On reading the article in the latest New Yorker about the singular phenomenon that is Beethoven's position as "number one genius" in the classical canon, I was moved to ponder whether people consider any runners to have possessed "genius" (or even whether such a concept is valid to consider)?
It's not unknown for coaches to be described in quasi-mystical terms and venerated for their feats of personality shaping and subtle insights.
In my experience, even the most successful track and field athletes are seldom described as possessing genius, more often being called "greats" or "phenomenons" or some other term that seems to appreciate their physical feats but falls short of encompassing the kind of creative power that the term genius implies.
Maybe this is perfectly valid, with running being such a linear activity, so straightforward in its basic limitations and so tightly codified in its sporting form; there is room for superlative achievement, but not so much for genius.
I can't help but think that there have been feats of self creation, aesthetic wonder and grand leaps forward in running that justify the use of genius. (If George Best was a genius, so was Sammy Wanjiru; if Roger Federer is a genius, so was Wilson Kipketer.)
Can a runner be a genius? If not, why are athletics coaches periodically described as being a genius? And why are other sports so much happier to describe their best as having or being genius?