You left off the part where Sydney ran the fastest women's 400m in nearly 40 years, breaking a major barrier, registering the second-fastest time ever, and coming just 0.18 shy of the world record.
While that is an amazing time and a memorable moment, it's not a WR (yet, she'll get there) and she was not the only woman breaking the 48 barrier this year (Paulino). In the end she ran a really fast time to become World champion, but the main accolade is the World champion part. Don't worry though, SML can still win this and she'll probably win this award (again) when she breaks that WR in the next (few) year(s).
My point was that compared to Chebet and MJW both Bol and SML have performed less, but only one is ever mentioned. I'm just saying that if Bol is there because of popularity, it's also the case for SML.
Yes, that's a fair point. The point that I'm making is I think most people view Bol's advancement to the final round as more egregious, precisely because Sydney's performance in Tokyo was so amazing while Bol's was excellent but relatively ho-hum. At least with Sydney, the argument can be made that her 47.78 was better than MJW's 10.61. The same cannot be said about Bol's 51.54.
And, to my other point, Bol's inclusion as a finalist is confusing because it's so inconsistent with how the voting went last year when Alfred was a finalist. It doesn't make sense that Alfred was a finalist last year, but MJW isn't a finalist this year despite having a better 2025 than Alfred's 2024. With Sydney, at least there's consistency.
To be clear, I think MJW should have been a finalist over Sydney (and Chebet should have been the other finalist), but there's a decent case that can be made for Sydney. I think most of us here agree there isn't a legitimate case for Bol. That's why she's being singled out in this thread.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
To be clear, I think MJW should have been a finalist over Sydney (and Chebet should have been the other finalist), but there's a decent case that can be made for Sydney. I think most of us here agree there isn't a legitimate case for Bol. That's why she's being singled out in this thread.
I don't think there's a decent case for SML or Bol as finalists if it was a competition for best athlete. You can put SML above Bol for that fast time and ignore Bol's 5th DL title, that's your opinion and that's fine, but SML (like Bol) still didn't perform as well as Chebet and MJW and that is what's the argument here.
To be clear, I think MJW should have been a finalist over Sydney (and Chebet should have been the other finalist), but there's a decent case that can be made for Sydney. I think most of us here agree there isn't a legitimate case for Bol. That's why she's being singled out in this thread.
I don't think there's a decent case for SML or Bol as finalists if it was a competition for best athlete. You can put SML above Bol for that fast time and ignore Bol's 5th DL title, that's your opinion and that's fine, but SML (like Bol) still didn't perform as well as Chebet and MJW and that is what's the argument here.
Yes, I understand your point. You're saying that neither Sydney nor Bol deserve to be finalists over Chebet and MJW, so there should be outcry about both. I'm saying most people think Bol's advancement to the final round is more egregious, which is why she's getting the attention.
Year end awards are jive bs marketing gimmicks to appease the target clientele. They don't represent reality. In the case of WA it's the upper class diginitaries of the 200 national federations. In the case of DL it's in 14 ruling national families and Nike's empty shoe sale joke failure. In the case of NCAA it's the hundreds of ADs. In the case of USATF it's Nike Beaverton. Don't take awards shows seriously.
World athletics opened up voting on October 13th and has been posting the link to vote repeatedly. Let me guess, you are one of those that didn't vote and are now crying about the outcome. While MJW is amazing and now very popular in the USA, Femke is a global phenomenon and WORLD Athletics is a GLOBAL organization. Far more track & field fans globally voted for Femke and most don't even know who MJW is. Yeah, MJW probably deserves it more, but when you open it up to the public to vote, it then becomes a popularity contest and MJW has no chance against Femke or Sydney. And if your excuse for not voting is that you didn't know about it, that just speaks volumes about your "journalism." You certainly should be following World Athletics and you should have used your platform to post the information and encourage others to participate. You know, try to grow the sport through engagement rather than doing nothing and complaining about the outcome afterwards.
Dumb post. What makes you think Rojo didn't vote? Did you even see the vote tally, reproduced on the first page of the thread? You think you can infer if Rojo voted from that? Lol.
It becomes a problem for World Athletics if the process of deciding the finalist and eventual winner becomes too detached from performance. And this year is an example of that happening. The award loses credibility when this happens.
If World Athletics didn't include the public vote as a contributory factor, then fans would be moaning that it's even more biased or corrupt than it is now.
But WA have included a public vote, and for whatever reason, the public have voted Bol above athletes some think are more deserving. And that's a big % of the overall vote.
WA are trying hard to be more inclusive with fans, and as implied above, I actually wonder how many people on these boards voted. I know I didn't, so I aint moaning.
The AOY has always been questionable. I'm guessing with Bol, it's not just about her World Title, but all those DL wins - and you cannot argue with WA there; they position the DL as THE elite circuit & want to promote it - and the fact that she is therefore (perceived) more accessible. Linked to that is she is still in the public's psyche because of her relay exploits: let's not forget that in a post Budapest Survey, the women's 4x4 relay was voted the best event by the public; similarly the mixed 4x4 was from Paris 24. The public love a seemingly impossible relay comeback.
I also think WA are starting to tread a little more carefully re public perception & Kenya, especially since the Chepngetich positive which was, quite frankly, massively embarrassing for WA.
The above is my thoughts on why I think Bol is shortlisted. My personal view is no, neither Bol nor SML deserve to be on the final 2. But I get why.
If World Athletics didn't include the public vote as a contributory factor, then fans would be moaning that it's even more biased or corrupt than it is now.
But WA have included a public vote, and for whatever reason, the public have voted Bol above athletes some think are more deserving. And that's a big % of the overall vote.
WA are trying hard to be more inclusive with fans, and as implied above, I actually wonder how many people on these boards voted. I know I didn't, so I aint moaning.
The AOY has always been questionable. I'm guessing with Bol, it's not just about her World Title, but all those DL wins - and you cannot argue with WA there; they position the DL as THE elite circuit & want to promote it - and the fact that she is therefore (perceived) more accessible. Linked to that is she is still in the public's psyche because of her relay exploits: let's not forget that in a post Budapest Survey, the women's 4x4 relay was voted the best event by the public; similarly the mixed 4x4 was from Paris 24. The public love a seemingly impossible relay comeback.
I also think WA are starting to tread a little more carefully re public perception & Kenya, especially since the Chepngetich positive which was, quite frankly, massively embarrassing for WA.
The above is my thoughts on why I think Bol is shortlisted. My personal view is no, neither Bol nor SML deserve to be on the final 2. But I get why.
A few points to consider about SML:
1) She broke a 42 year old World Championship Record.
2) The performance was the 2nd fastest ever over 400m and given tbe cloud over doping in the 1980s, the real world record.
.3) The performance in a WC final was not in her main event.
1) She broke a 42 year old World Championship Record.
2) The performance was the 2nd fastest ever over 400m and given tbe cloud over doping in the 1980s, the real world record.
.3) The performance in a WC final was not in her main event.
1) Most people don't know and/or care about Championship records. 2) Second fastest ever is super impressive, but a WR is just a better sell for the general public. Also, most people don't even know the WR time, let alone the (doping) history. 3) She switched from the 400mH to the 400m, which makes it her main event.
The above isn't meant to dismiss one of, if not the greatest female track athlete of this generation. But since it's a popularity contest, public perception matters. Sure, quite a few people will vote based on results, but the general public will simply vote on who they like or know better.
1) She broke a 42 year old World Championship Record.
2) The performance was the 2nd fastest ever over 400m and given tbe cloud over doping in the 1980s, the real world record.
.3) The performance in a WC final was not in her main event.
1) Most people don't know and/or care about Championship records. 2) Second fastest ever is super impressive, but a WR is just a better sell for the general public. Also, most people don't even know the WR time, let alone the (doping) history. 3) She switched from the 400mH to the 400m, which makes it her main event.
The above isn't meant to dismiss one of, if not the greatest female track athlete of this generation. But since it's a popularity contest, public perception matters. Sure, quite a few people will vote based on results, but the general public will simply vote on who they like or know better.
You're right about public perception, but the public vote was only worth 25 percent of the result. That means there were also a lot of people on the World Athletics Council (50 percent of the result) and the "World Athletics Family" (the remaining 25 percent) who thought Sydney was deserving. Those folks are more likely to be influenced by the three factors named by Chafford1.
Of all the female track athletes, Sydney produced the biggest "Wow!" moment of the year. Many of her voters probably remembered that when making their selection.
You're right about public perception, but the public vote was only worth 25 percent of the result. That means there were also a lot of people on the World Athletics Council (50 percent of the result) and the "World Athletics Family" (the remaining 25 percent) who thought Sydney was deserving.
I agree that the "WA Council" and "WA Family" should be more focused on actual achievements, but I don't think they're the experts you'd like them to be.
They could have just said that 75% is decided by WA experts, but they chose to split them up into 2 groups and out of those only "Council" seems to hint at knowledgeable people (but doesn't guarantee it).
I consider the "Family" part to just be an extension of the general public, which would make the votes 50/50 if you actually believe that the "Council" people are all knowledgeable and don't have favorites.