800 dude wrote:
I'm not seeing anything to indicate there was corruption in this particular instance. It just looks like more mundane incompetence. (Max's other specialty.)
Bingo. "Everything's a f****n' travesty with you, man!"
-
21
-
800 dude wrote:
The use of the term "disqualification" is an attempt to make it sound like Estes and Chattanooga violated some rules or standards. But they didn't. Nothing was communicated to the relevant parties, either verbally or in writing, to indicate that it would be impermissible to have a board member affiliated with a bid. Estes followed the standard protocol in these situations, and everything was out in the open. If USATF wants to have new rules about board members' activities, it can do that, but it shouldn't be ex post facto. Whether or not USATF and Max had some secret reason to prefer Orlando, it certainly makes things look fishy to tell the organizing committee that all of their work was for nothing because they violated a rule that didn't exist until after they submitted their bid. To be clear, I'm not seeing anything to indicate there was corruption in this particular instance. It just looks like more mundane incompetence. (Max's other specialty.)
Agreed. Jim Estes told USATF about his role with the Chattanooga bid months ago and received no indication from them that it would jeopardize the bid. If, as USATF says, this is why the Chattanooga bid was DQ'd, the blame is on them for not nipping this in the bud in August. Which is a real shame for the Chattanooga organizers. They bid for the Trials in 2020 and again in 2024. I'm curious to see if they'll ever bid again after this fiasco.
Sarah Lorge Butler has the details in Runner's World.
141 -
fact checker. wrote:
But late in the selection process, after the board vote, Chattanooga’s bid was disqualified.Neither USATF nor Conley would confirm that Chattanooga was disqualified nor explain why.
A board member, Jim Estes, had been involved as an advisor on Chattanooga’s bid. Estes had disclosed the relationship from the beginning—board members and other volunteers with USATF are required to file conflict of interest forms and keep them up to date—and Estes recused himself from voting on anything related to the Olympic Marathon Trials. His recusal is noted in the meeting minutes.
Does Sarah have her facts straight on who “DQed” Chattanooga? The USOPC gives the final approval, right? Sounds like there was a major conflict of interest having a board member (Jim Estes) as part of Chattanooga’s bid.
Called it 3 pages ago.
06 -
constrained wrote:
coachy wrote:
Host city. People come there to compete, watch, and plenty of free advertising of how great their city is. They bring in revenue from hotels, travel expenses, etc.
It seems like most organizations that have recently hosted the event have lost considerable money (Houston, NYRR, Atlanta). I get that there may be other reasons to host the trials, but is it really enough to start bribing people?
Why can't can't they do it like Paris is for the 24 Olympics? Aren't they doing a 'mass participation' marathon just before the games for 20,000 people? Seems to be a good idea. You get to be a select group that probably pays ridiculous entry fees..and very willingly...and you can put more money in the coffers. Personally, if I knew an existing, good marathon was also hosting the trials at the same time as the mass race, I would be more inclined to want to run that marathon just to see some of the pros do their thing.
31 -
Estes is directly involved with the Twin Cities Marathon weekend, which includes the TC 10 Mile that has served as the USATF National Championships on a number of occasions in recent years. Why has this situation been permissible but for the Trials, his involvement disqualifies the bid?
170 -
Jim Estes a board member accepted $8000 as a “consultant fee” and thought everything would be okay as long as he didn’t vote?
Hell yes this is a problem.
1. The race was wrong for offering a bribe disguised as a consultation fee.
2. Estes was wrong for accepting.
3. USATF was wrong for not putting this to bed in August.516 -
I still think the US would do well to let the runners qualify on a course that was similar to what they will face at the games. Unfortunately, it normally is in much cooler conditions than the actual race will be and so far in front of the games that one or more of the runners performs poorly. Obviously, the recovery necessary for the games makes it preferable to choose the team early, but fairly choosing runners who can thrive in the hot humid conditions normally encountered in the games argue against a cool venue. A hilly games course necessitates a hilly trials course and flat necessitates flat. There just is no really foolproof way to choose a team or trials venue.
24 -
Speak out wrote:
VaporBoi wrote:
Maybe he sees a pay cut in his future after all the outrage and needed to find alternative sources of income
There’s been a few comments from various pros about Max. Outside of that, there’s been very little response and outcry from the elites. I’m very surprised. I expected some protest but nothing. It’s like the fans are more angry than the pros themselves. I find this strange.
Agreed! WTF?
20 -
Getting this straight wrote:
Jim Estes a board member accepted $8000 as a “consultant fee” and thought everything would be okay as long as he didn’t vote?
Hell yes this is a problem.
1. The race was wrong for offering a bribe disguised as a consultation fee.
2. Estes was wrong for accepting.
3. USATF was wrong for not putting this to bed in August.Chattanooga isn't Houston/NYRR/BAA. They don't have the experience or technical nous to put together competitive bids entirely on their own.
In such cases, it is S.O.P. to hire a consultant who can help bring your bid up to snuff. The number of people qualified to do so is very limited.
Orlando, if what the story reports is true, submitted a less-than-ideal bid themselves. Perhaps they took should have hired a consultant rather than pay Meb and Jenny Simpson.
And it is beyond ironic that Max is accusing others of conflict of interest with his ties to Matchbook Creative:
150 -
Getting this straight wrote:
Jim Estes a board member accepted $8000 as a “consultant fee” and thought everything would be okay as long as he didn’t vote?
Hell yes this is a problem.
1. The race was wrong for offering a bribe disguised as a consultation fee.
2. Estes was wrong for accepting.
3. USATF was wrong for not putting this to bed in August.I don’t fault the bid organizers. It’s absolutely the sort of thing you’d get a consultant for and it sounds like that’s Estes line of work now basically.
Estes is definitely partly to blame—not for accepting necessarily but for simply accepting then disclosing. Any competent board member would have contacted the relevant authorities (including at the very least a conversation with USATF General Counsel) to make sure “disclose and recuse” would have been sufficient to avoid a DQ. Some conflicts are significant enough that you can’t simply disclose and recuse (although, I have some experience with these issues and it’s really not clear to me why disclosing and recusing wasn’t enough here; this sort of thing happens all the time).
But most of the blame goes to USATF. Estes disclosed! This is why you have disclosure rules! Timely assess the right steps to take to avoid adverse consequences. Where TF was USATF General Counsel on this!? Board conflicts are a huge deal and get timely assessed in any competent organization. Either USATF is dysfunctional AF for not spotting the issue, or there was some sort of issue with the processing of the disclosure (which is a massive deal and still makes then dysfunctional AF).
Sucks for the DQed city. Sucks even more for USA track fans and the future of the sport. Exhibit 1,458,214 of USATF’s mind blowing incompetence. At the very least, the GC has got to go.
132 -
StillRunnin wrote:
Why can't can't they do it like Paris is for the 24 Olympics? Aren't they doing a 'mass participation' marathon just before the games for 20,000 people? Seems to be a good idea. You get to be a select group that probably pays ridiculous entry fees..and very willingly...and you can put more money in the coffers. Personally, if I knew an existing, good marathon was also hosting the trials at the same time as the mass race, I would be more inclined to want to run that marathon just to see some of the pros do their thing.
I agree. I won't fly down just to watch the trials, but I would make the trip to watch OTQ and run a marathon.
30 -
He disclosed. Why did it take them so long to figure out this was a problem? They owed this to the bid city. What a shame.
160 -
kmaclam wrote:
Speak out wrote:
There’s been a few comments from various pros about Max. Outside of that, there’s been very little response and outcry from the elites. I’m very surprised. I expected some protest but nothing. It’s like the fans are more angry than the pros themselves. I find this strange.
Agreed! WTF?
You’re surprised that elites aren’t denouncing the person who can ruin their careers?
60 -
yeah, who cares about fans wrote:
Nike$ wrote:
It started at 10:00 am LA time, 1:00pm EST. But still too late in the day based on the forecast. Should have been 7am LA time. They don't give a crap about the runners. Just wanted the TV window.
Imagine, scheduling a sporting event so it'll be on network tv at a time to maximize viewership! What were they thinking?!?!?
The 6:25pm eastern time zone Super Bowl kickoff enters the room.....
00 -
Perhaps this is why Houston is a mess, Estes is the elite coordinator.
Estes and then race website still cannot confirm the prize money structure. Top finishers from last year haven’t been invited or they’ve been out on hold.
42 -
I’m trying to piece this all together. Was Estes hired by Chattanooga for $8000 to assist their bid or to help ‘steer’ the votes to Chattanooga. I’d like to see what that arrangement was and what was ‘expected’.
24 -
Unless things have changed over the past few years, the MLDR and WLDR committees have a site selection committee that visits each site and the bids themselves are submitted to the national office. If the bids are in order, they let those 2 committees know that. The committees than vote on the selection. In the past, that selection was rubber stamped by the BOD and submitted to the USOC for approval. That was, until the Houston/LA debacle. Does anybody know if there was any real debate on this at the BOD level? Jim Estes has always been a class act and I find it very difficult to believe he swayed anybody's vote. It is more likely the NO decided to stick it to Jim, pull rank and do another LA.
70 -
USATF is completely corrupt. Why are they not being investigated, starting with the $3.8 million man?
40 -
How much money do we think Chattanooga lost on this? Did they have to pay a fee to bid? Other expenses? Not to mention all the potential revenue the city lost.
10 -
$8000 isn't much of a bribe. Estes is well known for consulting on many races and as pointed out has consulted for other races that have been awarded USATF championships events. If there was no issues with that before, why is there one now? He clearly wasn't trying to hide anything from anyone...this is on the USATF office for their incomeptence...TWICE!!!
31
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.