Matt Carpenter = Avocado's Number
RELIANCE HAS BEEN SHOWN THAT THIS IS A USATF SPONSORED EVENT.
Stop being ignorant, and there does not need to be any legal basis for witholding the money in a private-club race (also Colorado law). Such private club, USATF, can withold monies at its discretion (CO Law) at said private race (USATF Sponsored).
This is all evident on
Just curious, what would be the rule on a non-USATF member participating in USATF Track and Field or Road Championships?
I'm just wondering if the same thing would apply rather than singling this out about the usatf MUT champs.
Or was the mistake that Carpenter should have technically been a competitor in the Teva Spring Runoff which was going on at the same time and had no prize money since he was not a US Citizen?
I am not Matt Carpenter, although I know him (and Nancy Hobbs) rather well. I am a very experienced Colorado attorney who has represented national governing sports bodies (NGBs, like USATF) in disputes with athletes regarding, among other things, the interplay between organizational membership policies and state contract law. You obviously know nothing about the relevant law.
I am not taking the position that Matt is entitled to the money. I am simply commmenting that I have yet to see anything to suggest that he is not entitled to the money.
I don't understand why it seems so difficult for USATF and certain events to spell things out very clearly for all involved.
The Greenland Trail 50K is great example. It's been the USATF Colorado 50K Trail Championships the first two years of it's existence. Like the Spring Runoff race, it's an event in and of itself, but also a championship event. See the website for all of the details:
http://www.coloradorunnermag.com/other/Greenland50K.html
Pay attention to this section:
-------------------
Awards and Prizes:
The Greenland Trail 50K is the 2006 USATF Colorado 50K Trail Championships. THe top three open male and female runners who are members of USATF will receive USATF awards.
Awards:
Prize Money will be awarded to the top three male and female runners in the 50K as follows:
1st Place: $200
2nd Place: $150
3rd Place: $100
You don't need to be a member of USATF to win prize money.
--------------------
As you can see, the prize money situation was very clear. And it's interesting to note that while this is only a USATF STATE championship event (vs national championship), USATF didn't commandeer the prize money to offer only to USATF members.
In other words, unlike the Vail race, racers weren't forced into paying USATF membership dues to earn the prize money that USATF wasn't offering (it was sponsors). I happen to be a USATF member, and I earned an extra medal from USATF for my 2nd place finish at Greenland (the $200 was a little nicer - thank you, sponsors).
I credit race director Derek Griffiths (Colorado Runner) for keeping everything simple and communicating exactly what everyone needed to know.
I don't think Matt Carpenter is out of line at all. He's taking a stand for himself and other athletes. The USATF press release stated that USATF athletes would earn an additional $100. He was willing to give up $100 if he didn't have to join USATF. He won the race, but was told that he wasn't actually in the same competition and therefore didn't win, and didn't earn the $1000. If I was fortunate enough to be in his shoes, I would still be fired up and demanding the $1000 that I had just earned.
In the case of this event, USATF is taxing runners (membership fees) in order to award prize money provided by sponsors. What a deal...
Thats a load of crap- Give the man his money and be more clear in the future-
Correction to my post above - I was awarded $150 for 2nd. Charlie Kelly crushed everyone for 1st & the $200 award.
Is there anyway to get the USTAF membership money back? I feel ripped off and do like how they treated Matt. I think there should be a protest by all trail runners to get there money back. I would give my $15 to Matt.
Say what? wrote:
I am glad to hear you say its not about liking or disliking someone. So why then did you bring up the issue? That was a cheap shot!
You can not speak to what people would or would not do. Nor can you speak to what they did and did not know. But if Ktilton above is correct about the USATF only giving the MUT $1,000 per year then perhaps taking an anti USATF position is not so far off base!
As far as foreign runners getting money at the TEVA Games - YES! Read the race wrap-up from last year apparently written by the same Dobbs or Hobbs
http://www.trailrunner.com/news/2005_10K_champions_vail.pdfThe international competition and the USATF competition coexisted peacefully and I for one thought that was cool. Dobbs or Hobbs seemed to like it as well. Now the same person who talked up the international flavor of the race last year has pulled a 180 and it appears that will no longer be the case. Again that is sad. From my perspective the USATF has now ruined this race. That is my concern here folks!
Finally, I flat out challenge you on your contention that the $5,000 was USATF money. All indications are that this was TEVA Games sponsor money and the USATF was putting up a whopping extra $100. I have not heard one complaint about that $100 and if the USATF put up the $100 then it is within their right to dictate where it goes. The other money should go to the first runners across the line as it has in years past. Just as the press release said it would.
To me it looks like the USATF found themselves in a pickle the last couple of years since foreign female runners won the race. This year they thought they could screw one runner (and Tank who finished out of the money) and get away with it. Perhaps they did - but it has not gone unnoticed.
Ok, a couple of things. I never contended that USATF put up all the money. I did try to imply that I think USATF titles and money should go to US athletes. That doesn't mean that other prize money can't be offered as well. I agree that USATF probably doesn't even begin to financially support trail/ultra/mountain running the way it deserves, but until USATF views trail running as anything more than a niche sport, that's the reality of the situation. I'm not saying it's right, but maybe trail running advocates may want to reconsider the relationship with USATF if it's unsatisfied with it's support.
My main beef/concern is Matt's comments about his "principles" when, IN MY OPINION, his principles are about what's best for Matt. Maybe I'd respect Matt for taking on USATF if I didn't think this was more about his own sense of entitlement as an "elite" athlete (i.e., unwilling to pay a USATF membership fee) or if I didn't know of instances when he slammed a small town race and race director for not putting on their event how Matt envisioned.
mtnrunner_wannabe wrote:
Just curious, what would be the rule on a non-USATF member participating in USATF Track and Field or Road Championships?
I'm just wondering if the same thing would apply rather than singling this out about the usatf MUT champs.
This may not be 100% correct, but here it goes...
USATF outdoor t&f nationals - USATF members AND US citizens only. Not sure if it's still done this way, but I believe at one point foreigners used to be allowed to run USATF indoor nationals.
USATF road championships - usually held in mixed races, but USATF money and titles go to members and US citizens.
USATF cross country - USATF membership and US citizenship required.
Regarding USATF trail/ultra/mountain, I don't think USATF has any issue with holding their championship races in mixed races (non-USATF members and/or foreign runners), but they expect USATF titles and money to go to members and US citizens.
Here's how I see it with the Vail race:
- An existing race bid for the USATF championship.
- The sponsors supplied the prize money.
- USATF required runners in the USATF championship to be USATF members.
- There was an arrangement reached between USATF and the race (and the sponsors???) to only award the prize money to USATF members who are US citizens.
- While only 6 runners will be awarded prize money, a large number of those interested in the race paid a membership "tax" to be be categorized as part of the USATF championship, even though they ran side by side those categorized as part of the Spring Run Off.
Lets see here trails,
In one post you state, “from the outside, it does appear that things were not clear going into last weekend's race.”
Thank you! We could stop there and we should stop there because that is what this thread is about.
In another post you state, “I agree that USATF probably doesn't even begin to financially support trail/ultra/mountain running the way it deserves.” And go on to state, “maybe trail running advocates may want to reconsider the relationship with USATF if it's unsatisfied with it's support.”
Thank you again on the first part and I agree 100% on the second part and some people are doing just that.
In a third post you state, “I don't think USATF has any issue with holding their championship races in mixed races (non-USATF members and/or foreign runners), but they expect USATF titles and money to go to members and US citizens.”
Now here we go gray again. No one is disputing the title and no one is disputing the USATF’s $100. But you have already conceded that you don’t think the other money was USATF money. So to be honest I am not following your point here because I am not even disputing that what got done can't be done like some of the others are. But four years of history at this race shows that non USATF runners would get paid money. A press release went out before this year’s race stating the same. (Admittedly some funny business took place last year in the way people got signed up for insurance purposes but that was not the case in previous years). So I simply ask you how is it so far fetched to not understand how someone would not think that things would be the same as previous years? You state that you don’t think the USATF has any issues with mixed races but that was not the case this year. It changed and it was not made clear that it changed and that is the issue. Not if it can be done, but how it was done.
This is the “USATF trail 10k champs” thread. And yet you continue to personalize this about one runner. Perhaps you need to start an anti-Matt thread. Otherwise, this is about more than one runner. It is about how things unfolded this weekend. Suppose, for one moment that a foreign runner showed up this year and won or placed like has happened several times. If they were to your liking and did not bash some small town race would you be singing a different song? You can have your opinions but others can not or you have a "beef/concern" with them so therefore it doesn’t matter that they get screwed? Sorry, but I find that position weak.
Finally, lets revisit that line you wrote about the USATF not supporting trail/ultra/mountain running the way it deserves. If I did not know better I would say you stole that from this webpage:
After reading this entire thread, and another one on the same topic posted earlier, it seems to me that the money was awarded to the appropriate winners. I have competed in numerous USATF Championships where non-US citizens, or runners outside of the conference won the race and did not receive the money which was allocated towards the USATF competitors. They may have received a trophy for the OPEN race or $ for the OPEN race, but not for the USATF Championship. This practice goes the same for road and mountain biking award payouts as well...you must sign up for the US Association sponsoring the event to win a monetary prize...such as NORBA, etc. It would be one thing if Matt just didn't have a clue about the rules, but he did. It seems that everyone BUT him did. And, the fact that he has spoken out against joining any kind of association extends the argument even further that he was making a statement by not joining. Well, he did show everyone and make a statement. He can win races. But, he cannot take home the first place purse unless he plays by the rules.
People keep talking about "the rules" that Matt should have known about, but no one has yet pointed to any language in those rules that restricts the award of prize money to USATF members, and -- more importantly -- no one has yet pointed to any language in the contract between the race and the athlete that incorporated those rules and that negated the language of the press release that was issued by Nancy Hobbs, an agent of USATF. Aside from vague references to "the rules" and USATF's "expectations" and past practices, I still haven't seen anything that allows USATF to prevent the first-place finisher in this particular race from receiving the first-place prize money that was advertised. This is a legal issue to be determined under state law. It's not an issue to be determined by USATF policy and practice.
I am not from the US, but I've run USATF races. I had to pay the $15. It's a USATF championship. How could Carpenter not know. It said in the article that Carpenter thought running should be free, or something like that. So why does the hypocrite charge money to enter his race?
I have to side with Avocado's Number on this one. The press release clearly states that the prize money is for the race and it does not state that USATF is required for it. In fact, their comment that there is an extra $100 for the top USATF supports the concept that anyone is eligible for the $5000 of prize money. I have run many, many USATF championship events (state champ road races and others) that are held as part of a larger event. This seems to be the case here.
It seems like a person or persons in USATF flexing some muscle at the last moment to protect some portion of their little fiefdom. And I've seen that done before too. I got no desire to become part of USATF.
Say what? wrote:
Lets see here trails,
In one post you state, “from the outside, it does appear that things were not clear going into last weekend's race.”
Thank you! We could stop there and we should stop there because that is what this thread is about.
In another post you state, “I agree that USATF probably doesn't even begin to financially support trail/ultra/mountain running the way it deserves.” And go on to state, “maybe trail running advocates may want to reconsider the relationship with USATF if it's unsatisfied with it's support.”
Thank you again on the first part and I agree 100% on the second part and some people are doing just that.
In a third post you state, “I don't think USATF has any issue with holding their championship races in mixed races (non-USATF members and/or foreign runners), but they expect USATF titles and money to go to members and US citizens.”
Now here we go gray again. No one is disputing the title and no one is disputing the USATF’s $100. But you have already conceded that you don’t think the other money was USATF money. So to be honest I am not following your point here because I am not even disputing that what got done can't be done like some of the others are. But four years of history at this race shows that non USATF runners would get paid money. A press release went out before this year’s race stating the same. (Admittedly some funny business took place last year in the way people got signed up for insurance purposes but that was not the case in previous years). So I simply ask you how is it so far fetched to not understand how someone would not think that things would be the same as previous years? You state that you don’t think the USATF has any issues with mixed races but that was not the case this year. It changed and it was not made clear that it changed and that is the issue. Not if it can be done, but how it was done.
This is the “USATF trail 10k champs” thread. And yet you continue to personalize this about one runner. Perhaps you need to start an anti-Matt thread. Otherwise, this is about more than one runner. It is about how things unfolded this weekend. Suppose, for one moment that a foreign runner showed up this year and won or placed like has happened several times. If they were to your liking and did not bash some small town race would you be singing a different song? You can have your opinions but others can not or you have a "beef/concern" with them so therefore it doesn’t matter that they get screwed? Sorry, but I find that position weak.
Finally, lets revisit that line you wrote about the USATF not supporting trail/ultra/mountain running the way it deserves. If I did not know better I would say you stole that from this webpage:
http://www.skyrunner.com/story/2005usatf.htm
Ok, I'll bite, but I think we are going in circles, particularly on the USATF issues. Did I steal a very general comment about the USATF and trail running? Give me a frickin break. I'm sorry to disappoint you (Matt, is this you?), but I haven't read that article on the link you provided.
Did I ever say others can't have an opinion? I feel like I'm having a childhood argument. This is a thread about what happened to Matt at Vail this past weekend and it included the Denver Post article quoting Matt that he wouldn't pay $15 to win $1000 on principle. Other posters have mentioned his "principles." Well, I'm calling BS and it's MY OPINION. That's what happens on threads - discussions go in all directions and we are free to give our opinion. Maybe he got screwed by the USATF, but most everyone else at the top of the standings paid their USATF fee. Why is that? Sounds like he thought he could pull one over on the USATF folks and it backfired.
Go back and ready the article. Matt Carpenter is NOT quoted as saying that "running should be free" or anything like that. Here's what he says relating running & money:
"You win your awards. You don't buy them,"
"Running is a sport for all of us, and I guess trying to separate us with money, to me, it seems a little crazy,"
"A principle is not a principle unless you are tested," he said. "If it costs me $15 to win $1,000, then that's against my principle."
So tell me where he says running should be free, or that runners shouldn't pay entry fees. This wasn't about an entry fee - this is about a USATF tax on top of entry fees for runners. As I previously mentioned, all the runners are physically running the same race (there was NOT 2 races), and a number of runners were cajoled into paying for a USATF membership in order to "compete in the championship" even though it was the same race as the Spring Runoff. I take the view of many when it comes to USATF and Mountain/Ultra/Trail Running. This race is a great of example of how USATF is not doing much to support this segment of the sport - they're taking membership money from many runners for themselves, and taking money from sponsors to pay 6 athletes prize money.
If you're going to call someone a hypocrite, you better know what the hell you're talking about.
Why is it that people like Pre are seen as heroes for fighting for the rights of elite athletes and furthering the sport, and a number of people are ridiculing Matt Carpenter with this situation? Carpenter has repeatedly made efforts to promote and advance trail/mountain running, fight out of date amateurism with a variety of races, and
improve the sport for competitive runners. He helps other runners through efforts like his Incline Club, his website, and obviously the Barr Trail Mountain Race.
Matt Carpenter, by sticking up for his principles, is doing far more for mountain/ultra/trail running than USATF.
"If it costs me $15 to win $1,000, then that's against my principle."
OK so he did it on principle. Good for him. I'd pay the $15 to win $1000. But that's me. Knowing Matt as I do, it does not surprise me how stupid his principles are. And I'm sure I don't know him as well as you which is just fine with me because I already know him more than I wish I did.
- Again, would someone please prove that it was clearly stated one had to be a USATF member to win the $1000?
- For not knowing him too well, you sure are angry about him and his principles. If you believe he gave up $1000 "for his principles," why does this piss YOU off?
- I don't really know him at all, but again, I support him over the USATF bureaucracy that can't get it's crap together.
And another thing..when did he turn into ET.