It's a good idea to remove USATF from the loop completely and have the selection made by the Chi/Bos/Nyc marathons. Historically we've all withnessed that the 3 marathons are non-profits run by professionals. USATF is an elementary school P.T.A. with a constituency of mostly phys ed and communications majors. No wonder long distance running is in the dismal shape it's in.
wineturtle wrote and edits.
Just like to point out this topic has been in play on the Boston '79 thread for the past few days.Seems very few people are taking the pro side of this debate.....but as Glenn Latimers letter pointed out we are not privy to all the facts and they will come out as the bid info is released.
Let's see what comes out as the bids unfold remember just a few weeks ago "insiders" thought Boston was the frontrunner with a trials race the Sat before Patriots Day.
I would like to learn more about the bids and the proccess of making them,submitting them,and the guide lines the bids must meet. Any links to the rules/guidelines? Thanks.
USATF is a shoddy organization.
I agree with you and you beat me to it CW. Yes--there are some good folks in USATF who are well-intentioned. Still, for the most part, USATF markets the sport very poorly--bottom line. Their press releases are normally uninteresting.
To hold the marathon hosts (Birmingham, St. Louis) accountable for the shortcomings of USATF is passing the buck. They paid good money to hosts those trials and didn't receive a particularly worthwhile return on their investment(s) in terms of promotion or exposure. The top athletes came and they didn't receive adequate coverage for their accomplishments either. That will not help their sponsors. Who's fault is that? I doubt the host cities mentioned will be too eager to host the trials again. Will the major sponsors be more leery next time as well?
(I don't think it's a bad idea to combine the Olympic Trials at ONE major race, i.e., Chicago, Boston or New York City, ready-made events with a built-in marketing engine).
USATF needs to reconsider its relationship with John Chaplin too. It's viewed as an incestuous organization that looks out for its own, but at what cost? Chaplin was forced out as coach at Washington State for rampant recruiting violations. As then-USATF Elite Athlete Coordinator, Chaplin was also the man responsible for not admitting Shannon Butler (28:33) to the 1996 US Olympic TnF trials when Butler had the 24th fastest 10,000 time on the list. He instead took Jon Hume (28:38). Even Hume and Butler's competition thought it was a bogus.
USATF was sued by Shannon Butler in a hush-hush settlement and they LOST. So in my humble opinion some of the USATF personnel or that organization as a whole could stand some upgrades. These factors are partially why USATF is weak in terms of marketing and lacks overall credibility (in perception) with the general public.
I'm at
and will stand by this.
JimG wrote:
As an editor of a national running publication, I can state almsst unequivocably that including/subsuming the Trials race as part of a major marathon (whether 1, 2, or 3) would LESSEN the interest, relegating it to a footnote/sidelight of the main event, even for dedicated running fans. As it is, there is little public interest in the Trials, and I don't see that changing no matter how/where it is staged. But among the running cognescenti, there's a heightened sense of drama for the one-shot Trials race as is currently constituted.
Having covered the past 4 OT marathons, there are plenty of stories that would have been overlooked or barely mentioned - Chris Clark in 2000, Briney in '04, etc. How dramatic would Colleen passing Deena and going on to win have been if it had occurred more than a mile behind Paula going for a WR in Chicago?
One of the most poignant stories from St. Louis was that of the last place finisher, who was pregnant a year before the race and was confined to bed rest the last 2 months, and only resumed training a few months before the race. For her, just making it to the starting and finish lines was as much a goal, and a story, as the top 3, but it would hardly have meant as much or garnered any attention if the proposed system were adopted.
My own proposal? Get Elite Racing to cough up some of the $$$ they garner from all the Team in Training runners and stage a Trials race in San Diego the day before Rock & Roll. House the elite athletes at the USOC training center to save costs, and set up a criterium course around Mission Bay. Fast course, generally good weather, and you'll have thousands of the R&R'ers out there cheering their lungs out.
So lets get this straight. In well over 100 posts we have had one "media person" (Jim Gerwick) step forward and say that this would be a disaster as far as publicity is concerned. There have been ZERO people involved with the media that have stepped up and defended the 3 race idea.
On the other hand one of the big selling points of the 3 race scam is that it will provide additional media. This is of course coming from people involved with USATF that no nothing about the media. THE MEDIA SAYS THAT IS WRONG.
I think that Jim Gerwick is far more qualified to tell us how this scam will be percieved by the media than the snake oil salesmen that are trying to push the scam.
Kevin Barda wrote:
Why is it 500k to put on the race? Where does the money go? Not being a smartass, I just do not know the answer.
~kevin
Who do you think pays Fred Finkes way there? And further....wht do you have to do with the process Fred? A voice? Maybe...
A vote?
No....
A picture?
ABSOLUTELY!!!!
OK, Fred Finke is the LDR Division Chair, so his job as a volunteer is to help shape the seletion process, period. He is the mediator in this process and if any person out there has a problem contract Jim, Fred, Glen or Elizabeth. Otherwise, stop this cheap shot shit where you question the best volunteers this sport has had in years!
The Policy
$500K is for the USOC registration fee to be Olympic Sponsor as any formal bid for the Olympic Trials has to have an Olympic Games Sponsor and the cost at the lowest level for this sponsorship is $500K that goes to the USOC, not the US runners, period. The new idea would change that slipping fundage and put more in the LDR/USATF Coffer for development.
Miles and Miles wrote:
So you don't think they should take into account the future? Or what's best for the sport as a whole?
I think they should take into account whatever is the best way to choose our 3 Olympic Marathoners and keep all other considerations secondary. Very secondary.
"The day the Olympics goes to a format where it's three races and the winners of those races each gets a medal, that's the day that the US team should be selected in such a ridiculous manner. The Olympics (or any other championship) are about the results that were on a given day, not about do-overs until you get the result that you wanted. The one shot trials system is the fairest and most American of all processes -- inoculated from the whims and corruption of selection committees and back-room tribunals."
=================================================
I agree with Malmo's comment also.
There have been some great stories to come out of the US Olympic Trials marathons in the past, and Jenny Spangler's 1996 UPSET WIN comes to mind immediately.
I don't think having 3 selection races will generate the same interest in media coverage, nor do I feel it will have positive impact in developing athletes at the club level.
Jeff Wagner
aka Wags In Illinois
So, you are saying that Birmingham and St. Louis were known and followed by as many Americans as Chicago, NYC, or Boston on live Television. (whatever!) The days of 2:31 females winning a trials race are over, the women's marahton in the US has come into a new level. It is a time where 2:48-2:40 is a joke qualifier anyway! Jeff, you have no concept of the MEDIA offered in doing a 3 race drama. In the end, getting money funds in athletes pockets, who are doing all the work, not the coaches or the agents. Yes in the 3 race options there are issues like; If Ritz debuts in a qualification race for example without prior qualification (for trials selection), he is not selection elegible for the Olympic Team, just running for time! One has to qualify to be in the Elite/Selection Race.
Another good point, how much money goes to 4th through 10th. In the 3 race deal, more to the athletes period. I agree with Mr. Gilmore, who is seeing how this could be very big for the US top runners and create excitement for the sport. All the other sporst, NBA, MLB, NFL have expanded and made things more interesing for the fans. Why not our turn in Marathon? Consider all the factors; now is the time to make it BIG in the media with 2 returning medalists. "SHOWDOWN IN BEAN TOWN!" Winner has to have A standard in 3 race trials, prior to the qualification race, no doubt. No doubt the Chicago winner would have the best time! Chicago and Boston will be for the brave non A guys (Olympic A) going for a Standard and David Monti will get those who already have standard with a little appreance money!
Hate The Game; Not the Players
The Process
I am in favor of this, the only one it hurts is the people who don't have a chance at making the team.
I don't think the 220 guys deserve to say they qualified for a olympic trials any way, that would be like qualifying for the 10k with a 29:30. We need to do whats best for the people who have a shot, so the best team is selected and with this process a injury or some timly misfortune wont ruin some ones chance to medal.
this will make the top american runners compete in OUR major marathons why is that a probem?
It may end up being a 2 race (NY, and Boston) series, but I Guarantee it will not be a 3 race series.
At the BIG RACES (BOSTON, CHICAGO, NEW YORK), the media will follow the people up front making the race, and these runners are almost always foreigners. I do not see how an American running 2:12 for 10th place will generate more exposure than a separate Olympic Trials race. When was
the last time an Anerican won Chicago or New York or Boston (or Grandmas for that matter)?
Our sport is all about developing athletes with hopes of achieving goals. What is the best way to keep runners in our sport after college? Qualifying for the Olympic Trials in the marathon is a great way to keep runners in the sport of long distance running in our country.
I don't think people should be able to talk about getting pay raises, promotions at work, or the new cars they get, but they do. Oh wait, that is called life and people are proud of certain things in their life. Some people might actually call these goals that create direction in their life.
Good for you.
I think it is a good idea to have the trials in conjunction with a major fall marathon so that our runners get to compete against a great field pushing them to their best performances. Chicago would be ideal. Let out athletes line up against the best in the world and run fast. Then they have almost a year to recover and prepare for the olympics too. They could be required to demonstrate fitness in the summer before the Olympics by competing in the Olympic trials 10,000m event. Both Deena and Meb won the Olympic trials 10,000m last year on their way to a medal performance in Athens.
I wrote:
------
Similarly, for coverage of the race itself, USATF could/should spring for someone (or more than one person) experienced to do race commentary. Pay a good production company to edit the race video, and actively shop it around to ESPN, Fox Sports, etc .
JimG replied:
-----------
Birmingham had Rod DeHaven doing color commentary, Toni Reavis was in St. Louis, both did great jobs, but only the local TV outlets picked up the broadcast (Rod's commentary was "hijacked" for webcast, however, with some knowledge of the producers).
-> Well great, then! That means we have good footage of both races with good commentary. So how about my other idea, to which Jim did not reply: produce a DVD of those races. It can't be that expensive to put together a well-produced DVD with both races, interviews with "cast members", background information on the trials, etc. There are a ton of college students on this board: anyone a media major who'd care to do this as a thesis project?
Then it could be distributed, as I also suggested, through various existing outlets. Giving it as race awards would be one. Including it in the goodie bag of major marathons would be another. Including it with every copy of RW would be another still. I subscribe to Entertainment Weekly, and last year I got several DVDs of new shows that way (the DVD comes in a little tear-open plastic sleeve that's simply glued to a page in the magazine). If you think your show (in our case, the OT marathon) might face an uphill battle to generate public interest, you go the extra mile in promotion. Simple as that.
I seriously doubt this would be prohibitively expensive. And I bet the organizers of the next OT marathon would be happy to pony up some of the funds, as it would generate more interest in their events. Especially if they could add some preview information for their events on the DVD.
How would the OT organizers and USATF find the money to produce a DVD ? They don't think that way. They are absolute minimalists when it comes to the athletes and fans. They are primarily concerned with 4-star hotel rooms, free airfare, and showing a good time to Bill Roe, Fred Finke, Craig Masback, John Chaplain, Stephanie Hightower, etc.
Martha wrote:
I think it is a good idea to have the trials in conjunction with a major fall marathon so that our runners get to compete against a great field pushing them to their best performances. Chicago would be ideal. Let out athletes line up against the best in the world and run fast. Then they have almost a year to recover and prepare for the olympics too. They could be required to demonstrate fitness in the summer before the Olympics by competing in the Olympic trials 10,000m event. Both Deena and Meb won the Olympic trials 10,000m last year on their way to a medal performance in Athens.
Why don't we require them to stand on their head and juggle knives too? What the heck.
In conjunction doesn't mean they would be running head to head with the rest of the field. Lots of scenerios flying around here.
Wags In Illinois wrote:
At the BIG RACES (BOSTON, CHICAGO, NEW YORK), the media will follow the people up front making the race, and these runners are almost always foreigners. I do not see how an American running 2:12 for 10th place will generate more exposure than a separate Olympic Trials race. When was
the last time an Anerican won Chicago or New York or Boston (or Grandmas for that matter)?
Definitely true - hell, it's hard to fit all the coverage you'd like in stories about the majors now - add the Trials into the mix and it will be nothing more than a sidebar at best, a few grafs in the main story, more likely. Forget the "increased media attention" angle - it's a red herring.
To answer your question: Dan Browne, Twin Cities '99.
"To answer your question: Dan Browne, Twin Cities '99."
Journalist???
Wrong
Khalid Khannouchi at Chicago
2000 2:07:01 (then an American Recoed)
2002 2:05:56
2002 Khalid Khannouchi at London 2:05:38
2003 Blake Russell Twin Cities 2:30:41