I'm interested to see how the GST format works, but I'm worried the format isn't different enough from the typical pro track meet to really move the needle.
I've thought for a while that pro running should adopt more of a combat sport format outside of Olympics and World Champs. Instead of fight night, it's race night.
The moment that track becomes Monster Truck Rally, completely dumbed down for the Trumptards, I'm out.
I'm interested to see how the GST format works, but I'm worried the format isn't different enough from the typical pro track meet to really move the needle.
I've thought for a while that pro running should adopt more of a combat sport format outside of Olympics and World Champs. Instead of fight night, it's race night.
You might be onto something. Currently a group of racers and challengers all do the same double. Maybe instead they should all put their name in a hat, and then one set of names are pulled for one race, and another for a different distance. Chance factors into the outcome.
Here's how I'd tweak GST: First, I'd get rid of the forced doubling and multi-day format altogether. It seems like the doubling is an unnecessary way of making athletes emulate Michael Johnson, and it has the risk of burning out or injuring athletes before their most important meets of the year. Plus, it's hard enough to get fans to come out to one day of track action; there's no need to try to get people to attend more than one day for a non-championship meet.
My recommendation is to organize it as a three-meet series: One on the west coast of the U.S. (but not Eugene), one on the east coast of the U.S., and one in Europe, in a country that doesn't already have a Diamond League meet (perhaps Spain, since Valencia does such a nice job with its road races). Things in 3s are more digestible and easier to remember, and it makes for better event group creation, as illustrated below. It would also allow for even bigger prize money at each meet.
I'd organize the event groups as follows, with each of the three meets having just one event per group:
Short sprints: 100, 150, 200
Long sprints: 200, 400, 600 (or maybe 200-300-400, I'm torn on this one)
Short distance: 800, 1200, 1500
Long distance: 3k, 5k, 10k (or maybe 3k-5k-8k or even 3k-4k-5k if there are concerns about event length)
Hurdles (just one hurdles group): 100/110h, 200h, 400h
That format would result in nice compact meets with 10 races per meet, which would be good for both live spectators and television viewers. Having each event group race at a different distance at each meet would keep the series interesting by avoiding repetition from one meet to the next (how many people really want to see Hocker, Kerr, and Nuguse race at 800m multiple times in a year?).
Prize money would be awarded for each race at each meet, with additional grand prize money for the top 3 of each event group at the conclusion of the series, based on their placings/points throughout the series, including a special bonus for everyone who completes the entire series (as an added incentive to not skip meets).
Keep the racer/challenger format, because that can create compelling and unique matchups at each meet.
Create a third group of athletes called Transcenders or something, consisting of athletes who commit to running the entire series but aren't limited to one event group. That would allow the most versatile athletes like Sydney and Tebogo (if they could sign him) to transcend boundaries by racing any event they choose at each meet, making it even more likely we get the special matchups that fans want to see.
This is a fantastic set of ideas. I think you're exactly right on what the series gets right (and so doesn't need to change), and also how to fix the flaws.
Johnson's influence does seem to hang over the format. Everyone doubles? That's what Michael Johnson would have done! Why are there separate 100/200 and 200/400 groups? We have to have the event group best suited for Michael Johnson!
Some tweaks and expansion of your ideas (just spitballing here)
a) Make the long sprint group 300/400/600, or maybe 300/400/500, to reduce overlap with the short sprint group. I could go either way on this, but less overlap means every athlete will have a most natural event group.
b) The distance group can be 3k/5k/10k. But the 10k can have the first 7k set up as a road (or cross country) race outside the stadium. That would be an interesting dynamic, can the aerobic monsters break away during the road portion, or can the kickers hold on until the track? Plus, the TV window can be compressed; start the men's race when the women hit halfway, and there will be about 3-5 minutes between the women's finish and when the men enter the stadium. And by having the race go through the streets, you get some community engagement like for the major marathons.
c) I *love* the one-day, 5 event groups idea. Each race should take 10 or so minutes on average, including short gaps, and so the whole thing would be about an hour and a half. The current series, like most track meets, is too drawn out between events.
d) Three meets could be fine, but if they want to stick with 4, they could do something like the following:
Short sprints: 150, 100, 200, 100 AND 200
Long sprints: 400, 300, 600, 400
Middle distance: 1000, 1200, 800, 1500
Long distance: 5k, 3k, 5k, 10k
Hurdles: 100/110h AND 400h, 200h, 400h, 100/110h
The novelty events are more in the start of the series, when the athletes would be sharpening up, and the last couple meets are more focused on the primary events. The hurdlers and short sprinters both get doubles in one meet. The final meet would be a culmination, with short sprinters doubling, 400 runners doing their primary event, distance runners doing their road/track hybrid. And the middle distance finale would be very interesting, with the 1500 specialists needing to push the pace to burn off the 800 specialists.
But long story short, I think you've nailed it.
Thanks for your positive feedback! I like your ideas too. Seeing your event group suggestions along with those from LarsL11 helped me to realize that the events groups don’t need to be the same each year. It would be beneficial to tweak them on an annual basis, which would help to keep the series fresh and intriguing each year.
Since this is my job, I’ll give you a little insight — this happens at every single meet, you just don’t know it. It’s why most of the time you don’t get the start lists until the day before.
We made the decision that we’d rather publish the field 3+ weeks in advance of the 96 athletes that were intending to run. That’s not a soft verbal - those are contracts.
Unfortunately, things happen. I polled a bunch of media members, including Gault, asking if they’d prefer this methodology or only getting the final list a day before and their opinions were unanimous.
Remember, the Racers committed months ago! Some as far back as June 2024. And many Challengers signed in December. It’s impossible to know then that their Achilles would be bugging them the week before. When is the final lineup announced in the NFL or MLB? It’s sports!
Is this the most upvoted post on LRC? 771 upvotes at time of viewing.
Since this is my job, I’ll give you a little insight — this happens at every single meet, you just don’t know it. It’s why most of the time you don’t get the start lists until the day before.
We made the decision that we’d rather publish the field 3+ weeks in advance of the 96 athletes that were intending to run. That’s not a soft verbal - those are contracts.
Unfortunately, things happen. I polled a bunch of media members, including Gault, asking if they’d prefer this methodology or only getting the final list a day before and their opinions were unanimous.
Remember, the Racers committed months ago! Some as far back as June 2024. And many Challengers signed in December. It’s impossible to know then that their Achilles would be bugging them the week before. When is the final lineup announced in the NFL or MLB? It’s sports!
But herein lies the 'problem'. GST is all about the head-to-heads, according to Michael Johnson. So when there are drop-outs - as we see with every meet, as you rightly say - it is far more noticeable. Especially true when 50% of the field are supposed to be 'Racers' i.e. appear at every meeting.
This is not like the Diamond League, where, not only do they have many more events (they have field events too! Wooo!!!) but they don't commit to X athlete racing 8 times over 4 meets at the start of the season. As soon as you do that you set yourselves up to disappoint fans, because they drop out.
The whole concept of Racers vs Challengers just doesn't work. It's that simple.
No, , me thinks Kerr, Nuguse, Hocker and Fischer quickly realized they might walk away with an additional $1/2million smackers after four weekends of racing.
This IS their season, and it’s about to be on like donkey-Kong.
They are promoting the sport by throwing half the athletes (field events) under the bud...
Yeah, there are plenty of field events that are highly competitive at the moment and just as entertaining as track events. I also get the impression that the top field athletes show up to a lot more meets than the top track athletes do, and are better for the sport in that respect. Trying to remove them from T&F when they are some of its greatest ambassadors doesn't sit well with me.
They are promoting the sport by throwing half the athletes (field events) under the bud...
Yeah, there are plenty of field events that are highly competitive at the moment and just as entertaining as track events. I also get the impression that the top field athletes show up to a lot more meets than the top track athletes do, and are better for the sport in that respect. Trying to remove them from T&F when they are some of its greatest ambassadors doesn't sit well with me.
Yeah, there are plenty of field events that are highly competitive at the moment and just as entertaining as track events. I also get the impression that the top field athletes show up to a lot more meets than the top track athletes do, and are better for the sport in that respect. Trying to remove them from T&F when they are some of its greatest ambassadors doesn't sit well with me.
I just want to know where the money is coming from? The expense of this series is ridiculous and unsustainable. What dummies did they lure in to float $30 Million for a losing product? 💀
They're trying to create something which isn't needed and isn't wanted.
Sports are panicking as they're losing viewers. You'll see more sports try things like this as they get a focus group around a table and come up with rubbish ideas.
Well robert smith is just one of their directors. I believe he’s worth about 15 billion. So that’s a pretty good start. He also invests about another 100 billion. Having said that I don’t think gst will work long term
I'm interested to see how the GST format works, but I'm worried the format isn't different enough from the typical pro track meet to really move the needle.
I've thought for a while that pro running should adopt more of a combat sport format outside of Olympics and World Champs. Instead of fight night, it's race night.
The moment that track becomes Monster Truck Rally, completely dumbed down for the Trumptards, I'm out.
I just saw a tweet from Chris Chavez talking about all of the replacements for the first Grand Slam Track meet in Kingston. It seems like half of the athletes are already bailing on the first meet! For a series that is totally based on competition and promoting that rivalry throughout the series, isn't this a sign that the whole thing just does not work in track? Trying to create an F1 style thing just does not work in this sport - as great as it sounds.
I believe only two of the listed athletes (Quincy Hall and Shamier Little) are Racers signed to all four meets.
They join Luis Grijalva and Devon Allen who were already scratched. 44/48 racers is a pretty good sign.
Two more racers scratched this morning, unfortunately.
I still believe in the core concept of creating a season-long competition for track. Injuries are always going to be a problem in an individual sport, but I don’t understand the mindset of people who want this meet to fail.
There will be some really good races this weekend, especially in the totally stacked women’s long sprint and men’s short distance groups.
Since this is my job, I’ll give you a little insight — this happens at every single meet, you just don’t know it. It’s why most of the time you don’t get the start lists until the day before.
We made the decision that we’d rather publish the field 3+ weeks in advance of the 96 athletes that were intending to run. That’s not a soft verbal - those are contracts.
Unfortunately, things happen. I polled a bunch of media members, including Gault, asking if they’d prefer this methodology or only getting the final list a day before and their opinions were unanimous.
Remember, the Racers committed months ago! Some as far back as June 2024. And many Challengers signed in December. It’s impossible to know then that their Achilles would be bugging them the week before. When is the final lineup announced in the NFL or MLB? It’s sports!
Is this the most upvoted post on LRC? 771 upvotes at time of viewing.
The most upvoted post is probably from Hocker’s Olympic gold.
Two more racers scratched this morning, unfortunately.
I still believe in the core concept of creating a season-long competition for track. Injuries are always going to be a problem in an individual sport, but I don’t understand the mindset of people who want this meet to fail.
There will be some really good races this weekend, especially in the totally stacked women’s long sprint and men’s short distance groups.
No track series is immune from injuries. What you want is one immune from politics which the Diamond League certainly is not. This one somewhat seems to be mostly but the geography/doubling/format (Jakob, Femke, Kishane) and the economics for the biggest stars (Lyles, Tebogo, Kipyegon, Sha’Carri, Grant) is holding it back from landing everyone. Still outside of a few weaker event groups, it’s going to be a great watch and I’m excited. Not like every DL field is a banger either.