, and the IOC is doing what it can to put cities at ease. Eliminating the cost of building a sliding track and/or ski jump are a part of that plan. But the alternative doesn't seem to be much better. The bobsledding and ski jumping needs to take place somewhere at a Winter Olympics. But those athletes should also be able to feel like they're a part of those Games. And I'm not sure sending them hundreds of miles away would accomplish that.
In fact, I think the opposite is true. The IOC is big on the post-Games "legacy." Well, wouldn't the construction of a world-class bobsled/luge venue be a terrific legacy for the host country? Look at what happened in Salt Lake City. Or in Calgary. Or even in PyeongChang. Let's not forget the reigning Olympic men's skeleton champion (who dominated the competition) in from South Korea. That's his home track. Don't think he'll be the last one from Korea.
So, sorry if I think it's a stupid idea to hold the sliding events elsewhere during the Winter Olympics. Yes, the cost is a significant factor. But building a track can still be worthwhile for the host city. In fact, the venue would probably pay for itself after a while since it would likely become the national team's training facility (likely for the national teams of nearby countries, too) and it would also undoubtedly become a regular stop on the World Cup circuit. Especially since it would give them somewhere new to go.
Is that enough to justify maintaining the facility long-term? Maybe not. But the existence of a sliding track and/or ski jump shouldn't be a deciding factor in who hosts the Winter Olympics. Because the IOC can't afford to be that picky.
If a city actually wants to host the Winter Olympics and already has one, great. If they don't, let them build one. Because the fact that there are fewer than 20 world-class sliding tracks in the world (four of which are in Germany) is a problem. And, frankly, they could use a few more.
No comments:
Post a Comment