The biggest 10k in the US this year, outside of USA's, will probably be Sound Running's "The Ten" which I believe will be on March 4.
It's not easy to run a hard cross country race on February 18, fly from Australia to the US, try to get over jet lag, and then run a stellar 10k on the track 2 weeks after World XC.
That means runners will probably have to choose one or the other, not both. And I think a lot of the top US runners will choose to do the track 10k instead of World XC.
Cool story bro.
Let's skip a free trip to Australia and a world championship where you will be part of team score so you can run a track race in the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night for a small chance of making a world championship on the track where you will get your doors blown off.
On the men's side, unless they are name Fisher, they will be total non factors at Worlds on the track. And anyone good enough to make the team on the track, doesn't need to be worried about someing in March. Run World xc, then get in 2-3 months of killer training and hit a 10k closer to USAs (or hell put a rabbit in USAs), or get in via World Rank like McGorty and Klecker are already set to do.
Your timing comment doesn’t consider DL events that are early summer and maybe in the top athletes sights.
Look, we all want to see the best running at all of the big events. It’s an unrealistic expectation placed on them.
Last Friday on our Friday 15 podcast, we were talking about World XC. I am starting to get excited as a) it's always an amazing event and b) this year it's in Australia and c) the date has been moved up to mid-February (Feb 18). World Athletics has probably moved the date way up from last time (March 30 in 2019) so it won't interfere with outdoor track preparations.
Who wouldn't want to go? In my book, no one.
So here's the statement I made, "Any and all US long-distance pros that skip the event should have their pro card stripped."
I don't want to hear " But we need to get our 10,000 qualifiers so we can go to Worlds." THIS IS WORLDS. IT"S WORLD XC where you are actually relevant. On the men's side, all US pros not named Grant Fisher have no shot at a medal on the track anyway so let's go to the 1 Worlds we know you can make and then worry about that 27:10 standard/world ranking later.
On the women's side, a US team of Elise Cranny, Karissa Schweizer, Alicia Monson and somoene else has a great shot at a medal.
Let's do this.
I agree but they need money incentive. They're pro's and pro's get paid. Give them an "appearance" fee to spend the time preparing and they have to go to the trials, too.
Remember when the World XC champs was one of the biggest dates on the calendar? Everyone wanted to go, and made it part of the process. But now it's all about fast times on a track, in front of a high school level crowd.
"In between the 84 olympic marathon and April 85 he did 17 runs. Some results: 2nd in Chicago marathon, winner of S Silvester new year international road run on Sao Paulo - Brazil, wins sevral road and crioss runs, winner of the WCCChamp and 1 month later took the marathon world record to Steve Jones."
I agree with Rojo about US men's distance running sucks. Only one athlete can even sniff a medal on the track. XC gives them a chance to medal as a team. Not individually, of course. But as a team they can snag one in a weak field.
Remember when the World XC champs was one of the biggest dates on the calendar? Everyone wanted to go, and made it part of the process. But now it's all about fast times on a track, in front of a high school level crowd.
The top guys raced a lot more back then. I wish they would start racing more often.
I agree with Rojo about US men's distance running sucks. Only one athlete can even sniff a medal on the track. XC gives them a chance to medal as a team. Not individually, of course. But as a team they can snag one in a weak field.
Serious question...are team medals worth any kind of financial incentive on a typical sponsorship contract?
I agree with Rojo about US men's distance running sucks. Only one athlete can even sniff a medal on the track. XC gives them a chance to medal as a team. Not individually, of course. But as a team they can snag one in a weak field.
Serious question...are team medals worth any kind of financial incentive on a typical sponsorship contract?
That's a good question. I think any time you can add something like National, World .... to someone's name it's worth money.
I agree with Rojo about US men's distance running sucks. Only one athlete can even sniff a medal on the track. XC gives them a chance to medal as a team. Not individually, of course. But as a team they can snag one in a weak field.
There are 197 nations in the world and over 200 belong to WA. How many nations have even one runner meet the qualifying standard for the 1500, 5000, 10,000 and steeple?
We typically have 3 in each event, men and women. We are nowhere near sucking.
I like XC as much as the next guy, but distance running is still a business. World XC has very little value when it comes to US sponsors compared to US champs, Worlds and OGs. Distance runners have very few chances over their careers to make a World or OG team and you can't blame them for taking a pass on World XC if they think that doing so is necessary to be ready to compete at USATF champs.
I like XC as much as the next guy, but distance running is still a business. World XC has very little value when it comes to US sponsors compared to US champs, Worlds and OGs. Distance runners have very few chances over their careers to make a World or OG team and you can't blame them for taking a pass on World XC if they think that doing so is necessary to be ready to compete at USATF champs.
Agree with this 100%. I can't fault distance runners barely being paid from choosing the options that maximize their potential earnings, which for US runners/contracts is tied to track performances. If financial incentives were tied to competing at World XC, you can bet that everyone would show up.
I would love for there to be some kind of DL XC season in the winter, culminating in World XC. But considering the lack of real funding for the regular DL, seems hard to envision this ever materializing.
Maybe finishing top 15 or thereabouts at US XC Champs could replace getting the US 10,000 standard? Something like that would push more people to XC over the Sound Running invite and get some more interest in XC races.
I agree with Rojo about US men's distance running sucks. Only one athlete can even sniff a medal on the track. XC gives them a chance to medal as a team. Not individually, of course. But as a team they can snag one in a weak field.
Serious question...are team medals worth any kind of financial incentive on a typical sponsorship contract?
Very few, if any, runners would get bonus money for a team cross country medal. Sponsors generally only care about track, not cross country.
Maybe if there was a modern day equivalent of Pat Porter who was famous for cross country. But no pros like that exist in the US now.
Last Friday on our Friday 15 podcast, we were talking about World XC. I am starting to get excited as a) it's always an amazing event and b) this year it's in Australia and c) the date has been moved up to mid-February (Feb 18). World Athletics has probably moved the date way up from last time (March 30 in 2019) so it won't interfere with outdoor track preparations.
Who wouldn't want to go? In my book, no one.
So here's the statement I made, "Any and all US long-distance pros that skip the event should have their pro card stripped."
I don't want to hear " But we need to get our 10,000 qualifiers so we can go to Worlds." THIS IS WORLDS. IT"S WORLD XC where you are actually relevant. On the men's side, all US pros not named Grant Fisher have no shot at a medal on the track anyway so let's go to the 1 Worlds we know you can make and then worry about that 27:10 standard/world ranking later.
On the women's side, a US team of Elise Cranny, Karissa Schweizer, Alicia Monson and somoene else has a great shot at a medal.
