Flo'da boy wrote:
At the ancient Olympics the main (and at first only) event was the Stade, which at the stadium in Athens measured roughly 190m
The only ancient "running" event. Didn't they do naked wrestling too though?
"HERCULES HERCULES HERCULES" -The Nutty Professor
The 5,000 and the 10,000 are redundant but lets be honest, the Marathon is, too. Someone like Kipsang, the Mutais etc would be great contenders for the 5,000 if they put their mind into it and trained for it.
If you want to truly test who are the best sprinters, middle distance and long distance runners you end up with:
100m
800m
Marathon
If you go even further and say you just want to see who is fastest and who has the most endurance you end up with:
100m
Marathon
Add the long jump and Javelin and you got a well rounded T&F program.
Add the quadrathlon (single/team) and we're done:
100m
Marathon
long jump
javelin
quadrathlon (100m, Mile, javelin, long jump) (single/team)
i like this a lot
Nutella1 wrote:
The 5,000 and the 10,000 are redundant but lets be honest, the Marathon is, too. Someone like Kipsang, the Mutais etc would be great contenders for the 5,000 if they put their mind into it and trained for it.
If you want to truly test who are the best sprinters, middle distance and long distance runners you end up with:
100m
800m
Marathon
If you go even further and say you just want to see who is fastest and who has the most endurance you end up with:
100m
Marathon
Add the long jump and Javelin and you got a well rounded T&F program.
Add the quadrathlon (single/team) and we're done:
100m
Marathon
long jump
javelin
quadrathlon (100m, Mile, javelin, long jump) (single/team)
Ok OP
Dick Pound?
What a joke.
Except for the 100m sprint, T&F is a total snooze fest at the olympics. I'd rather look at some of the beach volleyball hotties.
It's time to get rid off most T&F disciplines and then introduce CrossFit. Man would the ratings go through the roof when that happens.
The days of T&F are numbered. Accept it. FACT.
I'd get rid of the following events
1st-100m (the 200m incorporates both speed and some endurance)
2nd-Javelin (although plays well on TV)
3rd-10,000m (far to long of a race)
4th-Discus (from a spectator point of view it is too similar to Hammer, and the Hammer plays better on TV)
5th-only one Race walk event (20k on the track, 50k is too similar to the Marathon)
****
Steeple needs to me modified to make it different from the 5k, currently to similar.
Blahbaba wrote:
I'd get rid of the following events
1st-100m (the 200m incorporates both speed and some endurance)
2nd-Javelin (although plays well on TV)
3rd-10,000m (far to long of a race)
4th-Discus (from a spectator point of view it is too similar to Hammer, and the Hammer plays better on TV)
5th-only one Race walk event (20k on the track, 50k is too similar to the Marathon)
****
Steeple needs to me modified to make it different from the 5k, currently to similar.
Yeah getting rid of the 100m. If you're gonna troll at least be funny.
All you people banging on swimming look like idiots. Swimming, like track, is one of the showcase events of the olympics. It is a niche spectator sport and an enormously popular youth participation sport. It has far more in common w T&F then it has different.
rojo wrote:
It's interesting that Coe, who has insinuated in recent months that track needs to work on its presentation was very vocal in his defense of both the triple jump and race-walking.
Dick Pound said:Canadian IOC member Dick Pound, a former Olympic swimmer, was quick to throw out some suggestions.
When asked what sports the Olympics could live without, he told Reuters "Synchronised swimming... and maybe triple jump.
"Everybody has to share the load for the good of the Olympics."
but Seb Coe responded:
Seb Coe said:
I'll let Dick make observations about his own sport and I will make them about mine, and triple jump is a sacrosanct sport in track and field," Coe said.
But Coe, who last week launched his campaign to become president of world athletics' governing body, the IAAF, said he was not surprised track and field was already being mentioned.
"We have 47 different disciplines so it is inevitable," he told reporters....
Coe also leapt to the defence of race walking which has been questioned in the past.
"Race walking is a sport that is covered in China, Russia, large parts of Central America, Southeast Asia, Italy and Spain. It is a very important part of our sport," he said.
I'd sort of just assumed his recent comments meant we should get rid of some track events.
It's interesting to see how track is viewed by others. I always think all of the ridiculous swimming events are out of control (how many relays do they have?) but then they probably view the 47 aspects of track as absurd in similar fashion.
Getting rid of "race walking" would free up a tremendous time slot (organizational and T.V.) to bring in other sports more in tune with younger audiences around the paying/viewership world. Synchronized "swimming" and "race walking" are NOT sport disciplines with wide-spread appeal/participation in the paying/viewership world. If the "modern" pentathlon still exists, get rid of that too for the same fundamental reasons. The logistics and cost to furnish that antiquated compilation of military disciplines must be considerable. Then again, where there is considerable cost to furnish... there must be considerable money to be made as well as medals and IOC votes to be "considered".
Thankfully the two leading candidates for the IAAF presidency are modern era athletes, past world record holders, Olympic medalists... Olympians. A past Olympian will have the best interest of the athlete in mind. The foundation of Olympic ideals in ones thought process, coupled with organizational and political intelligence, business acumen, honesty and integrity is expected from the new leader of the IAAF. The sport of Track & Field hinges on this. Changing the perception of Track & Field is something leadership can do. If done well, the spin-off will be to gain participation, viewership, and sponsorship - all of which our sport desperately needs.
Imagine trying to cross a river or stream that is, say, 55 feet across, where there are two rocks in the river, the first 18' from the bank, the second, 36' from the bank. Triple jump makes perfect sense.
10000m is not redundant. Some guys are stronger at 5000m and you don't get 1500m guys trying to win championship 10000m races. Steeple is a tough event, quite natural in that you have to get over barriers and water jumps, just as you might in running in the countryside, and it is very entertaining to watch. But I would get rid of the race walking because it is impossible to police and a bizarre and unpopular event, and I would restore the cross country running events. Other events to cut would be rhythmic gymnastics and synchronized swimming (I see this being taught at my local pool--what a strange business that is).
I don't know about the Olympics but I wouldn't mind seeing the triple jump go away at the high school level. It's tough to find kids that want to do it and it's almost a guaranteed way to injure a kid. If they didn't have shin splints before, after a couple of triple jump practices they will. The forces on the feet and legs in the triple are enormous, way to much for a growing teenager IMO.
Cutting events by popularity seems like a zero sum game in track and field. I always find it amusing every year at the Colorado High School state champs when the stands empty out after the 100m finals on Saturday and most of the news cameras leave. Judging by the news coverage that's about how most people feel about Olympic track and field once the world's fastest man has been crowned, the amount of hype around the sport seems to dwindle after that, unless there is a really compelling story around an athlete in another event.
If you want to get the general public excited about track and field events I think the pole vaulters have the right idea with events like street vaults and vaulting events in malls etc. If anything the jumping events have an advantage here because they are compact, it would be easy to set up a street long, high or triple jump, or set them up in a mall or some other crowded environment. Standing right next to the pit when someone pole vaults 18 feet or long jumps over 25 feet is an amazing experience. I like the street sprints I've seen videos of on the web, you could do some sprints and hurdles in one event like that. Having events off the track in unique venues gives people something to get excited about and brings the sport to the public.
dgjhfdhh wrote:
I'm not sold the solution is cutting events from sports. People will watch NASCAR drive 100's of laps for hours, they'll watch an all day golf event, espn will report news on football players that is arguably just gossip. Quality and quantity are valuable.
I wanna see an analysis of what will really be gained from cutting events from the sport in connection to why people aren't watching the Olympics. Cause I don't think anything would be gained.
If someone doesn't watch the Olympics before, why would they know or care if we get rid of 5 events, that everything was already going to be put in a 2 hour block. Track already sucks because so much time is wasted between events, now there would be even less events, and more TV chatter.
My theory of what will make track good, build up support outside of the Olympics, so it isn't something relevant only every 4 years. The governing body of usatf needs to do more, individual people create meets, how crazy is that. Track is like the wild wild west, anyone can make a track meet and professional athletes will show up if there is prize money. We need a league, with teams, where the team pays the athlete, not the shoe company. Ironically even shoe companies see the value in teams, Nike Oregon project, bowermen, OTC.
If it was 8 teams around the US, 4 athletes an event. Could have duel meets where all 8 lanes filed. And a USATF championship with 32 athletes. Athletes could actually describe what they're training for outside of the Olympics. People Could actually regularly go to track meets that aren't college. It would create value for good professional athletes that aren't top 3. Even if someone can't make the Olympics, the 10th athlete can still shine by scoring points in duel meets even if he wouldn't make a usatf final. that adds depth to the sport. It's embarrassing the prize money for winning nationals is 7000. There should be at least 2 more zeros to that number.
There could be a draft, college athletes can temporarily wear pro teams jerseys for USA's. This will give the sport personality, fans something locally and regionally to support, and actually create a purpose. Include gambling and alcohol at the events, it can be 4 hours long. Maybe 7 duel meets diamond league style where all the events don't get ran every week. Track won't be such a stray dog with only 1 purpose every four years. People could begin to understand and cheer sport. But people need to be given something to cheer.
This is the best post I've seen on this topic.
Extend the team concept to road races, then the "lesser" places become meaningful.
I coach track and XC and having kids place (and score points) is exciting and adds depth to the event.
My 5th runner in XC is very important- that's the team concept.
runn wrote:
dgjhfdhh wrote:I'm not sold the solution is cutting events from sports. People will watch NASCAR drive 100's of laps for hours, they'll watch an all day golf event, espn will report news on football players that is arguably just gossip. Quality and quantity are valuable.
I wanna see an analysis of what will really be gained from cutting events from the sport in connection to why people aren't watching the Olympics. Cause I don't think anything would be gained.
If someone doesn't watch the Olympics before, why would they know or care if we get rid of 5 events, that everything was already going to be put in a 2 hour block. Track already sucks because so much time is wasted between events, now there would be even less events, and more TV chatter.
My theory of what will make track good, build up support outside of the Olympics, so it isn't something relevant only every 4 years. The governing body of usatf needs to do more, individual people create meets, how crazy is that. Track is like the wild wild west, anyone can make a track meet and professional athletes will show up if there is prize money. We need a league, with teams, where the team pays the athlete, not the shoe company. Ironically even shoe companies see the value in teams, Nike Oregon project, bowermen, OTC.
If it was 8 teams around the US, 4 athletes an event. Could have duel meets where all 8 lanes filed. And a USATF championship with 32 athletes. Athletes could actually describe what they're training for outside of the Olympics. People Could actually regularly go to track meets that aren't college. It would create value for good professional athletes that aren't top 3. Even if someone can't make the Olympics, the 10th athlete can still shine by scoring points in duel meets even if he wouldn't make a usatf final. that adds depth to the sport. It's embarrassing the prize money for winning nationals is 7000. There should be at least 2 more zeros to that number.
There could be a draft, college athletes can temporarily wear pro teams jerseys for USA's. This will give the sport personality, fans something locally and regionally to support, and actually create a purpose. Include gambling and alcohol at the events, it can be 4 hours long. Maybe 7 duel meets diamond league style where all the events don't get ran every week. Track won't be such a stray dog with only 1 purpose every four years. People could begin to understand and cheer sport. But people need to be given something to cheer.
This is the best post I've seen on this topic.
Extend the team concept to road races, then the "lesser" places become meaningful.
I coach track and XC and having kids place (and score points) is exciting and adds depth to the event.
My 5th runner in XC is very important- that's the team concept.
the problem with the 'league' concept is that track is a 'big meet' sport. No one would care about a bunch of tier 3 people running an 800.
Who would really care if the 'Pac NorWest' team beat the 'New England' team in a dual meet? No one.
The big meets will do well but I don't believe an artificial 'league' will draw more than a few hundred people. Mostly friends and family.
The problems of the sport in the US:
1) No marketable champion sprinter. They're all either not OG gold medalist types or they are cheating sons and daughters of b*^*&)(*s. Or they are both.
So USATF needs to get a clean sprinter to the top step. That is obviously hard, but if the Jamaican program actually stops being an outlaw operation, that could happen. USATF needs to push WADA to get real in Jamaica and other Caribbean countries, even if it has to fund it itself somehow. Nike would probably help, no?
2) Distance events on the track are not going to be popular. There has to be crossover to the roads. Rupp, Lagat, J Simpson, Emma Coburn - get them into road races! Lots and lots of rich people run road races - give them someone to know and cheer for - someone who showed up at the Bix 7 or the Boilermaker to race.
3) East African domination in distance. Until non-East Africans can win races cleanly (Russians andTurks dont count)...the marketing of distance will be very limited even with a road crossover.
...and find a way to have a pro race at big HS meets. I'm sure there are major rules problems with pros running at HS meets, but if there is a way - think how great it would be to have a pro competition at every HS state meet.
Could spread the events around - even field events.
it would be a treat for the kids and maybe make a few of them lifelong fans.
I love how some people declare the end of TF. These people are under the deluded notion that capitalistic ideology is the only forces at work. These people are still waiting for their jet packs. I think Nietzsche declared God dead a century ago...it seems as if religion is doing fine these days.
XC and TF combined is the largest participatory sport in HS today, road racing is the largest adult participatory sport in the US today. America has shown an ability to compete with the East Africans and we have had flashes of greatness in WMM. All the parts are there, we just have to find the right recipe.
Also, swimming is ridiculous. Any activity where any one person can win 9 events and your coach can still walk next to you in the pool as you do it is silly.
jjjjjj wrote:
...you don't get 1500m guys trying to win championship 10000m races.
You have never heard of Mo Farah, have you? Instead of competing in his best event, he goes after the easy pickings in the 10000.
agip wrote:
...and find a way to have a pro race at big HS meets. I'm sure there are major rules problems with pros running at HS meets, but if there is a way - think how great it would be to have a pro competition at every HS state meet.
Could spread the events around - even field events.
it would be a treat for the kids and maybe make a few of them lifelong fans.
They have a few "elite" events at the big St. Vrain high school meet in Colorado, there's usually some good performances and the kids seem to enjoy it. I don't think there are any rules precluding it so long as the kids aren't actually competing against the elite athletes. I don't think there is any prize money or anything like that though.
USATF could do something like this right now if they cared to tap into the many youth and all comers meets that happen all across the country during the summer. Some of the meets are in pretty nice stadiums with decent tracks. They could easily host an "elite" meet with a limited number of events at the end of some of the bigger USATF meets held around the country, pick 10-20 meets and make it happen. They could give each kid participating in the meet a couple of free tickets and charge a general admission for anyone else who wants to come watch the elite part of the meet. They could fill out the fields with local open athletes that meet a minimum standard and pay to bring in some semi-elites that might not be quite good enough to cut it at the IAAF meets in Europe and offer some decent prize money comparable to a mid-tier road race. USATF could do that right now with minimal effort and probably only use a little bit of the $34 million in revenue they claim to have. Heck they could plaster banners all over these events for the sponsors they got most of that revenue from as an added bonus, a win-win for everyone.
People have been talking about track leagues since the old t-and-f list server days (20 years ago). What we should be asking ourselves is why US Track and Field hasn't tried any of these things. USATF has the funds and the mandate to promote the sport of track and field in the US and they do little to nothing to promote it at the open or elite level or provide competition or financial opportunities for post-collegiate athletes. USATF could easily start a track league if anyone there had the vision to do so. We're all upset about the decision with Bob Hersh and we should be but we should be even more upset that USATF has millions of dollars that could be used to promote the sport and they don't or won't.