Why not just have a separate prize purse for folks from Sweden? A lot of US races have American only prize money. I think someone said this will be good for Swedish runners and motivate them to faster times. Bring in the best competition by not excluding runners and this will pull people to faster times. Seems like an easy fix.
That article is just rediculous. On the other hand, running needs all the headlights it can get.
Neither scandinavian or african elite runners gain from the current situation, were we are so incredeably far behind. Those who work with elite running in sweden (an probeably other parts of europe as well) must be willing to try new things. Running as a sport in sweden is huge but the intrest for elite running is close to zero, I'm sure that less than 1 out of a 100 knows who dennis kimetto is (compare that to nordic skiing which is hugely popular to follow).
I am glad Sweden changed their mind
http://www.thelocal.se/20150423/only-nordic-winners-get-stockholm-race-cash-prize
A good way to discourage interest in the sport of running or to ruin a city reputation is to engage in acts that can be perceived as xenophobia.
Fightfor15 wrote:
Why not just have a separate prize purse for folks from Sweden? A lot of US races have American only prize money. I think someone said this will be good for Swedish runners and motivate them to faster times. Bring in the best competition by not excluding runners and this will pull people to faster times. Seems like an easy fix.
Money is what a lot of nordic runners need to be able train and rest in a good way. I don't think they will be running a lot faster in this one race due to the cash prizes but it will lead to better training conditions for some runners.
Stockholm runner wrote:
Running as a sport in sweden is huge but the intrest for elite running is close to zero, I'm sure that less than 1 out of a 100 knows who dennis kimetto is (compare that to nordic skiing which is hugely popular to follow).
Exactly. Nobody in Scandinavia cares if some african theyve never heard of comes and win the marathon. Much more likely to create interest in the race and the runner if hes local or from another close by nation. A marathon where top scandianvians compete against each other for the victory? Far, far more intersesting for the people watching the race.
Barakus Obama wrote:
Exactly. Nobody in Scandinavia cares if some african theyve never heard of comes and win the marathon. Much more likely to create interest in the race and the runner if hes local or from another close by nation. A marathon where top scandianvians compete against each other for the victory? Far, far more intersesting for the people watching the race.
That seems appealing at first. But when they see the mediocrity, they will quickly tune out. Last year the top "Swede" was actually an Ethiopian refugee who finished in 2:25. Without East Africans to push the pace, this could go to 2:30
I understand Swedes like to see other Swedes win but I suspect they also do not want their marathon to be mediocre. Imagine a city marathon where the winner clocks 2:30. I would think many fans and sponsors would tune out. I mean surely Swedes know mediocrity when they see it.
I also suspect that Swedes do not want to be seen as xenophobes. That alone would turn fans and sponsors away. I suspect this because the Swedes have changed their mind. And they changed it not because East Africans complained but because of a public backlash.
Why do Marathon directors even care if they have the fastest runners as long as they get a high # of participants? Do the mid-packers and back-of-packers really care about who won the marathon - isn't it about your own individual accomplishment?
Why not use that prize monies to charity or to lower the entrance fee for the rest of the runners? Instead we all subsidize big cash monies to East Africans.
Barakus Obama wrote:
Exactly. Nobody in Scandinavia cares if some african theyve never heard of comes and win the marathon. Much more likely to create interest in the race and the runner if hes local or from another close by nation. A marathon where top scandianvians compete against each other for the victory? Far, far more intersesting for the people watching the race.
Exactly. In addition around 40 Kenyan athletes have tested positive for PEDs over the last 2 years:
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/08/wilson-kipsang-insists-most-kenyan-runners-are-clean-of-dopingFrom the article:
"Around 40 Kenyan athletes have been banned in the past two years, including the 2013 and 2014 Boston and Chicago marathon winner Rita Jeptoo,"
What other countries have had 40 distance runners banned over such a short time period?
Furthermore, countries like Ethiopia don't even have an appropriate drug-testing system in place!!
I am not interested in following a race where there could be the possibility that the leading runners could well be doping and effectively stealing the prize money. It would be much more interesting to watch a race with the top Scandinavians as they do not have this cloud of suspicion of doping around them. And I am not even Scandinavian!
What would happen to the NBA if they allowed Chinese teams to play and Chinese teams won every game?
I think it is fine to make a local runner prize. how does a mid major race benefit from foreigners winning? Records are not broken, does it draw more participation?
How about prize money?
I get "price" money but who cares about that anyway. It's PRIZE money that the Africans want.
Barakus Obama wrote:
Exactly. Nobody in Scandinavia cares if some african theyve never heard of comes and win the marathon. Much more likely to create interest in the race and the runner if hes local or from another close by nation. A marathon where top scandianvians compete against each other for the victory? Far, far more intersesting for the people watching the race.
^^^This^^
The race promoter gets far more out of keeping the race "local." It seems like they are connected to what makes the race profitable, lots of amateur runners who are mostly nearby and then selling that to sponsors.
Meanwhile, the major marathon org is almost identical to cycling. Someone "wins" a race, then years later it is revealed it was all a big fraud.
Jerry Cann wrote:
Barakus Obama wrote:Exactly. Nobody in Scandinavia cares if some african theyve never heard of comes and win the marathon. Much more likely to create interest in the race and the runner if hes local or from another close by nation. A marathon where top scandianvians compete against each other for the victory? Far, far more intersesting for the people watching the race.
That seems appealing at first. But when they see the mediocrity, they will quickly tune out. Last year the top "Swede" was actually an Ethiopian refugee who finished in 2:25. Without East Africans to push the pace, this could go to 2:30
I understand Swedes like to see other Swedes win but I suspect they also do not want their marathon to be mediocre. Imagine a city marathon where the winner clocks 2:30. I would think many fans and sponsors would tune out. I mean surely Swedes know mediocrity when they see it.
I also suspect that Swedes do not want to be seen as xenophobes. That alone would turn fans and sponsors away. I suspect this because the Swedes have changed their mind. And they changed it not because East Africans complained but because of a public backlash.
Maybe. But I think you could as easily argue that with the prospect of winning a fair few good Scandanavian runners will enter and push each other to better times than they would if they were back in 17th place. Obviously that's not a given but it's definitely possible and it might be interesting to spend some time seeing what really does happen.
As to Swedes not wanting their marathon to be mediocre, again, maybe. In all the excitement last year that followed having an American winner at Boston again after thirty years I don't recall anyone saying, "You know, his time wasn't worth getting excited about." I don't think the general public distinguishes very much in terms of race times. That's why the guy you work with who ran 5:32 gets about as many "ooohs" and "aaahs" from your coworkers as you did for your 2:35. So I think having a Scandanvian winner, preferably a Swedish one, in 2:20 might get generate more excitement and publicity than a 2:12 African would.
Hey you Swedes!!
Don't feel too bad..most people in Boston don't even know-or care-who won the race last Monday anyway.
HRE wrote:
Jerry Cann wrote:That seems appealing at first. But when they see the mediocrity, they will quickly tune out. Last year the top "Swede" was actually an Ethiopian refugee who finished in 2:25. Without East Africans to push the pace, this could go to 2:30
I understand Swedes like to see other Swedes win but I suspect they also do not want their marathon to be mediocre. Imagine a city marathon where the winner clocks 2:30. I would think many fans and sponsors would tune out. I mean surely Swedes know mediocrity when they see it.
I also suspect that Swedes do not want to be seen as xenophobes. That alone would turn fans and sponsors away. I suspect this because the Swedes have changed their mind. And they changed it not because East Africans complained but because of a public backlash.
Maybe. But I think you could as easily argue that with the prospect of winning a fair few good Scandanavian runners will enter and push each other to better times than they would if they were back in 17th place. Obviously that's not a given but it's definitely possible and it might be interesting to spend some time seeing what really does happen.
As to Swedes not wanting their marathon to be mediocre, again, maybe. In all the excitement last year that followed having an American winner at Boston again after thirty years I don't recall anyone saying, "You know, his time wasn't worth getting excited about." I don't think the general public distinguishes very much in terms of race times. That's why the guy you work with who ran 5:32 gets about as many "ooohs" and "aaahs" from your coworkers as you did for your 2:35. So I think having a Scandanvian winner, preferably a Swedish one, in 2:20 might get generate more excitement and publicity than a 2:12 African would.
Completely agree HRE.
I often find following college races more interesting than some international races, with a bunch of runners with no personality, more interesting even though the time is slower.
I'd be much more interested in watching the stockholm marathon seeing some scandinavians battling it out rather than a few random second tier africans win it easily.
Most of you are missing the point.
Never mind the east africans. Thing is, if lets say, a decent marathoner from England decides to take the cheap 1,5 hour flight over to Stockholm and participate in the race and win (which is very likely, since the Scandinavian runners can't even run under 2:20) he would have gotten ZERO prize money.
This is the problem here. Nothing else.
HRE wrote:
Maybe. But I think you could as easily argue that with the prospect of winning a fair few good Scandanavian runners will enter and push each other to better times than they would if they were back in 17th place. Obviously that's not a given but it's definitely possible and it might be interesting to spend some time seeing what really does happen.
As to Swedes not wanting their marathon to be mediocre, again, maybe. In all the excitement last year that followed having an American winner at Boston again after thirty years I don't recall anyone saying, "You know, his time wasn't worth getting excited about." I don't think the general public distinguishes very much in terms of race times. That's why the guy you work with who ran 5:32 gets about as many "ooohs" and "aaahs" from your coworkers as you did for your 2:35. So I think having a Scandanvian winner, preferably a Swedish one, in 2:20 might get generate more excitement and publicity than a 2:12 African would.
There is no way 2:28 runners will push each other to run world class times. And funding is not the issue because runners who have potential in Sweden are funded by SOC.
I believe Americans want a winner but they want the winner to be a legitimate winner i.e. win by running a world class time and beat other world class runners. Meb is a world class runner. I do not think Boston or New York will ever create a xenophobic style selection system. Neither will Stockolm clearly.
The general public may not distinguish times. But once the media starts reporting that the mediocre times are because of xenophobic principles, the public will take notice. They will tune out and so will sponsors. Nobody wants to associate with mediocrity when it is caused by xenophobia.
And I think most of you are trying to speak on behalf of the Swedes saying the like a race with locals better. This simply is not true. The organizers backtracked because of the public backlash. And I repeat, the backlash was from Swedish fans not bloggers or the media or the East Africans.
"If"?????
Kingkong wrote:
Most of you are missing the point.
Never mind the east africans. Thing is, if lets say, a decent marathoner from England decides to take the cheap 1,5 hour flight over to Stockholm and participate in the race and win (which is very likely, since the Scandinavian runners can't even run under 2:20) he would have gotten ZERO prize money.
This is the problem here. Nothing else.
That's not a problem.
Promoter gives the money to athletes that might actually help promote more attendance at his race. Nobody is going to remember the podium anyway.
You could be right, but the 2:12 Kenyans aren't going to pull the 2:28 marathoners to world class times either.