[telebob]

As you all probably know, there is a quiet but intense push behind the scenes to prepare a Colorado/Denver bid for the 2022 winter games. In researching a story, Vail Resorts, The Vail Valley foundation and others confirmed that there are ongoing talks about this right now.

I'm looking to do a little crowd-sourcing for this story, meaning I'd like to hear some on-the-record comments. What do skiers think about the idea? Would it be good or bad for Colorado? What would be some good venues?

I'll take the jokes and pokes, but thoughtful comments and ideas from this great TT crowd would be appreciated most!

In a related story, I recently reported how taxpayers in Vancouver and London got stuck with some pretty big bills related to Olympic development. You can see the story here: http://summitcountyvoice.com/2011/11/28/london-vancouver-taxpayers-facing-big-olympics-bills/
_________________
have skis, will travel

[Mulex]

I'll go on the record and say "meh."
_________________
"Everybody poops... but not at the same time" - my 4 year old.

[telebob]

Well, that's a start!
_________________
have skis, will travel

[telebob]

Well, that's a start!
_________________
have skis, will travel

[QuiverQueen]

OK, I'll be the first curmudgeon to weigh in. I was against hosting the Olympics in the state in 1976, and I am still against it. While we have a great winter sports tradition and ski mountains, we do not have the infrastructure to host the onslaught of folks who would try to get to events. Our venues would be spaced a lot farther apart than what Utah had, and frankly the mountain towns where events would be held cannot host the sheer numbers of people who would be seeking accommodations.

I also don't think the additional building frenzy that would be required is really something that I as a long-term and long-time resident of this state want to fund and sustain. That type of development really isn't appropriate in the mountain setting where it would take place, say what you will about the existing levels of development. I also don't feel any compulsion to "showcase" Colorado to the rest of the world. Why and for who? Who is making the money off of a project of this magnitude? Not anyone I know.

And while a rail system of some kind would be great to have up the I70 corridor and points beyond, who sustains it afterwards? The one existing RR from Denver to Winter Park can't find the wherewithall to keep operating, why would a larger system be any different?

I fear being stuck with horrendous bills and expensive, high-maintenance facilities when the Olympic train leaves town. Let someone else have the headaches and expensive legacy.
_________________
A humble student at Fryingpan University.

[HOTUNA]

FWIW: north america has had winter olympics twice in less than a decade, i doubt we will host them again for quite a while; besides, who wants to ski vail?
_________________
you do stupid shit when you're f*#ked up....Mike Tyson

[telebob]

Well, that's a start!
_________________
have skis, will travel

[stevesliva]

[ghostofcarl]

Trying to cement your place as an insecure mountain state? Or planning to elect a narcissistic cleptocrat to rule?

[rsireland3]

Canada doesn't count.
_________________

[ghostofcarl]

[Mr. T]

Colorado has most of the required infrastructure, handles loads of visitors on a consistent basis, and is in a far better position to host the OWGs than in the 1970s.

Denver is well geared with arenas, airport, and better transportation than most other candidate cities.

The alpine venues have sufficient capacity to hold alpine events.

The sledding events will require expensive construction or re-use of Utah facilities.

Nordic XC/Combined/Jumping/Biathlon events will need facilities development including standardized trails, jumps, and a biathlon range. Biathlon, XC, and Nordic Combined will need an override from the IBU and FIS because of altitude limitations strongly supported by the Scandinavian nations, the political powerhouses in ski governance.

The OWGs are an amazing event to host and to attend.

Colorado's costs could be significantly less than other candidates...

[cesare]

Quiver Queen pretty much summed up the way I feel about it.

There was a time when hosting the Olympics could result in a lot of useful infrastructure development. But with regard to the winter games, I think the last time a city really benefited from it was Sapporo in 1972. Those games changed Sapporo from a developing city constructed mostly of clapboards to a thriving metropolis with a world class transportation system and a gleaming downtown commerce center. And that cost was born by the Japanese people as a whole, not just the taxpayers of Hokkaido.

I would love to see Colorado solve its transportation problems in the same way, but I don't see who would pay for it. And without such a boost to the infrastructure, I don't think the games make any long term economic sense. Sadly--because I was a huge fan of the Olympic movement as a child--I think the games have been co-opted by greed and do not mean the same thing they meant 40 years ago. I'm kind of over them.
_________________
that sounds like a sure-fire way to get bitch-slapped by devil's club -- dschane

[telebob]

Yeah, I don't get a sense that there would a huge influx of cash for transportation - not in the current budget reality.
_________________
have skis, will travel

[maynard g. krebs]

You could hire Maynard, I hear he is an expert.
It might be really difficult to find a Nordic venue with a low enough elevation, it was difficult in Utah. I did the environmental assessment on Soldier Hollow. <1750 meters, the norway folk are wusseys when it comes to altitude, they like to win without getting out of breath
_________________
Home in time for supper with some tales to tell!