Over and over I see great races on flotrack all from night at Stanford. The stadium barely has any light and its not at all perfect for filming because of this.
Isn't it possible to have these races on a stadium with proper light?
Could someone please explain why they are always on that Stanford track that looks more like a training track than anythin else.
True YES wrote:
True. USATF and IAAF should impose an immediate ban on non-college races in the state of California and 49 out of 50 U.S. states, and only hold elite competitions at the Nike Campus in Beaverton and Hayward Field in Track Town USA.
This is not what I was saying at all. My question was why the best middle/long distance races, filled with great pro runners were at a track that doesn't have proper lightning.
Perfect weather is almost a guarantee
In these tough economic times the US should focus it's resources around Eugene and Portland and provide free housing and a stipend to professional elites and coaches who relocate there. That would be best for our sport.
Owl Jolson wrote:
Perfect weather is almost a guarantee
Ding ding ding!!!
I would shutdown Payton Jordan, Satnford Invite, Penn Relays Distance Carniival, Texas relays, distances, and Oxy HP and move it to Nike Beaverton.
orbitboy wrote:
Owl Jolson wrote:Perfect weather is almost a guarantee
Ding ding ding!!!
Only track with proper lighting in cali?
Msac relays distance Thursday should move permanently to Mt Hood Community College.
Stanford sucks that's why.
I know the economy in USA is bad, but can't we even afford som real lights to these fantastic events? Dark video, and its not even HD!
Why is it not HD? Flo track surely must be able to afford that, its really not very expensive.
I've attended the PJ meet the last three years and from a spectator view point, the lighting is absolutely fine. I'm guessing that part of the problem is the cameras that are being used for filming the meet are not Network TV quality (don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Flotrack and anybody else who films and steams track meets.)
I can't believe that the OP is whining about this, Stanford does a ton to support track.
The reality of the problem is the plain fact the sport of track and field in general is simply dying!!!! Have you all been to a track and field meet recently? How boring can it get? The only place a track and field event is "half interesting" is in Eugene Oregon, only because the fans are into it, come out, and cheer! Even in Eugene, they can "up the amp" and turn this into something interesting, with music, a mascot, etc.... which they don't.
Did you see the fans at the Big 12 meet? Disgusting. And watch the limited number of fans at Regionals this year. My family and I were at Regionals in Austin two years ago where they were lucky they drew 2,000 fans for the entire three day event! Hardly a sport drawing a fan base. I suspect it will be the same this year. We didn't even bother buying advance tickets. What's the problem?
There seems to be nobody working at the top to make this sport successful and turn it into a fan-friendly event. At the college scene, you have Pat Henry and Vin Lananna doing their best, but where are the other coaches? At the professional level we have the USA Track and Field association, which for the most part have no idea what they are doing and how to promote the sport. It's nauseating to say the least.
If someone a long time ago can make the unentertaining sports of baseball and golf entertaining, then certainly someone in this day and age can take and make the sport of track and field become successful and entertaining, particularly with the top range of athletes competing in today's spectrum.
Time will only tell. We'll see you few folks at the next meet!
Crappy stanfurd with its high pollen levels.
Stanford sucks. Hope they cancel the Stanford XC invite, Stanford T&F Invite, Payton Jordan meet, and move them to Hayward Field at Track Town USA.
Yes, but how many times can YOU bench YOUR OWN body weight? WITHOUT bouncing the bar on YOUR sternum. Ten? Seven?
Aotkmty wrote:
I've attended the PJ meet the last three years and from a spectator view point, the lighting is absolutely fine. I'm guessing that part of the problem is the cameras that are being used for filming the meet are not Network TV quality (don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Flotrack and anybody else who films and steams track meets.)
I can't believe that the OP is whining about this, Stanford does a ton to support track.
Save it. I'm not whining, I'm simply curious to why a track with such good meets doesn't have better facilities. I love the races they have there, I just want them to get som better lighting so they can get better footage.
Why would Stanford pay for better lighting for Flotrack?
Sensei wrote:
My question was why the best middle/long distance races, filled with great pro runners were at a track that doesn't have proper lightning.
1. Most elite runners prefer no lightning at all.
2. Races at Stanford do not have any lightning.
Therefore,
3. Races at Stanford have "proper lightning".
Sorry it will still be in the 30s or 40s and spitting sleet in Eugene until mid-July. You only get, what, 5-6 weeks of summer if you're lucky then it's back to the dreary stuff for you and your tatted up, methed out, camo-wearing Oregon-obsessive muffin-tops.
Also, since Stanford University alumni are so highly sophisticated (and demonstrate a far greater human value than Oregonians), you really don't need that many to attend to balance it out. For every three Oregonian louts who attend the meet (baked out of their gourds on hash brownies or something), one intrinsically high value Stanford fan is as good or vastly superior and an Oregonian d-bag.
Now go fetch me a Snapple or something. Chop! Chop! Make yourself useful boy!
lightning kills.