So I watched GST #1 from start to finish. I've had some family stuff going on and haven't been watching this one as closely.
But this doubling format is still very hard for me to wrap my head around. I mean Patterson just runs a world lead in the 400 but we have to focus on who got 2nd and won the money.
It makes each race less signficant. Normally at a sporting event, we know the outcome right away. Here we have to wait for a 2nd race (i guess the Champions league is like that).
But it does get the stars racing twice, I guess. And gives them three days of tv inventory. And prevents people from not running through the line.
What do you guys think of the format? Net positive or negative? What if we just had big prize money for each race?
Doubling might work if we tweak it. Every event group should not be the same. One of the distance races needs to be rabbbited.
If we are going to double, I'd love to see the 1500 guys race the 1500 twice and see if we get the same outcome. Make one rabbitted and one not.
I think for some events the double might be ok. But we won't care about the flat 100 for the hurdlers. Just have them hurdle twice as well.
I like the doubling "enough" and think it adds interesting dimension, but after the 2nd race they should focus more on that race winner for a few moments before they switch to the slam winner, if it's a different person.
The structural component I don't like is the 3-day format. Just make it 2 days. That would impact the long distance group the most, but those races have been tactical anyway (which I think it fine) so who cares about both a 3k & 5k within 24 hours? All of the competitors have done that before. Just do the event Saturday and Sunday - the Friday audience has been the worst of the days anyway, both live and on TV.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
What goes on in the mind on Mary Moraa I think is basically X-Files stuff. What point that serves is beyond me - why not just jog it in last in the 1500 and then save it all for the 800 and hope that gets you a mid table finish and 20, 30k?
One other thing of note here - not sure what to make of Jessica Hull. Is it just me or shouldn't we be expecting a 3.50 runner in that type of race to be able to come through at some point and win comfortably? She is 5 seconds better than anyone else in that race after all. Two of these races now and she hasn't even finished in the top 3, in the event that she is 5th fastest of all time and in that very, very rare sub 3.51 club.
I like the three day format. I also love the doubles. We get to see the same top runners compete in more than one final. This is one of the things swimming has always had over track.
In 2024, I think the only Americans to beat her all year were Monson once, St. Pierre once, and Hiltz a bunch of times. She even beat St. Pierre at the Trials. With Hiltz, she seemed to be on her a$$ just about every race.
In 2025, she's already lost to Cranny, Valby, Houlihan, Hiltz, Morgan, and Andrews. St. Pierre and Monson are out and yet she's still lost to six Americans. That was a very slow race and she seemed to have no kick. If she can't kick off a 4:07 paced race, she is in trouble at the Trials. In addition to those mentioned above, add Johnson, MacLean, Wiley, and McGee, and don't forget the new collegiates coming like Appleton.
NB Boston might be in a heavy training period right now. MacLean did not look impressive last Grand Slam with 5th and 7th finishes. Either way, Mackay needs to step it up over the next couple months or she will have trouble making Tokyo.
Because it's a sprinter thing. It's a 100/200, 200/400 thing. It doesn't fit or work for anything else - it just doesn't. Maybe 30 years ago it worked for 800/1500 runners but these days all the 1500 runners are 3k/5k guys. It doesn't work for the 3000/5000 runners because you are going to get these weird scenarios like Kingston and those guys don't want to hammer themselves twice in three days with nothing really of importance on the line. It's this simple and it's frustrating because the moment this league was conceptualized it was obvious to people that understand the sport.
is 15/3, 3/5, 5/10 not doubling to you?
I wouldn't call the prize money 'nothing of importance'.
Would you rather have wavelight time-trials 100% of the time?
I dunno I don't understand this take at all, especially if you're including yourself in 'people who understand the sport'.
Is this a joke post?
What's your point here? yeah anything can be a double - the half marathon/full marathon could be a double.
We've literally had guys not wanting to do these events because of the double event format - Rai Benjamin, Quincy Hall etc etc - they've publicly said it. Any of those other combinations you gave are usually reserved for events that actually matter to athletes - like a World Indoors, World Champs or Olympic Games.
If the money was so important where is Ingebrigtsen? Where is Kipyegon? Why isn't Wanyoni a racer? Where is Femke Bol? Grant Holloway, Noah Lyles?
Would I rather have wavelight time trials all of the time? No I wouldn't - I think the DL/Euro pro circuit could do a much better job of how they utilize this and they could start by designating events where it was going to be used on a limited basis across their series. Of course this is a totally separate issue to this grand slam "doubling" which just is confusing and the athletes don't like.
Get yourself up to speed and don't waste my time again.