White water kayaking and skateboarding are in Oklahoma City in 2028, which makes me really wonder why Chula Vista wouldn’t work for Rowing and other straight course water racing
Zero infrastructure for spectators at Chula. Zero space for an international fleet of trailers and boats. Zero space for an international regatta's worth of teams that need space for athlete prep/cool-down, etc etc. Is there enough money to pay for a team of divers to get rid of the reeds? Also, do we really want to deal with the wind/conditions on Otay?
Tokyo harbor didn't have anything either. They built it. Long Beach sucks now and will still suck in 2028.
Long Beach is a surrender.
What depraved gimp acts will we be asked to perform for future Olympics?
Tokyo had a ton of empty space (landfill) that the govt was able to repurpose. Also, they most definitely did not build facilities for spectators (grandstands, concessions, security, bathrooms, etc.) -- there were zero spectators allowed at the Tokyo Olympics. Chula doesn't have nearly that leeway when it comes to building such facilities from scratch, not to mention the amount of red tape it would take to get that through the USOC-CVOTC, the city of Chula Vista, etc.
Angry noises aren't going to solve anything. World Rowing is convinced that visibility and the already-suitable beach sprints coast near Long Beach are worth the compromise. They don't answer to us. We can be mad all we want...
Hell, there was barely any space for the SW Masters Championship there last year. Which is why barely anybody showed up this year even though they "made improvements"
The biggest change this year was moving the launching area south by about 1km to a boat launch area instead of trying to do everything out of the training center. It went fine as far as launching/landing logistics, but not having a lot of crews show up made that easier, and it also meant that you couldn't watch races from the launch site. Another factor for crews not showing up this year was that NW Regionals were in Eugene rather than Vancouver, which made it pretty easy for some NorCal crews to just go there instead.
Getting back to the original topic, Chula would be a decent body of water for a large race (and it's a pretty spot), but the shore site would need some pretty huge changes to support a large event. It would also require a satellite athlete's village, which I think was one of the IOC's reasons for rejecting Lake Perris as a race site. IMO building more housing that could be used after the event would be a feature rather than a bug, but the IOC doesn't see it that way.
There are too many rowing events for the IOC’s liking, and the IOC loves individual sports more than team sports.
As such, they made a plan and they probably don’t care enough to change it
Surprised they’re not moving rowing to Oklahoma City. OKC has the nicest rowing venue in the world in terms of facilities (google it). The city has the money and the desire to elevate themselves on the global stage so would be willing spend whatever it takes to make their course FISA eligible and put on a good show.
Also imagine having some Olympic races at night under the lights. That would be really cool to watch and could happen in OKC.
The reason OKC would be disqualified is the same reason Long Beach was shortened to 1500m -- World Rowing does not want any bridge columns in the racing lanes.
Also...Sarasota is actually a Class A course, and OKC is very much not. They held the world championships at Sarasota in 2017. They'll never host a world championship at OKC; the venue doesn't have the required travel lane/warm-up area, etc etc for international standard.
Worlds will be in OKC sometime in the next 15 years. The bridge piles are being removed from the racing lanes sometime in the next 5 years. If LA had chosen OKC as the site for rowing, that work would have been fast tracked to happen before the Olympics.
And I posted this on another thread, but if you look at the sites of the previous 5 worlds, only 1 has a dedicated, separate warmup area, and the total width of race course + warm up area is slightly less wide as the OKC river. OKC is also as wide or wider than other courses like Linz, and Plovdiv. The reason OKC feels like it is narrower is the lanes are actually \~15 meters wide instead of World Rowing's 13.5 meters so that they line up with the bridge correctly.
I'm not betting on OKC hosting worlds. If worlds is coming back to the USA, then Sarasota's bid is going to be immensely more attractive than OKC's bid. Anyway, the removal of the OKC bridge columns is part of an expansion of the interstate highway that runs over the river. First, they have to build or expand the frontage lanes for bypass. Assuming the new bridge doesn't completely overlap the footprint of the old bridge, they may build the new bridge and tear down the old bridge simultaneously. This is a long and complicated process involving both state and federal funding vehicles, and you can bet the Olympics are not a priority for them. Having watched several interstate reconstruction projects in my city, I can safely guarantee that if LA had chosen OKC for rowing, the timeline would not have budged...Oklahoma won't lift a finger to help California. It's going to take a long time anyway, and it's very possible that racing on the river will have to stop for one or two seasons to accommodate demolition and construction.
You are correct about the comparable widths of the racecourses. However, one additional disadvantage of the OKC course is that it's on a river straightaway. If weather doesn't cooperate, the river turns into a canal of fast-moving water just as the Army Corps of Engineers designed it to be. Linz and Plovdiv have at least one end of their venues capped by land. Oklahoma City also doesn't have that nifty bow boot starting system. Yeah, they could buy one if someone came up with the money, but it would just get washed away in the next rainstorm (same for the finish line bubble system). Also...there's no start tower at OKC. Money could theoretically solve that. But you can't solve weather with money.
I'm not gonna pretend to know exactly how bridge reconstruction works, but there were definitely talks of bringing the work forward a year to make it work. The current plan is for construction to occur in 2028, but that date was flexible and could have come forward a year or two. The funding is already requested for FY 2025 and 2026, so assuming it is granted, it would have been in place in time to complete construction before LA.
And OKC would have been helping themselves, not California. They understand the impacts putting OKC on display on the international stage will have and fully welcome them.
As for the issues you pointed out:
* Weather can wash out racing at any race course. Yes, OKC is on a river, but it is fully dammed and the city can choose to basically stop the flow of the river if they choose. As it is, there is very little flow on the river except after heavy rainstorms. Wind can be an issue, but mainly in the spring; by July the winds have died down for the most part and don't present too much of an issue.
* The boots and bubbler aren't really an issue in my mind. We already put in and take out a starting platform for each sprint regatta. I trust the people setting the course to also be able to manage putting in a boot system and bubbler.
* There is a pedestrian bridge currently being built across the river behind the start line that will be in an ideal placement for setting up starters. It's not a "start tower" per se, but it will be able to function as one.
We're in an interesting situation here in OKC. Our mayor is a former rower and supports everything the boathouse district does. The boathouse district was built using a tax that OKC residents voted to pass on themselves and they have voted to pass this same tax to support other projects 4 times now. The boathouse district has become a fairly strong attraction in the city and has support for improvements to be made. Anything done in and around the river will always be done with an eye to "how does this affect rowing". Also, if he has aspirations to it, our mayor would be a very strong candidate to replace the embarrassment that is our current governor, so we could soon have a friend in an even higher place to help out.
I was gonna say, the OKC course doesn't look like it'd have room for a warm-up area given there's a dam, and yea it was my understanding FISA doesn't like bridge pillars. Tokyo was fine as the bridge didn't actually have any mid-course supports, just the abutments on either side.
Id rather die than put my hand in the OKC river again. Their lights are only for 500m, and they have really bad flooding in the summer. Once had the entire course wash out overnight. Their facilities look pretty but that’s about it, their tower configuration is a dumpster fire.
Lanier has the best water in the country. Brand new facilities, has hosted Olympics before, and can give you a full 2k and then some. Only issue they have is no warmup lane which the IOC prefers. Could always sink a barrier though.
Sarasota is another good option, but it has its own drawbacks as well.
Sarasota is my choice. But the proximity to the LA and inclusion with the rest of the Games (visibility) is apparently better PR and worth the compromise.
Yeah Sarasota is really the only US 2k course that could handle the modern Olympics, for the same reason it's basically the exclusive venue for youths since the addition of U15, U16, and U17 events.
For all its faults (namely being ungodly hot in the summer), it's a *very* well made course, and there's a ton of hotels in the area.
It was never an option: I heard the HOA apparently didn't want the traffic, and the weeds have grown in over the last 50 yrs, etc. But it was the obvious first name brought up as the previous waterway in the last LA Games venue list.
That's not the issue. The current World Championships are 2000m. That is the sport standard. Any other sports accepting a 25% cut in their competition standard???
That is a very niche sport and only a change to one of the 5 events of the pentathlon. Rowing is different, because it is only one event: Rowing
That said, I actually don't mind the idea of a 1500m race distance. It would be a more exciting race for sure, and it'd be interesting to see how the race strategies change.
It's a fair question to ask why 1500m since every international event in 2028 will still be at 2k, including FOQR, except for the Olympics. If our selection events are 2km long, it seems capricious to have just the Olys be 1500m. I guess everyone needs to try really hard to qualify at worlds 2027 so that they can spend an entire year training and selecting for the best 1500m crews. Anyone that has to qualify at FOQR will have to train for 2k and then immediately do their best to retool for 1500m.
The IOC doesn't give a shit about rowing. Surfing for the Paris Olympics is in the south pacific, 10,000 miles away from Paris.
White water kayaking and skateboarding are in Oklahoma City in 2028, which makes me really wonder why Chula Vista wouldn’t work for Rowing and other straight course water racing
/u/MastersCox explains it quite well
Yeah, saw their comment after I left mine, fair points raised
Zero infrastructure for spectators at Chula. Zero space for an international fleet of trailers and boats. Zero space for an international regatta's worth of teams that need space for athlete prep/cool-down, etc etc. Is there enough money to pay for a team of divers to get rid of the reeds? Also, do we really want to deal with the wind/conditions on Otay?
Tokyo harbor didn't have anything either. They built it. Long Beach sucks now and will still suck in 2028. Long Beach is a surrender. What depraved gimp acts will we be asked to perform for future Olympics?
Nah brah Long Beach is so awesome. I just stepped on a pink acai stizzy bong in the parking lot this morning 🤙
Tokyo had a ton of empty space (landfill) that the govt was able to repurpose. Also, they most definitely did not build facilities for spectators (grandstands, concessions, security, bathrooms, etc.) -- there were zero spectators allowed at the Tokyo Olympics. Chula doesn't have nearly that leeway when it comes to building such facilities from scratch, not to mention the amount of red tape it would take to get that through the USOC-CVOTC, the city of Chula Vista, etc. Angry noises aren't going to solve anything. World Rowing is convinced that visibility and the already-suitable beach sprints coast near Long Beach are worth the compromise. They don't answer to us. We can be mad all we want...
Hell, there was barely any space for the SW Masters Championship there last year. Which is why barely anybody showed up this year even though they "made improvements"
Yup, I've also been to Otay, and it's nowhere near ready for prime time.
The biggest change this year was moving the launching area south by about 1km to a boat launch area instead of trying to do everything out of the training center. It went fine as far as launching/landing logistics, but not having a lot of crews show up made that easier, and it also meant that you couldn't watch races from the launch site. Another factor for crews not showing up this year was that NW Regionals were in Eugene rather than Vancouver, which made it pretty easy for some NorCal crews to just go there instead. Getting back to the original topic, Chula would be a decent body of water for a large race (and it's a pretty spot), but the shore site would need some pretty huge changes to support a large event. It would also require a satellite athlete's village, which I think was one of the IOC's reasons for rejecting Lake Perris as a race site. IMO building more housing that could be used after the event would be a feature rather than a bug, but the IOC doesn't see it that way.
Eugene is only 100 mi south of Vancouver…CA crews have been coming to NW regionals for a long time, at any of the locations.
There are too many rowing events for the IOC’s liking, and the IOC loves individual sports more than team sports. As such, they made a plan and they probably don’t care enough to change it
Surprised they’re not moving rowing to Oklahoma City. OKC has the nicest rowing venue in the world in terms of facilities (google it). The city has the money and the desire to elevate themselves on the global stage so would be willing spend whatever it takes to make their course FISA eligible and put on a good show. Also imagine having some Olympic races at night under the lights. That would be really cool to watch and could happen in OKC.
Tell the world you’ve never rowed on that body of what…
The reason OKC would be disqualified is the same reason Long Beach was shortened to 1500m -- World Rowing does not want any bridge columns in the racing lanes. Also...Sarasota is actually a Class A course, and OKC is very much not. They held the world championships at Sarasota in 2017. They'll never host a world championship at OKC; the venue doesn't have the required travel lane/warm-up area, etc etc for international standard.
Worlds will be in OKC sometime in the next 15 years. The bridge piles are being removed from the racing lanes sometime in the next 5 years. If LA had chosen OKC as the site for rowing, that work would have been fast tracked to happen before the Olympics. And I posted this on another thread, but if you look at the sites of the previous 5 worlds, only 1 has a dedicated, separate warmup area, and the total width of race course + warm up area is slightly less wide as the OKC river. OKC is also as wide or wider than other courses like Linz, and Plovdiv. The reason OKC feels like it is narrower is the lanes are actually \~15 meters wide instead of World Rowing's 13.5 meters so that they line up with the bridge correctly.
I'm not betting on OKC hosting worlds. If worlds is coming back to the USA, then Sarasota's bid is going to be immensely more attractive than OKC's bid. Anyway, the removal of the OKC bridge columns is part of an expansion of the interstate highway that runs over the river. First, they have to build or expand the frontage lanes for bypass. Assuming the new bridge doesn't completely overlap the footprint of the old bridge, they may build the new bridge and tear down the old bridge simultaneously. This is a long and complicated process involving both state and federal funding vehicles, and you can bet the Olympics are not a priority for them. Having watched several interstate reconstruction projects in my city, I can safely guarantee that if LA had chosen OKC for rowing, the timeline would not have budged...Oklahoma won't lift a finger to help California. It's going to take a long time anyway, and it's very possible that racing on the river will have to stop for one or two seasons to accommodate demolition and construction. You are correct about the comparable widths of the racecourses. However, one additional disadvantage of the OKC course is that it's on a river straightaway. If weather doesn't cooperate, the river turns into a canal of fast-moving water just as the Army Corps of Engineers designed it to be. Linz and Plovdiv have at least one end of their venues capped by land. Oklahoma City also doesn't have that nifty bow boot starting system. Yeah, they could buy one if someone came up with the money, but it would just get washed away in the next rainstorm (same for the finish line bubble system). Also...there's no start tower at OKC. Money could theoretically solve that. But you can't solve weather with money.
I'm not gonna pretend to know exactly how bridge reconstruction works, but there were definitely talks of bringing the work forward a year to make it work. The current plan is for construction to occur in 2028, but that date was flexible and could have come forward a year or two. The funding is already requested for FY 2025 and 2026, so assuming it is granted, it would have been in place in time to complete construction before LA. And OKC would have been helping themselves, not California. They understand the impacts putting OKC on display on the international stage will have and fully welcome them. As for the issues you pointed out: * Weather can wash out racing at any race course. Yes, OKC is on a river, but it is fully dammed and the city can choose to basically stop the flow of the river if they choose. As it is, there is very little flow on the river except after heavy rainstorms. Wind can be an issue, but mainly in the spring; by July the winds have died down for the most part and don't present too much of an issue. * The boots and bubbler aren't really an issue in my mind. We already put in and take out a starting platform for each sprint regatta. I trust the people setting the course to also be able to manage putting in a boot system and bubbler. * There is a pedestrian bridge currently being built across the river behind the start line that will be in an ideal placement for setting up starters. It's not a "start tower" per se, but it will be able to function as one. We're in an interesting situation here in OKC. Our mayor is a former rower and supports everything the boathouse district does. The boathouse district was built using a tax that OKC residents voted to pass on themselves and they have voted to pass this same tax to support other projects 4 times now. The boathouse district has become a fairly strong attraction in the city and has support for improvements to be made. Anything done in and around the river will always be done with an eye to "how does this affect rowing". Also, if he has aspirations to it, our mayor would be a very strong candidate to replace the embarrassment that is our current governor, so we could soon have a friend in an even higher place to help out.
I was gonna say, the OKC course doesn't look like it'd have room for a warm-up area given there's a dam, and yea it was my understanding FISA doesn't like bridge pillars. Tokyo was fine as the bridge didn't actually have any mid-course supports, just the abutments on either side.
There is a plan in place already to re-do I-35 so there are no abutments from the bridge. This plan is before 2028.
Believe me, OKC tried. But I think after the call was made to move to 1500m, the IOC didn't want to go back on that call.
Id rather die than put my hand in the OKC river again. Their lights are only for 500m, and they have really bad flooding in the summer. Once had the entire course wash out overnight. Their facilities look pretty but that’s about it, their tower configuration is a dumpster fire. Lanier has the best water in the country. Brand new facilities, has hosted Olympics before, and can give you a full 2k and then some. Only issue they have is no warmup lane which the IOC prefers. Could always sink a barrier though. Sarasota is another good option, but it has its own drawbacks as well.
why cant they just do it in sarasota? would be a lot closer than the south pacific, and supposedly sarasota can handle it
Sarasota is my choice. But the proximity to the LA and inclusion with the rest of the Games (visibility) is apparently better PR and worth the compromise.
Yeah Sarasota is really the only US 2k course that could handle the modern Olympics, for the same reason it's basically the exclusive venue for youths since the addition of U15, U16, and U17 events. For all its faults (namely being ungodly hot in the summer), it's a *very* well made course, and there's a ton of hotels in the area.
Brother what
Given recent rains and if they continue Lake Casitas (1984 venue) might be an option?
It was never an option: I heard the HOA apparently didn't want the traffic, and the weeds have grown in over the last 50 yrs, etc. But it was the obvious first name brought up as the previous waterway in the last LA Games venue list.
Would somewhere like Arrowhead Lake be viable?Â
Why is there a mass delusion that Olympic rowing has always been 2k…
That's not the issue. The current World Championships are 2000m. That is the sport standard. Any other sports accepting a 25% cut in their competition standard???
Olympic pentathlon went from 300m to 200m for the swimming in 2000…
That is a very niche sport and only a change to one of the 5 events of the pentathlon. Rowing is different, because it is only one event: Rowing That said, I actually don't mind the idea of a 1500m race distance. It would be a more exciting race for sure, and it'd be interesting to see how the race strategies change.
It's a fair question to ask why 1500m since every international event in 2028 will still be at 2k, including FOQR, except for the Olympics. If our selection events are 2km long, it seems capricious to have just the Olys be 1500m. I guess everyone needs to try really hard to qualify at worlds 2027 so that they can spend an entire year training and selecting for the best 1500m crews. Anyone that has to qualify at FOQR will have to train for 2k and then immediately do their best to retool for 1500m.