Did Wesley Korir Start 5 Minutes Back and Run 2:13

rojo wrote:

He clearly must not have been concerned with the prize money if he ran the race despite not being given an elite start. . . .

Under the rules, he doesn't deserve it. It's very clear. Read the IAAF explanation.

http://www.iaaf.org/LRR08/news/newsid=48031.html

If Carey decides to give him the money, all the more power to him. It will yet again be another great move by a guy who took an nothing race and made it into a great one.

Rojo,

I've been addressing only the prize money issues, not the various other complaints (about which I have no strong views one way or the other), but you're wrong on all of the above points.

First, good runners who care about prize money actually do run races in which they have not been given special treatment beforehand. Many years ago, I ran Chicago even after a certain elite athlete coordinator failed to give me a seeded number as promised. I was required to start behind the first 500 runners. I would have been pretty steamed to discover that I was ineligible for prize money simply because I didn't receive the advantage of starting up front with the rest of the faster runners. It's not unreasonable for someone who actually pays the full entry fee for a race to be able to participate fully in the race, including the race for prize money.

Second, although you say that "the rules" are "very clear" that Korir "doesn't deserve" the prize money, you haven't actually cited any rules, or any documents that incorporated any such rules into the contract between the athlete and the race, and you haven't explained how those alleged rules either override or can be reasonably squared with the race's own materials, posted on the Internet and made available to the press, regarding the awarding of prize money. In the race materials posted online, I saw statements about prize money for overall, American, Illinois, and masters categories, but I didn't see anything about anyone being ineligible for any of those prizes if he or she didn't receive the advantage of starting with the faster runners.

Third, how do you figure that Chicago was a "nothing race" before Carey took over? Have you ever heard the names of Frank Shorter, Carlos Lopes, Rob DeCastella, Steve Jones, Toshihiko Seko, Joan Benoit Samuelson, and Ingrid Kristensen? They, along with many more great runners, all ran Chicago before Carey took over as race director.

Yes I am criticized the race for not having a large US field. This is a world marathon major and should have more US runners. US runners should have been allowed to compete/entice to compete in the elite field (not sub elite field).

That is all I am trying to get across. The point is obvious that the elite field was too small and didn't have enough depth.

I am sure that the announce fields for Boston and NYC will have more "elite" US marathoners than Chicago and not generate as much controversial headline news.

I ran Twin Cities out of the 2nd corral one year. My gun time was 2 minutes slower than my chip time. My place was still determined by my gun time.

I realize people say there were two guns but the race organizers could easily say the elite gun is the "official" gun.

Hopefully they do pay him the 15K regardless. His effort was well worth it. And it was his debut, wasn't it? Very bright future ahead i'd say.

rojo wrote:

....People are saying the race is making a lot of mistakes. The mindset that someone is to blame for all bad outcomes in life is starting to ruin America... Please stop taking easy pot-shots on people that work hard to promote the sport.

What on earth is wrong with holding people accountable for their actions or requiring them to fulfill their contractual obligations? The guy fulfilled his part of the deal--he paid the entry fee in full and ran the whole race. Please don't tell me that the desire to see entities like the Chicago Marathon (45,000 runners at an entry fee of $___ each) or the sponsor (Bank of America!) pay this guy the measly prize money is what is ruining this country! What crap! That's the same kind of b.s. spewed by the insurance industry, big business, and the medical profession. God forbid that a mere mortal should try to get what he deserves. How dare he even think about suing! I would have taken his case for free.

I think what Rojo and some others are failing to appreciate is that there are multiple sets of laws at play in this situation.

The USATF/IAAF rules fairly clearly show the first 5 finishers should get the advertised prize money for finishers 1-5. Here I am almost entirely convinced. The only 2 issues I see with the IAAF rules are 1) does an enforced time-stagger (whereby athletes are actively restrained by the organizers from starting) create two gun times; and 2) if there are 2 gun times can the results be integrated.

But perhaps more interesting is the separate question that DougC introduced regarding Korir's hypothetical claim against the Chicago Marathon (obviously this would never become a real suit). Here's how I would frame the issue: if a competitive athlete pays an entry fee and participates in a competition in consideration of prize money offered in the competition, can the organization deny that athlete eligibility for prize money on a discretionary or non-discretionary basis without stipulating the athlete's ineligibility for prize money in the contract.

The concept of consideration is key here. If the athlete relied on the promise of a possible payout in paying his entry fee and flying out to the race, he might have a claim even if he DIDNT place in the money. If I pay 100 dollars for a lottery ticket, or 100 dollars for blackjack chips at a casino, I have a right to the POSSIBILITY of winning $. If I pay my 100 dollars, the casino can't turn around and say "you can play blackjack until youre out of chips, but we won't let you cash out any winnings." Granted an athletic competition is a skill-based contest, but the promise of a possible payout still exists, no matter how long the odds.

I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that a marathon can't advertise a prize purse without stipulating eligibility (e.g. that ONLY elites are eligible for winnings, or that non-elites will be disadvantaged in their eligibility in the amount of ___ time).

For the top 100 runners, the case is quite interesting. The website content provided as follows:

"Clock time (gun time) is the official time for professional athletes, top 100 participants and wheelchair participants. The official times shall be recorded from the start of the race by the air horn to the point where the participant crosses the finish line. Times shall be rounded to the next highest second. Net times shall not be used for any purpose regarding professional athletes or Top 100 participants."

I don't think this language clearly stipulates that top 100 participants are excluded from an "official time" based on their separate air horn start.

Another interesting hypothetical would be a class action lawsuit on behalf of all top 100 participants (and possibly on behalf all non-elite participants, although that would be a more difficult case to argue). Every top 100 participant, not just korir, was deprived of the possibility of winnings. Just as a lotto ticket has some value despite long odds, a top-100's possibility of placing in the money has some value. I don't think the damages would be sufficient to carry the hypothetical to class action status, but it's an interesting thought experiment.

My personal opinion on the matter is that a staggered start for the purpose of protecting female-elites tv-coverage is absurd. I think the viewership would be significantly higher if the coverage was democratized and didn't focus entirely on the elites. If there was a legitimate chance that every participant would be on tv, a whole lot more friends, family, et al., of the 10s of thousands of everyday participants would tune in.

All that said, I think the Chicago marathon is a fantastic event.

This is EXACTLY why there is no running beyond the collegiate cross country level.

This stuff reminds me of the back and forth currently going on between presidential candidates.

enough.

He is being Payed and yet you idiots are still complaining.

This is the current question regarding this mess since the Korir situation, for better or worse, has been cleared up. Do Americans 1-5 receive the advertised prize money ($5000-$1000)? What about the top 3 Illinois runners ($1500 for first) and masters runners?

1 Reneau, Mike 2:16:20 5:11 USA

2 Freeman, Crosby 2:20:43 5:22 USA

3 Wagner, Allen C 2:22:17 5:25 USA

4 Ware, Chad 2:23:50 5:29 USA

5 Bartlebaugh, Matthew D 2:25:12 5:32 USA

1 Davila, Desiree 2:31:33 5:46 USA

2 De Reuck, Colleen 2:32:25 5:48 USA

3 Higgins, Paige 2:33:06 5:50 USA

4 O'Neill, Kate 2:34:04 5:52 USA

5 Gomez, Zoila 2:35:41 5:56 USA

Only 1 of the guys on this list, Mike Reneau, started with the elite gun. Do they fail to award the prize money listed in the official race program because they only invited 2 american men to the elite race, and only 1 finished in the top 5?

Yes. They even discussed this at the technical meeting. All monies accept overall would be awarded on chip time. They made a point of saying this to all of us so as not to be shocked.

Wrong again wrote:

He is being Payed and yet you idiots are still complaining.

Yes, the payment issue has been resolved.

How about who is the real fourth place finisher?

Also, the root cause HAS NOT BEEN addressed. In fact the payment of two fourth place finishers only created MORE ambiguity. Are these separate races or in fact a single race?

Most posters on this thread would like to see it as a single start with "elites" at the front, all are eligible to win.

rojo wrote:

People are saying the race is making a lot of mistakes. The mindset that someone is to blame for all bad outcomes in life is starting to ruin America.

Best post around here in a while.

Two years in row, all the experts check in telling Chicago what they SHOULD have done AFTER the fact.

It was known for months that the elites would have A 5 minute head start, how come all of you didn't criticize that decision before the race? Why didn't you discuss a scenario like the one this year where a guy from the open field rips off a great run, places but can't win money?

Oh that's right, you never thought of it.

But you allow yourselves to forget about that and charge ahead with your arm chair quarter backing. What are the odds of this happening?

People make mistakes, they fix them and they move on. If RD's listened to all the experts here, we would never have any races, just bickering about what a perfect race should be.

Chicago sucks because it was hot 2 years and it sells out early.Boston sucks it was hot a couple years and you have to wait in the village (and the purse is small, like that makes any difference to anyone here). New York sucks because the start is confusing.

If you can solve all the problems in big races before hand, volunteer your services now for next year. If not, how about shutting the f*** up and running?

try wrote:

This is EXACTLY why there is no running beyond the collegiate cross country level.

Actually there is a huge amount of running.

It just that you aren't good enough to be part of it.

Wrong again wrote:

He is being Payed and yet you idiots are still complaining.

First of all, the word is "paid". Second, I was not complaining. I was simply pointing out that rojo was wrong.

[quote]Avocados Number wrote:

[quote]:

Third, how do you figure that Chicago was a "nothing race" before Carey took over? Have you ever heard the names of Frank Shorter, Carlos Lopes, Rob DeCastella, Steve Jones, Toshihiko Seko, Joan Benoit Samuelson, and Ingrid Kristensen? They, along with many more great runners, all ran Chicago before Carey took over as race director.

It was a nothing race. It was the great runners you mentioned and about a thousand others. It didn't bring millions to the local economy. It wasn't mentioned in the same breath with Boston, London and New York until Carey arrived.

this race deserves much more criticism. I called the office to ask how prize money was going to be awarded based off the two starts. The man I spoke with didn't know and thought that was a good question. So I gave him a few days to find the answer and when I called back he told me it was going to be based off of gun time. He said everyone was notified incase the top american happens to start in the top 100, so they are not quick to announce the hansons runners as the top american. How could this not be discussed prior to the time I called (three weeks) and why was it never announced to everyone they already screwed! You don't care because you didn't pay 110 to run a race that was advertised as one race and ended up being two races. You don't care because you never ran a race were everytime you saw a clock you had to subtract 5 minutes in your head.

TLtl wrote:

People make mistakes, they fix them and they move on.

Nothing was "fixed". The underlying issue has not been addressed. Some hush money may be paid out. Not really call that a solution. In fact, it just creates more confusion on who the real 4th place finisher is.

No one claimed to be a fortune teller. So your criticism that we did not predict this has no relevance.

It is the ability to dissent and criticize that makes us strong.

TLtl wrote:

It was known for months that the elites would have A 5 minute head start, how come all of you didn't criticize that decision before the race? Why didn't you discuss a scenario like the one this year where a guy from the open field rips off a great run, places but can't win money?

Oh that's right, you never thought of it.

Actually, it is the job of the race director to be prepared for this type of scenario. Pinkowski went ahead with the separate starts without considering what would happen if someone outside of the 15 in the elite field might run fast... That's very poor planning by a race director.

Additionally, a previous poster called the marathon 3 weeks in advance and was assured that those in the top 100 start would still be eligible for prize money. Carey screwed up. It's pretty simple. However, it does not take away from the fact that he's run a great marathon for years and provides very strong support for US runners. Nobody is claiming that Pinkowski's past leadership of the Chicago marathon has been a failure.

Rojo.. you miss the point. the 5 minute "head start" was a bone head move from the beginning.

They have 2 Americans in the mens Elite field. Say they had bumped it to 5 "elite" US guys. What happens when 3 of them finish before the sub-elite, but say 2 guys come from the 2nd group beating the other 2 "elite" times. Who gets the money in this case?

This also f-up things for age group awards. Are they using chip time or gun time for that as well?

I assume if that would mean Elite Racers are not elligible for the age group awards?

Bonehead play from the beginning. Start the race together. ONE RACE 1 WINNER

Glad to see that some people haven't lost their grip on common sense. Yes, the Pink Man is a good guy and good for the sport. Yes, he'd be within his "rights" not to pay Wesley. But while that would be allowable, it wouldn't be right, so big ups to the Pink Man for dojign the right thing.

Focusing not on blame here, but on solutions...maybe 25 is too small a number for a pro field. Not sure what capacity constraints exist regarding a secured warmup area, or other such logistics, and I know you have to draw the line somewhere...

...but I thought to myself, if Mike Reneau gets picked, why would Wesley Korir not get picked? Wesley's a good runner too (That's no dig at Mike, who strikes me as a pretty impressive "old-school" runner)