Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is at 7,000 ft above sea level (2200 m) at foot of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains.
It has Olympic class downhill skiing nearby at Taos Ski Valley.
Taos Ski Valley base elevation is at a lofty 9,700 ft ASL (2950 m)
Vertical drop is 2,612 ft (796 m) with tons of dry powder snow and NM sunshine
Kamloops, BC could be good too. population 100,000
Nearby Sun Peaks Resort has 881 m (2,892 ft vertical drop).
Quebec City would an awesome location for the winter Olympics.
Le Massif Ski Resort has tons of snow and there is dedicated train to it from Quebec City.
and has a current vertical drop of 770 m (2,562 ft) only 30 meters short (could be amended).
Calgary is good too. Lake Louise has an excellent downhill with 960 m (3,150 ft) vertical drop.
Montreal could handle the winter Olympics too. Lot's of snow.
Nearby Mont Tremblant has 2,137 ft (649 m) vertical drop. Almost long enough.
Or in a pinch they could use White Face Mountain, Lake Placid, NY (90 min drive south),
and make it a two nation Winter Olympics
Outside the US, hosting the Olympics is a national venture supported by the central government. In the US, it’s local initiative supported by the city, private donors and the state. The federal government provides little or no support. As such, the choice of metro-area has to be larger to support the investment.
I will take issue with that. For the 2002 SLC games, the highway entrance to SLC International and the I-80/215 interchange were completely overhauled using federal and state funds. The Federal Govt. does not pony up money for stadiums, ect. but they do pay up for highway and transportation funds to get to the games. That is not a pittance.
It is at 7,000 ft above sea level (2200 m) at foot of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains.
It has Olympic class downhill skiing nearby at Taos Ski Valley.
Taos Ski Valley base elevation is at a lofty 9,700 ft ASL (2950 m)
Vertical drop is 2,612 ft (796 m) with tons of dry powder snow and NM sunshine[COLOR="rgb(244, 164, 96)"]likely the same as Le Massif[/color]
Kamloops, BC could be good too. population 100,000
Nearby Sun Peaks Resort has 881 m (2,892 ft vertical drop).
Quebec City would an awesome location for the winter Olympics.
Le Massif Ski Resort has tons of snow and there is dedicated train to it from Quebec City.
and has a current vertical drop of 770 m (2,562 ft) only 30 meters short (could be amended). Le Massif has been rejected by the IOC for holding winter skiing events three different times. "You cannot change the mountain, the shape of the mountain is such. (Meaning it will not allow an Olympic downhill course) Gian Kaspar, Ski federation president, 2010.
Calgary is good too. Lake Louise has an excellent downhill with 960 m (3,150 ft) vertical drop.
Montreal could handle the winter Olympics too. Lot's of snow.
Nearby Mont Tremblant has 2,137 ft (649 m) vertical drop. Almost long enough.[COLOR="rgb(244, 164, 96)"]not nearly so. It is nearly 500' short and that is a significant distance for mountain runs[/color]
Or in a pinch they could use White Face Mountain, Lake Placid, NY (90 min drive south),
and make it a two nation Winter Olympics
I think the issue with Santa Fe would be hotel space. A lot of people would have to get hotel rooms in ABQ unless Santa Fe wants the development. When I was there last 5 years ago, they did not.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,748 posts, read 23,813,296 times
Reputation: 14660
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingcat2k
I think the issue with Santa Fe would b e hotel space. A lot of people would have to get hotel rooms in ABQ unless Santa Fe wants the development. When I was there last 5 years ago, they did not.
I'm quite certain little Santa Fe could not handle it and more importantly does not want to be on the world stage. Not unless the Winter Games were downscaled to Lake Placid sized events, but the tide has already turned, larger cities seem to be the rule now. And don't even bother mentioning Albuquerque, it's a high desert city not suited for winter anything. As far as Taos goes, when conditions are good they're great, but that's when they are not enduring long term drought conditions which they have in recent years, so that venue would be too unreliable. That and the closest major airport to Taos would be ABQ and that's a 2.5 hour drive. Best to look to our neighbor to the north rather than the Land of Enchantment for hosting the winter games.
Last edited by Champ le monstre du lac; 02-23-2014 at 10:17 AM..
Denver was awarded the 1976 games but the State of Colorado rejected them by passing a funding requirement bill in 1974. The funding requirement bill basically segregated the Denver Metro counties from the rest of the state from its standard per-capita spending equation and gave them a different one. If Denver wants to have the games, it will require winning a state referendum to access state funds to have the Games.
Beaver Creek was to be the skiing venue for the 1976 Games so the venue is already in place and already used for a number of World Cup events.
The Olympics provide political capital to fund a large number of infrastructure projects that are needed. SLC before the games would be considered a corporate backwater not worthy of hosting regional offices. They always went to Denver. Now, lots of corporations have regional offices there and are even gaining professional jobs that would have been bound for Denver without any forethought before. The Games usually aren't a money maker themselves but host cities see a large boost in productivity from the massive overhaul of their infrastructure to support them. SLC is certainly much more of a draw now than it was in the mid-90's when their Interstate and mass transit systems were shoddy, clogged and underfunded.
Considering the rejection of the 1976 games and the success of Salt Lake City in 2002, Denver will NEVER get the games even if they put a bid together. Even submitting a bid may require a referendum now that bid packages for Winter Games are nearly as expensive as Summer Games. The IOC can sit on its hands and say "Why??? You rejected us when we were down, a laughing stock and now you want us?"
There's already a number of other locations that could support the games that aren't Denver with big sacks of money. Seattle (Skiing would be at Snowqualmie) or Spokane/CDA could easily support them now and Spokane/CDA needs the infrastructure boost that the Olympics do provide. Boise would be a good choice as well. Portland is ok but probably wouldn't want them. Any new Californian bid is DOA due to zoning and environmental laws but Squaw Valley and Reno could use a boost.
Is that really the case, the IOC has said it wants places that can financially handle hosting the Games, in the 70's Denver was in dire straits financially.
Plus I have never heard the IOC ever say that they never forgave Denver for the snub.
It's almost a sure thing the host city for the 2026 Winter Olympics will be a North American city. 2018 is in Asia and 2022 is down to 6 (none from North America)cities. I can't see Beijing getting the not after an Asian city host the previous games. So it will probably be in Europe. That leaves North America in line to get the 2026 games.
The US should be a solid bet to get the 2026 games. I think Lake Placid is too small an area to host so we're looking at somewhere out west. Denver would get my nod.
Anchorage could be very cool, it's a city often overlooked that could have some its potential tapped into. I wonder what the Alaskan locals would think. Alyeska is a fantastic resort. Probably best held in March so it won't be too cold and added daylight hours.
ANchorage made a bid when SLC was chosen. It's planning on making another run in 2026
Does Anchorage have the hotels the transportation infrastructure? Does it have the population to support the necessary arenas after the games? I suspect the USOC will want to continue the Salt Lake City model by hosting the games in a quasi-major city that has most of the infrastructure in place. The Salt Lake games only cost $2 billion; a third of the cost of Vancouver ($6.4 billion) and peanuts compared with Sochi ($51 billion).
Denver or Boston seem more likely.
Yes. It's also an international air crossroads.
Anchorage has over 300,000 people and tourism is one of the largest industries. It has imountains literally in the urban area, plus Alyeska and I would imagine they would develop some other areas in the Chugach Mts.
Why I do agree with that to some degree, it's not like money wouldnt be poured into the games and resorts. Atleast that's my thinking.
Seattle is a much better choice for the summer games.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
