straightshooter wrote:
Like most sports, I don't think a tie should be available at a championship. The jump off should be mandatory.
Only if they keep going at the height they missed. Moving the bar back down to a lower height is bush.
-
55
-
They made the right choice but athletes shouldn't be put into this spot.
They should keep jumping per rules.
Rules need to be changed.
People are now hating on McEwen and Kerr because they didn't decide to share.
McEwen is getting vile comments all over the internet.
This is Seb Coe's fault. Fix this.
171 -
Honest question wrote:
Seems weird to not take the gold sitting in front of you
$50,000 vs $25,000
The commentators mentioned it- some of the competitors said that.
10 -
Gutf wrote:
Winthorpe53 wrote:
It’s not selfishness. He wanted to be outright champion.
It took courage.
but the reality is that he gave up SO much in that one moment.
I'm thinking of it this way:
You are not splitting a pie. There are two pies and you each get one, and the other person having one takes nothing away from you.
If you split: You are a gold medalist/Olympic champion, you get the prize money (perhaps divided but you will more than make up for that in other earnings as a champion), the sponsor bonuses, higher appearance fees, etc.
The other guy gets those too, but at NO expense to you. There are two pies.
If you jump off and win, you get what you already had and little more (except you are the only one with it and the prize money is greater). You barely get more pie. You simply deny someone else a pie.
If you lose, you just served yourself a much, much smaller pie.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.123 -
They should both get silver and the gold passes on to the xx woman who got beat by the xy boxer.
15 -
Against Ties wrote:
This is Seb Coe's fault. Fix this.
They did fix it. They both should walk away with Gold medals.
One athlete F-ed it up.
45 -
KERR ASKED FOR THE JUMPOFF, MCEWEN WANTED TO SHARE.
jumpoffs are kinda lame, but sharing gold is an imperfect result as well. they should have many more chances at the next height imo.
83 -
RossiCheated wrote:
Gutf wrote:
but the reality is that he gave up SO much in that one moment.
I'm thinking of it this way:
You are not splitting a pie. There are two pies and you each get one, and the other person having one takes nothing away from you.
If you split: You are a gold medalist/Olympic champion, you get the prize money (perhaps divided but you will more than make up for that in other earnings as a champion), the sponsor bonuses, higher appearance fees, etc.
The other guy gets those too, but at NO expense to you. There are two pies.
If you jump off and win, you get what you already had and little more (except you are the only one with it and the prize money is greater). You barely get more pie. You simply deny someone else a pie.
If you lose, you just served yourself a much, much smaller pie.
That’s just it. The event is the ‘high jump’. They both jumped the same maximum height, with the same number of attempts, and then failed to progress.
The ‘tie break’ involved what was effectively a sudden death endurance competition.
41 -
Starr wrote:
Now we can talk about him as a competitive Silver medalist for the rest of his life instead of calling him an Olympic Gold medalist.
I guess that’s cooler?
I can see that, but I think it’s better that the jump-off occurred. It settled any doubt as to who was the better jumper that day.
30 -
nysouthrunner wrote:
KERR ASKED FOR THE JUMPOFF, MCEWEN WANTED TO SHARE.
jumpoffs are kinda lame, but sharing gold is an imperfect result as well. they should have many more chances at the next height imo.
Source?
Media I’ve seen is reporting the opposite.
30 -
Because they are both avid readers of LetsRun and know that it they decide to share the gold, they will get slammed here.
61 -
According to McEwen, it was the 27-year-old New Zealander who had suggested they press on with competition on another hot night in the French capital.
“Talking to Hamish, man, I’ve been around him for a long time now,” said McEwen, who finished 12th in the Tokyo final. “We’re good buddies, good opponents, and good jumpers when we jump together. He said he wanted to face off, and I was all for it.
131 -
"I have so much respect for what they did in Tokyo. But I always thought that to add to the story and to be able to be given the chance to actually do the jump-off would be so amazing," Kerr said. "I knew straight away that we were going to make history, and we did that."
170 -
$50 grand to winner from WA, so became a $25,000 bet from each
This post was edited 20 seconds after it was posted.10 -
RossiCheated wrote:
In 2009, though, a new rule was introduced where the jump off was made optional, which meant that athletes could share the top spot if it was mutually agreed upon.
1) The rule should not be optional.
2) Thank God, they didn't tie.
3) You guys may have it all wrong. Everyone is trying to blame it on the greedy American. Here is how it went down according to McEwen.
“Talking to Hamish, man, I’ve been around him for a long time now. We’re good buddies, good opponents, and good jumpers when we jump together. He said he wanted to face off, and I was all for it,” explained McEwen rather simply afterwards. “We faced off until the last battle and he came out on top, so salute, congratulations to him.”
Now I haven't seen a quote from Kerr.
164 -
rojo wrote:
RossiCheated wrote:
In 2009, though, a new rule was introduced where the jump off was made optional, which meant that athletes could share the top spot if it was mutually agreed upon.
1) The rule should not be optional.
2) Thank God, they didn't tie.
3) You guys may have it all wrong. Everyone is trying to blame it on the greedy American. Here is how it went down according to McEwen.
“Talking to Hamish, man, I’ve been around him for a long time now. We’re good buddies, good opponents, and good jumpers when we jump together. He said he wanted to face off, and I was all for it,” explained McEwen rather simply afterwards. “We faced off until the last battle and he came out on top, so salute, congratulations to him.”
Now I haven't seen a quote from Kerr.
I was joking about the money.
00 -
rojo wrote:
1) The rule should not be optional.
2) Thank God, they didn't tie.
3) You guys may have it all wrong. Everyone is trying to blame it on the greedy American. Here is how it went down according to McEwen.
“Talking to Hamish, man, I’ve been around him for a long time now. We’re good buddies, good opponents, and good jumpers when we jump together. He said he wanted to face off, and I was all for it,” explained McEwen rather simply afterwards. “We faced off until the last battle and he came out on top, so salute, congratulations to him.”
Now I haven't seen a quote from Kerr.
I provided a quote from Kerr two posts above yours.
33 -
It all worked out.
Good show!As far as people saying the rules should force them to keep going, how do you do that?
If they both decline to jump anymore, what are you going to do?
52 -
It’s clear from the footage that once Hamish was faced with the chance of sharing gold - he was happy to share which is smart. It was McEwen who wanted the jump off. Once he won gold, he was being gracious to McEwen (and trying to back his own previous comments about not sharing the gold). The truth is, anyone who would throw away a gold in their hand is a fool! All that history cares about (and the sponsors & the world) is that you are an Olympic champion - end of
311 -
As they were deciding they should have posted on LRC and consulted with you geniuses.
41
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.