Friday night roundup

by Bob Truman on October 26, 2018

in XC

The daily ritual of looking at numerous weather forecasts has returned. The ever-optimistic Snow Forecast is predicting significant snowfall(15 cm) for Lake Louise at the elevation of Moraine Lake road on Sunday and Monday.

The Weather Network is showing small amounts over the next five days. It doesn’t take a lot to make MLR skiable, but I would imagine at least 10-15 cm is necessary to get any kind of a decent base. 

Does anyone want the Olympics? I found it amusing that the Canadian Taxpayers Federation would come out in support of Sweden’s bid for the 2026 game…but hold on. A Swedish Taxpayer Group is endorsing Calgary’s bid. Strange optics. Has the corruption and cheating finally taken its toll? Beckie Scott resigned from WADA due to frustration over reinstating the Russian Anti-Doping Agency.

Lifesport ski swap from last year

Ski Sale this weekend

Lifesport’s ski swap is happening on Saturday and Sunday. Click over to Lifesport’s ski swap page for more information. 

Guess the Date

The Snow Forecast is predicting 10 cm for PLPP, but it will take a lot more than that to initiate any tracksetting on Elk Pass. Have you entered the contest? When will Elk Pass see its first tracksetting? If your date has already been picked, don’t despair. Everyone who picks the correct date will get a second chance at a prize. Stoney-Nakoda Resort is providing two identical prizes for the two winners, a free night’s accommodation and a buffet dinner for two. 

If you are anxious to ski, there’s always Frozen Thunder at the Canmore Nordic Centre. It’s open to the public all day on the weekends. 

The Birkie Guarantee

They’ve come up with an interesting feature for this winter’s Canadian Birkebeiner ski race in Edmonton. No snow, no problem. 

  • Sign up before December; and if your ski event is cancelled for any reason, your registration will transfer to the same event in 2020. You get a full carry-forward credit!
  • After November 30, 2018, the normal No Refund policy will resume.

Read more Secure your spot

{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }

1 SkieM October 29, 2018 at 5:16 pm

Unfortunately, No to the Olympics.
To summarize all over again why ‘No’:
1) Too expensive for the City already as it is presented now.
2) Costs will get higher once the bid is secured. Sorry, no magic fairy tale here…
3) Taxes for Calgarians will increase.
4) Events held in Edmonton and Whistler. 1000 kms apart? Really?
5) Very bad reputation of IOC and WADA as being corrupt and toothless organizations. Becky Scott’s exit is just one tiny example of big nasty picture.
6) All civilized and democratic cities and countries either dropped the bids or do not support the bidding. What does this tell us?

p.s. This bid being advertised to Calgarians like:
“Will you agree to buy my car at undisclosed costs? I will tell you the price once you signed all the papers, with no return policy. And the price might increase in the next 8 years and you will pay the difference no matter what.
You can make some money back by ride sharing though. And you can rent it out!
And if it seems too much for you, your wife and kids can help you to pay from your joint bank account.”

I love winter sports. I truly do.
But it is not the right time for posh and lavish party aka Olympics…

Reply

2 JeremyN October 28, 2018 at 9:06 pm

I’m all in on hosting the Olympics: for the economic and facility stimulus, athletic elitism, and the over the top optimism of the whole spectacle. Quite frankly, I love it. I don’t throw rocks in my glass house and I’m not going to be swayed by the chicken little, conservative curmudgeons in the crowd. Happy skiing!

Reply

3 Steve Riggs October 29, 2018 at 10:34 am

Jeremy, seriously?
“Economic stimulus” A mirage, as every objective study indicates otherwise, when compared to alternate ways of spending this kind of money. Especially when leaving it in the hands of the taxpayers who can then spend it on the economic stimulus of their choice.
“Facility stimulus” Upgrades might be nice to have, but as I mentioned- we already host many world class events at existing venues. As per recent news of the decommissioning of ski jumps at COP- this location was never a good choice to begin with, for a sport that is a minor niche at best. And don’t get me started on subsidizing a new arena for pro hockey, which is an undercurrent of the olympic hype.
“Athletic elitism” I support our amazing athletes, but as above- this coming winter you will have plenty of opportunities to watch them compete locally, most likely for free! Instead- spending money on grassroots initiatives, for instance- playgrounds or outdoor programs for schools that don’t have them- would give a far greater benefit to the health and athleticism of the general public, and maybe even help foster a future elite athlete.
“Spectacle” Why should the taxpayers be forced to pay for the IOC’s party, that a majority do not want any part of ? Even the Bid Corp is estimating that the average household will be hit with an extra $1600 of taxes. And that is for a bid that has been obviously lowballed in an attempt to gain approval. Are you ready to foot the bill for the inevitable cost overruns?
“Chicken Little” “Curmudgeon” Obviously we have opposing viewpoints, but name calling won’t help in any way.
In the end- it will be up to the voters as to whether Calgary will proceed. It is galling though that the professionals on the yes side are fuelled with $30 million of public money, and media influence, while the average citizens who hold an opposing view have to fight to be heard on their own dime.

Reply

4 MaSid October 29, 2018 at 5:02 pm

Agreed. Nothing comes for free, unless somebody benefits more than another (i.e. They get more out of it than they paid in). So why not have the benefitting parties pay their fare share. If there are necessary “public” facilities, lets build them through proper channels/process that seem to be more unbiased with better scrutiny and accountability, and not confused and hidden within an Olympic package. A publicly funded arena for a private for profit org doesn’t pass the test. I find the add campaign content and promotion leading up to a plebiscite questionable and perhaps unethical. It’s akin to a political party standing outside a polling station. It would be easier to decide on some criteria for deciding vs. trying to measure which way the wind is blowing without having the right guage for doing so. Still haven’t seen any of this to any significant degree or a full disclosure of facts and assumptions. My guess is at the end of the day it will be a no but we will have spent $30 million getting there too slowly by being too hopeful that we were getting something for free. If the plebiscite is no and Stockholm are out, calgary may re-engage with IOC to see if they will sweeten the pot. For that reason I hope Stockholm is in. Either way, lots of finger pointing to come.

Reply

5 JeremyN October 30, 2018 at 7:13 pm

Fair enough arguments. Yes, perhaps pejorative terms were unnecessary -wasn’t referring to anyone specifically. I’m still for the visionary and maybe utopian view of the Olympics at home but …I guess the discussion is now moot. The naysayers and never-the-right-timers win their fight.

Reply

6 Steve Riggs October 27, 2018 at 9:54 am

It’s a very firm “NO” to the Olympics from my family, and pretty much everyone that I talk to. Simply put- with governments of all levels awash in debt, and taxes in Calgary on an inexorable rise- now is not the time. Despite what our mayor and the proponents claim- there is no free money to be had here! We had our moment of glory in 1988, and while some of the facilities could use upgrades, the Calgary-Canmore-Banff area nonetheless continues to host world class winter sports events every year, nonetheless.
Other than a few with their heads out of the clouds, Calgary city council in particular needs a solid reality check (next election) after having spent over $30 million of taxpayers money that was much needed elsewhere by pandering to a special interest group, with the promise of far more debt should Calgary “win” these games. The only winner here will be the IOC, and a select group of athletes, who- while I celebrate their achievements, have plenty of other opportunities to compete.

Reply

7 Kirstin October 27, 2018 at 2:42 am

Great overview.

I’d like to see the Olympics, but then I work in construction, so I see the economic benefits of building and renovating existing facilities.

It’s a good question as to whether we should participate in international events like this, and invest in infrastructure that everyone uses afterwards. Who hasn’t skated at the Olympic Oval? Who hasn’t skied at CNCPP? Who hasn’t been to the Saddledome? Those and other facilities were either built or improved in full or in part for the Olympics.

Edmonton doesn’t have anything of the calibre of the Canmore Nordic Centre, and here we have it practically in our own backyards. Even places that have hosted the Alberta Winter Games, while great, don’t hold a candle to the XC skiing there.

I know it’s a polarizing issue and that a lot of people are really angry about the Olympics, but the quieter group that isn’t angry might be larger than many people think. It may even be larger than those in angry opposition.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: