The Canadian Running Thread

So I hurt your feelings Skuj? Too bad, I think I brought up some good points, something you have failed to do.But if you won't listen to me this guy....

And, for the love of God, don't accuse us of being the same person.

Good post. (Somehow I got accused of saying that AC must throw a shitload of money at athletes in order to solve things. My biggest complaint has been the AC abandonment of long distance, in it's new carding statements, AG statement, WXC participation, and so on.)

Indeed, the major major problem is getting those who are ready to train seriously (late teens, 20ish) into that position, by the thousands. Are AC recent statements and actions helpful in this regard? You know my answer to that.

positive thinker wrote:

What kind of support do military runners got now? Still quite good? it would be interesting to see if a group of distance runners could join the military and be funded that way (Zatopek, eg, was a military man. And I think there are plenty of other examples).

This is my own personal opinion of course, but, I believe things fell off for the CF after some years of gradual improvement, due mostly to stretching of resources, over tasking, etc....ie Many runners became too busy with other things in order to be able to commit to the program. Bosses became too concerned with all the other things that have to get done. Training camps dwindled, etc.

On those 11 trips I met many famous runners from other countries... "Oh....you are in the Military?" 2:07 Marathoners, National 10k record holders, etc.

Some really interesting comments and points being made at the moment - thanks guys. Can we get rid of the personal stuff, and just give opinions on the issues? Everyone has a valid opinion, and if we can get some consensus on issues, perhaps we can move toward solutions at some point, instead of silly bickering...

I was the original rsb - My name is Ron Bowker. I don't know why someone else would want to be rsb or bsr or whatever, but perhaps the cloak of anonymity works for some of the posters here. It doesn't work for me...

Anyways, as far as OWNING THE PODIUM in terms of winning a substantial number of medals in distance running, in the very near future, is obviously a fantasy...

It's a legitimate question to ask, IMHO, why we need to OWN THE PODIUM, in order for a sport to get funding?

Is that all that sport means to us? Really? You must be kidding, if you believe that.

It's like saying to kids in school, we'll do one run in Phys.Ed. class in September. Those who finish in the top 3, we will pay some attention to --- maybe even give you some coaching, and take you to a track meet. The rest of you are total losers, you should just go and hang out at 711, and smoke dope, and dropout.

Because THERE IS NO VALUE TO SPORT IN CANADA IF YOU DON'T OWN THE PODIUM. Is that really the message they are trying to send out, because that is being received by a lot of citizens and their kids as the message...

Our previous successes in distance running were based on a whole different set of principles. We were always trying to be more INCLUSIVE, as compared to the EXCLUSIVITY of OWN THE PODIUM thinking... We wanted more people to run, and to try, and to train, get good coaching, put some other parts of life on the back-burner for a while, and see how good you can really be with another 10 years of training and racing....after Univesity...

Our version of HIGH PERFORMANCE produced a real depth of performance almost across the whole spectrum of distance running, on the track, on the roads, and over the country...

You had to be damn good to make the Canadian team, and if made an Internationally accepted standard, then you were on the Team, and went and gave it your best, and kept improving and getting more experience and getting better, and so on and so on....

Did you know we had 3 women in the Olympic final in 1988 in both the 3000 and the 10000 metres, and 2 in the 1500 metre final? That was the result of our version of a High Performance system for distance running...And some will point out that the African women were just getting started, and that is true. But you should also note that the Eastern European women from many countries were doped to the gills, and very hard to beat. So were some of the American women by the way. In Canada, apparently only our SPRINTERS were doped to the gills....Of course, if that's what it takes to OWN THE PODIUM, then all is good, right?

We used to think that if you could make the International Standard (not some articially high made-in-Canada standard, manufactured by some highly-paid bureaucrat in Ottawa), then you had a chance to take on the World, and go for it...

And if you went into the Games ranked in the top 24 in the World (3 athletes/Country - who the f**k really cares what the 17th best Kenyan runs for the steeple?) then you had a shot at being at least TOP 16 in the World, which I think is pretty damn good, and absolutely worthy of the support of our Sport System. If you went in ranked a bit higher, you maybe have a shot at top 8, and of course only a very select few are in there with a PODIUM chance.

And that's the way it is, when the sport is competitive around the World, instead of just a few fairly small, mostly white, Countries, such as most of the sports that we think Canadian is OWNING THE PODIUM in.

Feel free to disagree, but please do it politely.

Thanks / Ron Bowker (the one and only) :)

rsb wrote:

Can we get rid of the personal stuff,

So you'll stop making derogatory comments about specific AC staffers or 'highly paid bureaucrats'?

It's a legitimate question to ask, IMHO, why we need to OWN THE PODIUM, in order for a sport to get funding?

Is that all that sport means to us? Really? You must be kidding, if you believe that.

You are looking at 'funding' with too much of a singular focus. It's not an absolute 'win or just quit and smoke dope', no matter how many times you and Skuj repeat that mantra.

Reality is there is a finite amount of funding for 'amateur' sport in Canada for high performance. We're not just talking track and field events, but ALL sports. If you are one of those so-called 'highly paid bureaucrats', what other criteria do you use to decide 'high performance' funding if not absolute 'high performance'? Fact is, a medal is a better 'high performance' than 20th place.

But, (and here's the big thing you guys are not seeing) there is more to sport in Canada than just high performance. There is tons of money going to grass-roots things that get thousands of kids and others active and involved in organized physical activity.

Just because someone has been turned down for funding so they can run full time doesn't mean they have to throw in the towel, there are plenty of other competitive opportunities available that are produced in part through government amateur sport funding. Some would say that anyone who would surrender their competitiveness just because they didn't get carding or access to a high performance centre isn't really the type of person we should be throwing public resources at anyways.

And let's be honest, was funding and sport bureaucracy really so ideal back in the glory days of the 60s, 70s and 80s? Anyone with any knowledge of the history of the sport knows there were even worse hassles with standards and team selections and a complete lack of funding 'back in the day'. Just read up on Drayton's problems trying to qualify for the 76 Games (yet he still somehow managed to run a time no one with many more resources today is able to come close to).

Point is, AC is not the be-all and end-all. They don't control or dictate athletes becoming the best in the world. Sure, they can have a minor influence here or there, but the real responsibility for getting to the top is on the athletes themselves and those who claim to be big supporters of the sport in Canada.

No one (including AC) is stopping you or anyone else from starting up Canada's answer to the OTC. Don't blame AC for that lack of inaction, just look in the mirror.

I agree the philosophy sucks, especially for distance runners. But it is the new reality. And until you get someone in OTP who is willing to change that philosophy (highly unlikely given the name of the program is OWN THE PODIUM and you yourself admit we are not going to do that!), then we are stuck with OTP objectives. So instead of getting on Letsrun and TnFnorth and just spewing rehtoic and vitrol towards AC why not provide some solutions? Why not start by posting your mythical 20/20 Plan you love to talk about without providing any substance. Reality check, it's 2010, not 1998, and last I checked Canada had two finalists in distance events in 2008 (5000m women, and 10,000m men which was a straight final anyway so not sure you can really count that unless you're mixing it up with the top guys, which was not case). The eastern Euopeans are still doped to the gills (see the # of Russian women nailed in the past couple of years), and now you have the African women to deal with as well, so I'm not sure how it's going to get any better any time soon. Why not deal with the current situation and try to find a solution other than just bitching that AC and OTP should turn the clocks back and go back to buisness as usually and continue to fund a declining disatnce program. Or, at least provide the worth to AC/OTP to resume funding of distance runners. As for playing polite, you might want to practice what you preach, because whenever someone doesn't agree with you you start spewing venom at them and complaining how they are turning your thread negative.

um yeah covered a lot of the important points but here's a few more...

we're posting on a message board. there isn't a solution to reach? also, i never personally attacked you, i know you have a decent history as a high-end coach and as a coach-in-training I can respect that. Skuj on the other hand...

As um yeah said you're looking at funding as the end-all, be-all. It isn't. And I do believe that. Sport is about winning, always has been, always will be.

Um yeah got this one too.

What does the AC have to do with this? Nothing is stopping athletes from finding good coaching, getting a cushy job at a running store and training with an independently funded training group! As for the university part, many athletes are too burnt out after university to keep running, this is a problem that the AC can do nothing about and which is more pronounced on distance runners, which may be a reason for AC's focus moving away from these events.

But we aren't now. Both because of the emergence of talent from Africa and a drop in talent here. Talent isn't the word I would like to use here, but it seems to fit best.

Pretty big claim. Anything to back it? And if it is true, then yes maybe our distance should try something along those lines (slightly tongue in cheek here).

My guess on this one is that AC got sick of paying for guys to get lapped twice at the Olympics or finish in the 100's at World XC. So they figured senior distance runners should get the money elsewhere, which really isn't THAT hard, and find meets which they are more competitive at. They still send Junior teams to world btw.

Do you really think that we have distance runners with a shot at top 16 in the World? Other than Bariu, who has AC's full support - which is much more than his much faster training partners Tegenkamp and Solinsky.

A lot of the Winter Games sports are much more popular than track worldwide. Hockey comes to mind here for some reason...

Feel free to disagree, but please do it politely.??

Give me a break.

Like the way you are always so polite...Threatening to tarnish peoples reputations, slandering their "initials"

You're an idiot.

Thanks for the comments guys - much appreciated, especially in terms of coming to grips with issues, as compared to personal stuff...Hmmm, where to start...I'll try and do it in point form - it helps me keep my ancient memory focused...

1) Hockey more popular than track? No way. Most of the world doesn't play hockey - there are probably a couple of dozen countries who take the sport seriously, or even play it at all. I have been at the World Championships of Track & Field several times, as a Canadian Coach, and there are usually about 180 Nations represented there. So I really disagree that Winter Sports are very popular at all, on any kind of worldwide basis. Which is not to say that I didn't absolutely jump for joy when Sid the Kid put the puck in the net, win it in overtime - I did, as I'm sure all Canadians did, but most of the Countries of the World didn't see it and could care less...

2) This is not about Athletics Canada, at least in my mind. I'm sure they have limited resources available from Government funding, and are doing their best to allot that within the PRISON of the OWN THE PODIUM mandate that they have to live within, or they will get even less Government funding.

3) I totally agree with those who say that we should not be limited by what AC has to deal with, but instead stretch the vision ourselves as to what is possible, within the greater fabric of Distance Running in Canada, and that needs to be a much larger and more inclusive vision than AC is able to provide, due to the aforementioned restrictions placed on them by some of the

Sport Canada / Government priorities.

4) As far as the sprinters being doped to the gills in Canada in the 1980's, perhaps you didn't get to watch the Dubin Commission inquiry, after Big Ben tested positive in Seoul. If you get a chance, watch it. Almost all of our sprint "success" was due to doping, or cheating, as some would call it ---- the brilliant Charlie Francis admitted it and detailed it in front of a Federally-appointed Judge...

5) Perhaps we don't have enough top 16 candidates in the distance running events at the moment. Will we get more, by ignoring those who may have that potential? The obvious answer is "no", so how do we develop more? That's what I would like to talk about...

Enough for now,

Ron Bowker

I'm not judging popularity by number of countries that participate. But we can debate that later.

I've been trying to make this point the entire discussion.

Again, agreed.

I don't really care about things like this. but we still have a rich history in sprints by athletes not doped to the gills.

As would I. I've made several suggestions. Skuj ignored them of course, maybe you could check them out.

rsb wrote:

5) Perhaps we don't have enough top 16 candidates in the distance running events at the moment. Will we get more, by ignoring those who may have that potential? The obvious answer is "no", so how do we develop more? That's what I would like to talk about...

Enough for now,

Ron Bowker

Who is on the radar right now in the distance ranks (other than Simon Bairu?)

Men:

No one in the 5000m (Sullivan hurt/retired?)

No one in the 10,000m (Coolsaet moving up and dealing with injuries)

No one in the Marathon (Gillis top ranked marathoner at 2:13, solid but hardly world class)

On the women's side:

Metcalf in the 5000m (Olympic finalist, injury prone)

No one in the 10,000m

No one in the Marathon (Quinn-Smith at 2:33, like Gillis, solid but not world class)

Who else is on the radar right now? (And that is a serious question)

pre32 wrote:

we're posting on a message board. there isn't a solution to reach? also, i never personally attacked you, i know you have a decent history as a high-end coach and as a coach-in-training I can respect that. Skuj on the other hand...

I cannot ignore this. And, I'm forced to lower myself to tooting a horn, something I hate to do, but I'll do it anyway.

I coached 2 juniors to National Championship titles in 5000m, and under my guidance, 2 juniors ran 3:44, 3:47 and an early 20-something ran 3:48.

Pre32, tell us about your coaching acomplishments. NOW.

thewhiz wrote:

rsb wrote:

5) Perhaps we don't have enough top 16 candidates in the distance running events at the moment. Will we get more, by ignoring those who may have that potential? The obvious answer is "no", so how do we develop more? That's what I would like to talk about...

Enough for now,

Ron Bowker

Who is on the radar right now in the distance ranks (other than Simon Bairu?)

Men:

No one in the 5000m (Sullivan hurt/retired?)

No one in the 10,000m (Coolsaet moving up and dealing with injuries)

No one in the Marathon (Gillis top ranked marathoner at 2:13, solid but hardly world class)

On the women's side:

Metcalf in the 5000m (Olympic finalist, injury prone)

No one in the 10,000m

No one in the Marathon (Quinn-Smith at 2:33, like Gillis, solid but not world class)

Who else is on the radar right now? (And that is a serious question)

But you see, this is what bugs me so much about this situation which AC seems to be basing it's decisions upon. It ignores history. It ignores the REASONS for the current state of affairs. It reminds me of Neville Chamberlin and his little piece of paper waving in the air...."peace in our time".....while Churchill shook his head in dismay. Chamberlin dealt with the NOW. Unfortunately.

We cannot just say "oh we suck, we better just turn our focus elsewhere". Sport is about finding solutions. I'm quite happy to join in a discussion about solutions in this thread, but so far, I have not been able to get my point above past my detractors, so what's the use?

You have not provide one single solution...the only thing you seem to be able to do is say that 'AC' has thrown in the towel. Ok, so even if AC has thrown in the towel, then do something about it. What happened to Kajacks, TOC, UTTC, Etobicoke Huskies, Montreal Olympique? All great clubs with great distance running histories, and now all a shell of their former greatness. I'm sorry, that is not the fault of AC no matter how you want to slice it. The only group that has figured out to be a viable, sustainable training group outside the AC HP model is Guelph. Maybe if you got off the message boards for a while and took a cue from DST you could be a soloution to the distance running problem in Canada. As it stands right now, you contributions amount to nothing...even AC has contributed more than that to distance running this year. As soon as Goulet left for AC, the McGill series all but disappeared. Where are the so called great leaders we have in this sport of distance running...oh, that's right, they are stuck in talking about events of 20 years ago on the message boards. Get out and do something proactive to save the sport!

Skuj wrote:

Sport is about finding solutions. I'm quite happy to join in a discussion about solutions in this thread, but so far, I have not been able to get my point above past my detractors, so what's the use?

Maybe if you get past the fact that an intelligent discussion/debate is going to consist of varying opinions and ideas you might be of some use in this discussion.

As it stands right now, you can seem to get past the idea that, OMG, someone might not agree with me!

That and the fact that you have not listed one viable solution. At least your detractors, in the midst of slamming you have actually put forth some worthwhile arguements that back up their opinions.

Hey whiz, is this your "solution"? (You've just lectured me in a couple of posts, so I take you back to this. I've spent 100000hrs busting my ass to try and make distance running in Canada better. WHAT ARE YOU SOLUTIONS, WHIZ? Esp given THIS post! Thanks.)

thewhiz wrote:

Who is on the radar right now in the distance ranks (other than Simon Bairu?)

Men:

No one in the 5000m (Sullivan hurt/retired?)

No one in the 10,000m (Coolsaet moving up and dealing with injuries)

No one in the Marathon (Gillis top ranked marathoner at 2:13, solid but hardly world class)

On the women's side:

Metcalf in the 5000m (Olympic finalist, injury prone)

No one in the 10,000m

No one in the Marathon (Quinn-Smith at 2:33, like Gillis, solid but not world class)

Who else is on the radar right now? (And that is a serious question)

While Whiz looks in the mirror, I admit that my main thrust thus far has been one of philosphy.....ie we must never EVER accept this crazy notion that we don't have the talent, we don't have the means to compete with the best, on the world stage. To accept the opposite of this is to submit, resign, look towards OTP philosophy.

Several people in this thread, and AC as well, thru recent statements and actions, do not see it this way. What's the use of talking specifics when several of you in this thread do not think that we can ever be there, at the top, no matter what level of support/leadership is available?

Skuj wrote:

Skuj wrote:

....2 juniors ran 3:44, 3:47 and an early 20-something ran 3:48.

Ooops...they were all arond 20-22 when they did this, my memory is sometimes foggy.

Still, I can't wait to hear from pre32 about his coaching accomplishments.

No accomplishments, sorry. I'm still trying to build my own running career.

Please give some proof of these performances.