Where Your Dreams Become Reality

Main Front Page

What's Let's Run.com?

SAVE ON SHOES

Training Advice

World Famous:
Message Board

Turn Back The Clock!
Today's Top Runners Talk About Their High School Careers

Opinions
Miler Scott Anderson's Journal

Wejo Speaks

Rojo Speaks

JK Speaks

Archives
Wejo Speaks
Rojo Speaks
JK Speaks

 
Feb. 12, 2004-
Phil Hersh Clarifies Why He Won't Profile US Distance Runners

Phil Hersh, who covers Olympic sports for the Chicago Tribune, caused an uproar on this site last week when he said, "I have vowed not to write a word about other U.S. distance runners until they at least make top-5 in a major international event." Hersh wrote to  us clarifying his remarks, as what was printed was just a sound bite, so we are publishing his full remarks below along with our response.

Phil Hersh's remarks:
   Gee, it's nice to be the object of such an uproar.

   I didn't express myself completely to Dave Monti, who, however, quoted what I said EXACTLY as I said it.

    I meant to say this: I will no longer write another personality profile about a U.S. distance runner until he or she makes the top five in an international event.

   This is typical:  I profiled Deena Drossin last summer and before the 2002 Chicago Marathon.  Then she ran well off the pace in Paris at the worlds 10k, where she was competitive for about three laps, and finished 6th in Chicago with a good but unremarkable 2:26:53.

    Many US distance runners train hard and do whatever they can to get better.  They are just not competitive on the world scene.  With Deena's exception in ONE marathon, they are mainly not even running as fast as the Rodgers-Shorter-Benoit generation did 25-30 years ago. (Not to mention Kim Jones, Julie Brown, Francie Larrieu Smith and others more recently.)

      As an example, compare the results of the Sunday Tokyo Marathon, where Kenya's Eric Wainaina finished 8th in 2:11.03, to those of the U.S. Olympic Trials.  Tokyo is a very good international marathon, but hardly the best.

     And consider these statistics, used in my Friday advance on the marathon:

     The leading U.S. marathoner of 2003, Meb Keflezighi, was only 84th fastest in the world with a time of 2:10:03. No other U.S. marathoner made the top 150 on a 2003 world list that included 25 men who ran 2:08 or faster, topped by the world record of 2:04:55 by Kenya's Paul Tergat.

     Not since Frank Shorter's silver medal in 1976, four years after he had won gold at the Munich Games, has a U.S. man made the top 10 in the Olympic marathon. Over the past decade, the event has been increasingly dominated by East Africans and Asians.

     The only hope for a U.S. man in Athens is that expected hot weather on an extremely hard course could bring an unexpected result, such as Steve Spence's bronze medal at the 1991 world championships in Tokyo.

     Entry limits provide further optimism. Forty Kenyans (40!!!) ran faster than Keflezighi in 2003, and 15 were faster than 2:08, but each country gets a maximum three entries in the Olympics.
    
     Given those numbers, a top-10 finish in Athens will be worthy of a brief mention, a top-5 of several paragraphs and a medal of an entire story.  I am simply tired of hearing over and over that U.S. distance running is on the way back, while the results don't back it up.

     I have written literally hundreds of marathon stories in my 25 years of covering the sport.  If you doubt my passion for distance running, read some of them.

     As long ago as the Tribune of April, 19, 1988, I have written stories about the decline of U.S. marathoning--yet I continued to write about U.S. marathoners.  Sixteen years later, I have decided that the decline has yet to be arrested.

     Of course, the infinitely greater worldwide competition since the 1980s is a factor in the drop in world rankings, but there is no reason why the US should not have several sub-2:10 runners every year.  But, excluding Khannouchi's results, 6 of the remaining 7 times in the US top 10 were run between 1979 and 1983, and the 7th in 1994.  Other than Khannouchi, in the past 10 years, just three US men (Morris, Lawson, Culpepper) have broken 2:10, and not by a lot--Morris' 2:09:32 is the best.

     So, for marathon profiles, I will focus on the likes of Tergat, Abera, Takahashi, Ndereba and Radcliffe.  They are proving their ability, not talking about how it will show itself soon, which has come to sound like Cho-Cho San in Madame Butterfly, waiting in vain for the ``one fine day'' when Pinkerton returns.

     Newspapers have limited space and budget these days.  I choose not to spend it in an area that simply is not worth it by any reasonable measure. 

LetsRun.com Response: First, let us address Phil's tone. It seems like he goes out of his way to point out the shortcomings of American runners. Notice his tone when he starts off by saying, "this is typical": "This is typical: I profiled Deena Drossin last summer and before the 2002 Chicago Marathon.  Then she ran well off the pace in Paris at the worlds 10k, where she was competitive for about three laps, and finished 6th in Chicago with a good but unremarkable 2:26:53." Starting with "this is typical" to us shows a negative bias. From the bitter tone, you'd think from reading what he wrote that Deena isn't one of the best distance runners in the world or worthy of another profile.

Well let us state emphatically first and foremost a fact - Deena Drossin (now Deena Kastor) is one of the top distance runners in the world. Hersh, however, in some ways comes across as upset that Deena didn't perform well immediately after he wrote a profile of her.  That doesn't change the fact that she's clearly deserving of the profile. It's not an athlete's job to make a journalist look good by performing well after getting some publicity.  So let us repeat, Deena Drossin (now Deena Kastor) is one of the top distance runners in the world and thus deserving of a profile in major newspapers across the country.

However, Hersh's tone and mixing and matching of some dates/facts in the sentence quoted above (leaving out many of Deena's major accomplishments) portrays her in a more negative light.   When he profiled her prior to the 2002 Chicago Marathon, she was already a World Silver Medallist at the World Cross Country Championships (thus worthy of a profile we assume according to his criteria) and a world record holder at 5k on the roads. Thus, she was certainly deserving of a profile. Sure, she then that year ran 2:26:53 at Chicago which was a subpar performance for her, but he conveniently left out the fact that the next spring, she went on to repeat as World Silver Medallist at the World XCs and set the American Record in the Marathon at the Flora London Marathon for 3rd place (top 5), the premier marathon in the world outside of the World Champs and the Olympics.

Thus it's only natural that one concludes that Hersh is upset that she then didn't perform really well immediately after he profiled her last summer, as she did great things before the profile.  Little did we know it is the job of journalists only to profile people who are certain to get medals right after they are profiled. Track and field aficionados know that Deena has not shown herself to be a top 5 performer in the world on the track. Her strengths are the roads and cross country.  Similarly, Catherine Ndereba's strengths lie on the roads- not the track. According to Hersh's logic he should think twice about doing a profile on her (yet says he very well may do one on her) as she would be even behind Deena on the track.

Thus we just wanted to point out that Deena has had by far more than ONE world class performance as Hersh seems to indicate. From his comments one could reasonable come to the conclusion that he almost seems to want to belittle the accomplishments of her and all US distance runners (and perhaps not cover them), because he's been burned in the past. Once again we point to the phrase "this is typical". Now contrary to what they want you to believe, all journalists have biases, but as much as possible these biases are not supposed to cloud their judgment in what they cover.

We're more than willing to agree with the one major point that Hersh based his whole lack of coverage on - that by and large US distance runners are not top 5 runners in the world.  However, just because someone isn't top 5 in the world doesn't mean they aren't deserving of profiles or coverage. Phil Hersh is a great writer, but unfortunately in this case it appears he has a bias and bitterness against US distance runners.

Hersh compares apples to oranges when comparing the Marathon Trials times (a championship event with no rabbits where times are slower) to that of last weekend's Tokyo Marathon.  Alan Culpepper in his only previous marathon was 6th in the Chicago Marathon, a marathon of greater international stature than Tokyo, and almost undoubtedly would have run faster than 2:11:03 if not in a tactical race. We just want a little more intellectual honesty. Alan Culpepper is the fastest American ever to debut in the marathon.

And although we could quibble with Hersh for leaving out some other international performances by US distance runners (Colleen de Reuck world xc bronze medallist, US men world team xc bronze medallist, a couple of 6th place finishes in the Chicago Marathon (does that count as a major international event? it should as it is the 2nd most competitive marathon in the world outside of the world champs), our main point is we didn't know it was in the job description of journalists only to cover athletes who are in the top 5 in the world. It is not beneath a journalist and does not reflect poorly on him or her to cover an athlete who is not #1 (or top 5) in the world.

We live in the greatest country on earth with millions of people who run every day, and the Olympic Marathon Trials are an event worthy of coverage by a major newspaper, especially this year with the marathon returning to its birthplace, Athens, in 2004. That in and of itself makes the Trials newsworthy.

We note that yesterday's Chicago Tribune via the AP had a fairly lengthy article that covered the US Olympic soccer team's loss to Mexico. Last time we looked, the US soccer team is far from a top 5 team in the world. Yet, the Tribune could only devote 1 square inch to the Marathon Trials Recap? (Yes 1 square inch) That's simply a travesty. And we think Hersh might agree if pressed on this issue that his paper should have had more of a recap and applied a double standard in these 2 cases.

Interestingly enough, the Tribune and Hersh did write a pre-race article on the men's marathon trials where he described the race and athletes with the following sentence: "Those athletes will be involved in a much longer and apparently futile exercise". To call athletes competing to fulfill their lifelong dreams, to win a national championship, and to represent their country in the Olympics "futile" is extremely sad (and bitter) (We'll have more on this tomorrow in our Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down awards)

We don't doubt that Mr Hersh is passionate about running or a great writer (we've enjoyed many of his articles in the past).  Our advice to him is: Continue to be passionate, don't be bitter.

And remember, the Boston Red Sox haven't won a World Series since 1918 or Mr. Hersh's own Chicago Cubs since 1908. They still get lots and lots coverage. Americans love lovable losers. (Wait, we forgot the Cubs and Red Sox were top 4 in the World this year)


Tell a friend about this article
(Dont worry we won't email your friend(s) again. We send them a 1 time email)
Enter their email address(es), separated by a comma.
Enter your name:

Don't Worry: We
Back to Main Front Page
Questions, comments or suggestions?Please email the LetsRun.com staff at suggestions@LetsRun.com.

Save on Running Shoes

Cross Country Spikes 10% off


Train Smarter!!!


Injured?
Lower Body Pain Relief 120x240



Running & Track and Field Posters


Unbelievable interest
ING Orange Savings Account

Sponsor of the NYC Marathon
ING Orange
5 Minute Process to Open an Account
No Minimum Deposit


Search the Web
or LetsRun.com
Google

Web

LetsRun.com