.US Championship Another Sad Screw Up By USATF

There is a point to the complaining - it isn't a well set-up series from that (points to money) financial perspective.

However, it was great to see Huddle and Flanagan race against each other (in a non-trials race, where they have been doing different events anyway), as arguably two of the three best distance runners in America (non-1500), with the exception of Simpson. While New York also had a great 5k field, it says that money will draw them together - in this case resulting in a world best (even if it is a mainly american distance).

No surprise about the money part, but a series needs to be handled better, or just have these as one-off championships with no relationship to each other, or why even bother with the other championships? It's not as if the 12km distance has any special significance in relation to the other distances, and there are (or have been) good races elsewhere for this distance (Bloomsday, Bay to breakers) - even if these are dominated by foreigners at times. Will this race now become a "go to" race annually or is this a one-shot deal? If part of the mandate is to increase the prestige of National champioship road-races (as this does), it needs to be handled well for the sake of continuity, or its effectiveness is limited.

How did it play live?

I would give USATF just a little slack. This was the first year of race series (even though there are plenty of 'points' series-type events out there to model it off of).Hopefully, it will get continued sponsorship and with that, more exposure.

The USATF set up a great race between 2 American record holders - Flanagan and Huddle, and Huddle ran a WR after a tough 1 on 1 duel with Flanagan. That race alone made the .US championship a success.

The other issues - the schedule and points in the series, getting bigger crowds and so on, are things to work on. Since it's the 1st year, you would expect some rough edges and stuff that needs to be adjusted.

The big picture, however, is that the USATF is finally making an effort to put some structure into the road race scene. It's not perfect but it's a start and they got a terrific women's championship race out of it.

This series or event as you may call is a little bit like our recent health care launch by the government , in principal not a bad idea and needed , in practical application poorly executed , not well thought out visibly showing a lack of understanding of road racing and the event management.

They should have let the pro's get their hands on it , tied it into a major event that has relevance and history. Hopefully use this as learning mistake to build on something to be bigger and better for next year.

Keep it simple , maybe a 4 race series , to run in the "final" you have to race two other of the series with a top ten finish. Make the final count with big $$ ,course , US and world record bonus money.

I don't see a problem with it.

The nba 3 point contest makes the last ball in the rack worth double.

Family Feud makes the last game worth double the points.

Kroger doubles their coupons on Wednesdays.

Most series are won by putting more emphasis on quantity than quality. Since there will rarely be a close competition going into the last event, making it virtually a winner take all is the only way to insure the whole series gets any recognition.

Flawed logic , why have them race a series just have one big race. Really dumb.

The logic is to build the sport with a series of races for the participating elites to race a final after a series of battles. In some case it builds a story line that may have news worthy attention and get some press. Not just hold a championship and hope you have a race as we had with the women , they got lucky.

If the series was spread to different parts of the country and the championship switched east coast to west coast year to year.

National sponsors like to see their name numerous times , not just one race , one shot hope of being seen.