Where Your Dreams Become Reality
|
Where Your Dreams Become Reality |
|
The American Revolution Take II The story of this year's Boston Marathon was the story of the American men. Three Americans in the top 5, and 6 in the top 11. That's pretty impressive no matter how you cut it. "Another American Revolution has begun," Boston Marathon Director Guy Morse said after the race. ''It began here in Boston." Not so fast, Guy. In running, revolutions aren't born overnight, and the revolution definitely did not begin in Boston, it only ended up there. The revolution began in the minds of young runners in this country, who despite hearing how bad they were told they were, dreamed of success. It began in the minds of Kevin and Keith Hanson, two brothers who had a vision to turn around American distance running. And if the Revolution began at any major marathon in the United States, it began at the LaSalle Bank Chicago Marathon. In the late 1990s, when the New York and Boston marathons couldn't care less about American marathoners (at the 1999 World Half Marathon Championships the (former) elite athlete coordinator for the NYC Marathon was there did not even talk to the US team members (the NYRR lately has made a huge commitment to American runners so don't judge them on the past)), Chicago extended a welcome hand to American marathoners and got good results. All of the following happened at Chicago: These Chicago inspired successes gave hope to a legion of the other "mediocre" American marathoners (Khannouchi clearly doesn't deserve this label) to continue in their quest. For example, if you look at the 1999 results, you'll see Brooks-Hanson's team member Clint Verran 10 minutes behind David Morris in 32nd place in 2:19:43. Having racing opportunities like Chicago helped inspire Clint to go on to get 17th at the 2000 World Half Marathon Championships, 5th at the 2004 Olympic Trials, and 22nd at the 2005 World Marathon Champs. So while the Boston marathon definitely can not take credit for the American 'Revolution', it's good to see them climbing on board and this seems to be the direction the race should head in. One truth that has emerged over the past decade in running is that Boston cannot (or will not) compete with the London Marathon to be the #1 marathon in the world. Don't get us wrong, Boston still is one of the top 5 marathons in the world, but it is a far way from London in the stars it can attract to its race. Possibly the greatest runner ever, Haile Gebrselassie; the world record holder in the marathon, Paul Tergat; 2 time world champ, Jouad Gharib; the top marathoner in the world in 2003-04, Evans Rutto; the 2004 Olympic champ, Stefano Baldini; and not to mention defending champ, Martin Lel, all were entered to run this year's London race (Tergat pulled out this week because of injury). So while Boston cannot attract most of the world's best marathoners, it still has the resources to attract America's best marathoners. This year's race shows Americans can do well in Boston, and that creates excitement. (Purists may argue that its easier for an American to do well in Boston because most of the top stars are in London. There is some truth to this, but who cares? Boston is still a top 5 marathon in the world, and Americans should take advantage of the "easier" opportunity to do well). Thankfully, it appears the Boston Marathon realizes now that by attracting the top Americans and having them do well, Boston can remain in that special place it has with American runners and the American public. Bostonians are full of pride, and few of them like to admit their race was slipping, but Boston Globe columnist, John Powers, was right on the mark when he wrote about the American resurgence at Boston this year, and the buzz it created:
So props to the BAA and John Hancock for encouraging the
"American Revolution" to come to Boston. But just remember, this
"American Revolution" didn't start there, it ended up there. **** Perhaps our favorite thing about the Boston Marathon is it is the only marathon we can watch on television every year (well now that we have DirecTV we can pick up the local NYC Marathon feed, too). The race used to be on ESPN2, but for the last two years it has been on OLN. Our main problem with the coverage is that they should put people with more knowledge of marathoning in the trucks that follow the races. Lewis Johnson and Carol Lewis know track and field, but they know very little about the marathon. Every year, sitting at home, we know way more about the race than they do. Give us a set of binoculars, access to a telephone (so we can call someone with access to a computer), and we'll do the broadcasting job (or spotting job) for free. Leg speed doesn't have much to do with a marathon, yet we heard it mentioned, over and over, and over. It's fair to point out someone is faster at shorter distances, but don't make it sound like "leg speed" is often the deciding factor in a marathon. When the men reached halfway on record pace, all the announcers acted like the this was the first time the runners were aware of the pace they were on and should slow down. We knew way before this that they were on a record pace, and the runners just don't all of a sudden show up at the halfway point and find out how fast they are running. It took OLN 10 minutes after the halfway split to announce the men had gone through halfway and put up their times. For the casual fan at home, and the serious fan at home, the half-way split in the marathon means something. The production crews should make a point of pointing out the halfway mark right as it occurs. That's what we thought the pace truck was for. And since we're leaving our criticism to the coverage of the actual race as a sporting event (the overall broadcast was pretty decent, they had a wonderful profile on Meb Keflezighi's incredible family and journey to America, we loved seeing former champ Moses Tanui dressed like he was meeting the president, doing a little commentary in the booth, plus some coverage of the Iraq Boston Marathon, the Marathon Majors, etc), we can't believe the announcers failed to mention Heartbreak Hill when it decided the actual outcome of the men's race. The casual fan, the serious fan, they all have heard of Heartbreak Hill in Boston. The announcers talked about it a few times during the race before the runners got to it. Yet in the men's race, Robert Cheruyiot made his winning move away from Ben Maiyo on Heartbreak Hill, and this was never mentioned. Not at all. Unbelievable. They were neck and neck until Heartbreak Hill, and then boom Cheruyiot was on his way to victory. The problem is if you watched it on tv you had no idea (we've got a link to prove that the break occurred at Heartbreak Hill). There are only a few major points that decide a marathon and this was one of them, and not a single mention that it was on Heartbreak Hill. Lewis Johnson further messed up his gaffe by saying Meb Keflezighi was 800 meters behind the leaders (that would be roughly 2.5 minutes) when he was less than a minute behind (Larry Rawson corrected him). Stuff like this isn't too hard to get right, and is what we as hard core fans would like to see corrected. It wouldn't be too hard to count in seconds how far back the other runners are, and even to give updates on all the Americans. But considering they missed Heartbreak Hill, maybe we're asking for too much. Our other main concern is with the wheelchair races. How about getting rid of them or giving them very little coverage? The women's race to our knowledge had 4 competitors. Yet, the prize money was 5 deep. This is a joke. We don't watch the NBA telecasts to see the Paralympics, so we don't need as much coverage of the wheelchair races especially when one person is just rolling along all by themselves. The wheelchair champ took home $15,000 which is more than the prize money for Alan Culpepper in 5th place ($14,000). When you're covering an event with little interest to the average fan, it is more likely you'll miss one of the pivotal moments of the marathon. (They had to show on tape when Cheruyiot blew by Meb Keflezighi). Our other concern is how about having the women's awards
ceremony after the men's race is over. There is not a ton of time, from
once the women's winner finished to the end of the men's race, so we
don't need to see the victory ceremony in this time period. It would
make more sense to have it after the men's race. And if you're going to
interview someone whose English isn't very good, please have a microphone
that works, and take them to a less noisy area (the interview with
Robert Cheruyiot was impossible to hear). Buy 2006 Boston Marathon Apparel:
|
Cross Country Spikes 10% off Injured?
|
