I like the innovation GST in general, but not sure about the event groups. I’d love to see, say Michael Norman vs Rai in a flat 400m, but that’ll never happen with Norman presumably in the 200/400 group and Rai in the 400h/400 group. And as you mention, likely missing out on a lot of the current top milers being more 1500/3000 guys.
Maybe requiring athletes to double to earn the full contract, but letting each individual pick their 2 events could be the way to go
It seems a very simple fix with these overlapping groups: -You have 8 lanes (4 stars/4 contenders) run the non-overlapping events e.g. 110H/400H/100 - You sit the contenders for the overlapping events and have just the stars double -The idea of having athletes never racing despite running overlapping events is silly and not in the spirit of this at all
Groups that make sense:
100H/110H (should be standalone, hurdlers outside of Holloway for the most part will run 10.05-10.20 and even he will probably lose handily zzz) 100/200 (H2H with long sprinters in 200) 400/200 400H/600 (H2H with 800 guys, if Rai complains whatever dude) 800/600 1500/3000 (these guys don't need to double, just run three 1500s and one 3000)
I think this brings up an important question that I didn't even really consider: Why not have alternate events? Add in the 300. It's a fantastic event. Add in the 600. The 1k.
I hope they go with a day-by-day schedule and drop the mandatory groupings while keeping it as a suggested guide, mostly for the spectators to know what to expect, so you would have something like:
Day 1:
200m
300m
400h
110h/100h
800m
1000m
3000m
Day 2:
100m
400m
60h
600m
1500m
5000m
You still have the basic groups, and they are split up over 2 days to enable doubling in each area of specialization, but the actual groupings are a less strict to enable more interesting doubles and matchups. Imagine seeing Femke go against Syd on day 1 in the 400 hurdles and then go against Mu the next day in the 600. There are SO MANY opportunities like that. Lyles vs Norman in the 300, then Lyles vs Coleman in the 100 the next day.
Great concept. Need to work on execution. The distance events are a bit of a sh*tshow. As others have mentioned distance runners doubling vs sprinters is very different. I Think they should do one race and switch it every other meet. Also, need to reconfigure the race groups a bit. Another thing they didn't address in the press conference was injury and how they will handle that. It is an unfortunate reality of the sport
I think this brings up an important question that I didn't even really consider: Why not have alternate events? Add in the 300. It's a fantastic event. Add in the 600. The 1k.
I hope they go with a day-by-day schedule and drop the mandatory groupings while keeping it as a suggested guide, mostly for the spectators to know what to expect, so you would have something like:
Day 1:
200m
300m
400h
110h/100h
800m
1000m
3000m
Day 2:
100m
400m
60h
600m
1500m
5000m
You still have the basic groups, and they are split up over 2 days to enable doubling in each area of specialization, but the actual groupings are a less strict to enable more interesting doubles and matchups. Imagine seeing Femke go against Syd on day 1 in the 400 hurdles and then go against Mu the next day in the 600. There are SO MANY opportunities like that. Lyles vs Norman in the 300, then Lyles vs Coleman in the 100 the next day.
Yeah what is most important:
- Fun Matchups (mixing athletes in events where they meet in the middle) - Lack of Redundancies - Competition
Doing an unpaced 3,000 and 5,000 over 3 days is the definition of redundant. That has to go. Having separate 200s and 400s, so very similar athletes can dodge each other is completely counter to competition and is redundant. Watching probably all short hurdlers run fringe world class 100m flat times is not exciting at all. How exciting will it be to watch the world's best 110m hurdlers struggle to break 10.2. It'd be better to see them take on NFL players in the 40. Instead of using the doubles as a chance to fill more space, compress the field and put athletes against other groups. Here's my schedule:
Day 1: 100 400 400H 800 Rocket-Speed Field Events (no low heights, 3 throws max/2 attempts at heights, 4 athletes max, 2 events at same time but not done simultaneously, PV/HJ/LJ/SP/JAV) 4x100 (better use of the short hurdlers)
Day 2: 110H 200 (between 100 and 400 runners) 600 (between 400H and 800m runners) 1500/3000 (alternate) Rocket-Speed Field Events (no low heights ~ open at 2.28/5.72 etc., 3 throws or LJs max/2 attempts at heights, 4 athletes max, 2 events at same time but not done simultaneously, PV/HJ/LJ/SP/JAV) a wonky 4x4 (add monetary stakes and make each team have at least one distance runner, field event athlete etc.)
I don't think oddball events are really needed, and may even hurt the casual viewers ("they ran half a lap last month, why are they starting way back there today?") Just have your guaranteed money athletes pick any 2 to earn the full contract, doesn't have to be the same 2 every time. Maybe that encourages some otherwise unusual doubles. I'd love to see Hoppel go 400/800 one meet, 800/1500 the next, for instance. Maybe he even runs a 3k early season
100m
200m
400m
800m
1500m
3000m
110h
400h
I don't see the 5000m getting much traction if doubling is required, probably best left to DL or 10pm time trials at random California high schools
This really s*cks. I dont get this need to create a new sport, but that might be because I like track and field as we see it in the Diamond League.
I guess this format might be great to sell ads, and to maybe reel in some viewers that dont really like track and field. Hope it doesn't destroy the sport by splitting it in two or taking over for the Diamond league.
I think Michael Johnson is gambling that fans don't want to watch Jakob Ingebrigtsen race a 1500m week after week after week. They'd rather see him do a variety of races. Show more than just a single dynamic.
"Jakob won the 1500m last week and got beat in the 5k. This week he's rematching Bryce Hoppel in the 800m and having a showdown with so and so in the 3k"
I don't know about you but this sounds more fun to me.
That sounds dumb to me. I already know how Jakob would fare in an 800 against Hoppel; I want some consistency and simplicity. I'd love to see Jakob vs Kerr 4 times a year in the 1500, that would be awesome
Yeah agree. If you dont like to watch the best in the world doing what they are best at, maybe you just don't like track and field. Who cares about seeing Ingebrigtsen race Hoppel in an 800m? Imagine sitting here and not being excited for Kerr vs Jakob in Monaco and rsther wish Jakob raced Hoppel in the 800.
I don't think oddball events are really needed, and may even hurt the casual viewers ("they ran half a lap last month, why are they starting way back there today?") Just have your guaranteed money athletes pick any 2 to earn the full contract, doesn't have to be the same 2 every time. Maybe that encourages some otherwise unusual doubles. I'd love to see Hoppel go 400/800 one meet, 800/1500 the next, for instance. Maybe he even runs a 3k early season
100m
200m
400m
800m
1500m
3000m
110h
400h
I don't see the 5000m getting much traction if doubling is required, probably best left to DL or 10pm time trials at random California high schools
Exactly. Why are people here suggesting adding random distances that nobody cares about or ever races? Stop overcomplicating things. I think what MJ has here is great, I just don't understand the arbitrary event groupings or insistence on doubles
This really s*cks. I dont get this need to create a new sport, but that might be because I like track and field as we see it in the Diamond League.
I guess this format might be great to sell ads, and to maybe reel in some viewers that dont really like track and field. Hope it doesn't destroy the sport by splitting it in two or taking over for the Diamond league.
The problem with the Diamond League is that athletes make very little money from it, and each individual diamond league race means relatively little. So athletes are not incentivized to race all the Diamond Leagues.
This also gives athletes a stable contract tied into racing (not a random shoe company)
I think this brings up an important question that I didn't even really consider: Why not have alternate events? Add in the 300. It's a fantastic event. Add in the 600. The 1k.
I hope they go with a day-by-day schedule and drop the mandatory groupings while keeping it as a suggested guide, mostly for the spectators to know what to expect, so you would have something like:
Day 1:
200m
300m
400h
110h/100h
800m
1000m
3000m
Day 2:
100m
400m
60h
600m
1500m
5000m
You still have the basic groups, and they are split up over 2 days to enable doubling in each area of specialization, but the actual groupings are a less strict to enable more interesting doubles and matchups. Imagine seeing Femke go against Syd on day 1 in the 400 hurdles and then go against Mu the next day in the 600. There are SO MANY opportunities like that. Lyles vs Norman in the 300, then Lyles vs Coleman in the 100 the next day.
Yeah what is most important:
- Fun Matchups (mixing athletes in events where they meet in the middle) - Lack of Redundancies - Competition
Doing an unpaced 3,000 and 5,000 over 3 days is the definition of redundant. That has to go. Having separate 200s and 400s, so very similar athletes can dodge each other is completely counter to competition and is redundant. Watching probably all short hurdlers run fringe world class 100m flat times is not exciting at all. How exciting will it be to watch the world's best 110m hurdlers struggle to break 10.2. It'd be better to see them take on NFL players in the 40. Instead of using the doubles as a chance to fill more space, compress the field and put athletes against other groups. Here's my schedule:
Day 1: 100 400 400H 800 Rocket-Speed Field Events (no low heights, 3 throws max/2 attempts at heights, 4 athletes max, 2 events at same time but not done simultaneously, PV/HJ/LJ/SP/JAV) 4x100 (better use of the short hurdlers)
Day 2: 110H 200 (between 100 and 400 runners) 600 (between 400H and 800m runners) 1500/3000 (alternate) Rocket-Speed Field Events (no low heights ~ open at 2.28/5.72 etc., 3 throws or LJs max/2 attempts at heights, 4 athletes max, 2 events at same time but not done simultaneously, PV/HJ/LJ/SP/JAV) a wonky 4x4 (add monetary stakes and make each team have at least one distance runner, field event athlete etc.)
Love the relay idea. I think theres a ton of space to expand on it. You could even add in team scores and make something out of that. I don't mean shoe companies either, I mean actual, named teams. People love to root for teams.
One thing:
"Watching probably all short hurdlers run fringe world class 100m flat times is not exciting at all. How exciting will it be to watch the world's best 110m hurdlers struggle to break 10.2."
GSL was quite clear on this and I actually have to agree with them: It's not about the times. It's not about the times at all. It's about the matchups. That is the only important thing for them. It doesn't matter if there are hurdlers struggling to break 10.2 - what matters is that they are going up against sprinters.
It's so tough because a part of me feels like breaking some key meets off from the DL and establishing a new "Golden Four" (for old track heads) sort of situation would have been the best route. We all know that Zurich, Brussels, Monaco, Oslo are essentially the "Grand Slams" of global track (that aren't the Olympics/WC's) but the problems with that are easy to identify.
Should have had 5 meets. 2 in America, one in Africa, one in Europe, and one in Asia. Build a global audience for a global sport.
As someone who has followed track very closely for a while at this point, I agree that Zurich, Brussels, Monaco, and Oslo are the grand slams of the DL.
But here's the thing: I had to think about that for a sec, and say "but are they really? what do those meets look like and entail?"
Performance and field wise they might be the best of the diamond league meets but they aren't recognizable in any way whatsoever. And i'm a hardcore track fan. I mean, i'm posting on letsrun and I had to actually think "yeah Zurich, but what about it?". Can you imagine how much of a branding problem that's gonna be to a casual fan?
I hope the grand slams get names like the WWE. Something like Chicago Clash, maybe just less corny.
What more branding do you need? When you have history and traditions you don’t need names like "Monaco Ultra Mega-clash with Kerr the Killer against Hocker the Hulk Hogan!". Its so extremely tacky and corny.
Its hillarious that Diamond league have packed stadiums and good tv viewership by simply showing the sport of track and field and its stars, yet somehow everything just have to be turned into a circus by people who just cant fathom how its possible just enjoy the sports in its pure form, and rather want to make a bastardization by mating it with american ninja warrior and WWE. It sucks that Eugene can't get an audience, please don't try to fix it by destroying the rest of the sport.
400/800 makes more sense to me than 800/1500 given the strength of most 1500 runners. I dont know what else they would pair the 400 hurdles with which is obviously important with Sydney. 800/1500 is hard to imagine at this point the training is completely different for most of those athletes.
Who in the world today is on a world class standard in both the 400 and 800?
Wanyonyi, Kessler, Wightman, and more are all sub 1:46 and sub 3:34
You'd do very well to find an athlete that's sub 45.2 and sub 1:46.
Athing Mu. Mary Moraa. Certainly more I am not thinking of. These event groups don't HAVE to be both genders all the time - maybe you can have 400/800 for women and 800/1500 for men.
This really s*cks. I dont get this need to create a new sport, but that might be because I like track and field as we see it in the Diamond League.
I guess this format might be great to sell ads, and to maybe reel in some viewers that dont really like track and field. Hope it doesn't destroy the sport by splitting it in two or taking over for the Diamond league.
The problem with the Diamond League is that athletes make very little money from it, and each individual diamond league race means relatively little. So athletes are not incentivized to race all the Diamond Leagues.
This also gives athletes a stable contract tied into racing (not a random shoe company)
So what? The best makes more than enough money, there are lots of athletes that would gladly take a sport at the Diamond league. If SML dont want to race I rather want to watch someone who will. This devolving into SML arm-wrestling some shot putter before racing each other in an untimed 3000m race, before SML can raise the Louisiana Lions trophy is just not worth it. Its not track and field.
Love the relay idea. I think theres a ton of space to expand on it. You could even add in team scores and make something out of that. I don't mean shoe companies either, I mean actual, named teams. People love to root for teams.
One thing:
"Watching probably all short hurdlers run fringe world class 100m flat times is not exciting at all. How exciting will it be to watch the world's best 110m hurdlers struggle to break 10.2."
GSL was quite clear on this and I actually have to agree with them: It's not about the times. It's not about the times at all. It's about the matchups. That is the only important thing for them. It doesn't matter if there are hurdlers struggling to break 10.2 - what matters is that they are going up against sprinters.
Would they be going against the sprinters? Unless I'm reading it wrong the hurdlers do a second race where they go against each other in a flat 100m. Yes it's about competition, but these hurdlers are doing the hurdles for a reason. They are the best at what they do, but if we remove the barriers in most cases they are not particularly close. It feels like it works for Sydney McLaughlin and Grant Holloway (somewhat), but I am not finding a competition between Daniel Roberts and Trey Cunningham to run marginal times behind him an interesting matchup. It's kinda like if you made those 800 guys double with a 400m. Novelty to see who is the quickest fun for a meet? Sure. After a host of 46-47s, I really don't need to see it 4x when we have guys running 44 in the same meet.
"Two of the four Slams will be based in the United States. Los Angeles has been revealed as one of the Slam host cities The other three host cities will be announced later this summer."
Any guesses for the other US location?
Options include:
a) Hayward Field
b) Hayward Field
c) Hayward Field
d) Hayward Field
I guess then that I would only attend one of the slams. That sucks. LA here I come...
Should have had 5 meets. 2 in America, one in Africa, one in Europe, and one in Asia. Build a global audience for a global sport.
As someone who has followed track very closely for a while at this point, I agree that Zurich, Brussels, Monaco, and Oslo are the grand slams of the DL.
But here's the thing: I had to think about that for a sec, and say "but are they really? what do those meets look like and entail?"
Performance and field wise they might be the best of the diamond league meets but they aren't recognizable in any way whatsoever. And i'm a hardcore track fan. I mean, i'm posting on letsrun and I had to actually think "yeah Zurich, but what about it?". Can you imagine how much of a branding problem that's gonna be to a casual fan?
I hope the grand slams get names like the WWE. Something like Chicago Clash, maybe just less corny.
What more branding do you need? When you have history and traditions you don’t need names like "Monaco Ultra Mega-clash with Kerr the Killer against Hocker the Hulk Hogan!". Its so extremely tacky and corny.
Its hillarious that Diamond league have packed stadiums and good tv viewership by simply showing the sport of track and field and its stars, yet somehow everything just have to be turned into a circus by people who just cant fathom how its possible just enjoy the sports in its pure form, and rather want to make a bastardization by mating it with american ninja warrior and WWE. It sucks that Eugene can't get an audience, please don't try to fix it by destroying the rest of the sport.
You sound like Avery Brundage. Take an aspirin or something.
Tell me what a casual fan looking into their first season of professional track would find interesting about Zurich DL. Or Oslo DL. Some random European cities with barely-advertised matchups. Doesn't know or doesn't care about history or meet records.
Love the relay idea. I think theres a ton of space to expand on it. You could even add in team scores and make something out of that. I don't mean shoe companies either, I mean actual, named teams. People love to root for teams.
One thing:
"Watching probably all short hurdlers run fringe world class 100m flat times is not exciting at all. How exciting will it be to watch the world's best 110m hurdlers struggle to break 10.2."
GSL was quite clear on this and I actually have to agree with them: It's not about the times. It's not about the times at all. It's about the matchups. That is the only important thing for them. It doesn't matter if there are hurdlers struggling to break 10.2 - what matters is that they are going up against sprinters.
Would they be going against the sprinters? Unless I'm reading it wrong the hurdlers do a second race where they go against each other in a flat 100m. Yes it's about competition, but these hurdlers are doing the hurdles for a reason. They are the best at what they do, but if we remove the barriers in most cases they are not particularly close. It feels like it works for Sydney McLaughlin and Grant Holloway (somewhat), but I am not finding a competition between Daniel Roberts and Trey Cunningham to run marginal times behind him an interesting matchup. It's kinda like if you made those 800 guys double with a 400m. Novelty to see who is the quickest fun for a meet? Sure. After a host of 46-47s, I really don't need to see it 4x when we have guys running 44 in the same meet.
Presumably they would be going against the sprinters. Doesn't seem like an event that would have multiple heats. Also, a lot, perhaps even most sprinters can put down competitive times in the flat events - they just don't because they never race flat events when they are in shape, only at the start of the season as a rustbuster or something. Holloway at his season peak could probably go 9.8 high. Roberts could probably go 10.0-10.1. Omar Macleod, who was pretty unremarkable in the grand scheme of things, went 9.99. Terrence Trammell went 10.04. That kind of speed is what it takes to succeed at the world level, regardless of whether or not you have hurdles.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.