See title. There are 9 possible "matchups" but there are only 3 that actually are questions (since I'd say every athlete would prefer Olympic "equivalent" (i.e. gold vs gold) medals to World ones, and obviously they'd prefer better Olympic medals to weaker World ones.
So assuming you'd only have 1, which would you prefer? For me, I think it'd be Olympic silver, World gold, Olympic bronze.
I would generally agree with this. "World Champion" is tough to beat with any Olympic medal other than gold.
However, if I only got one great season, and had to choose between being a World Champion who never qualified for the Olympics vs being an Olympic silver medalist with no WC appearances ... that is tough.
Some WC medalists never qualify for the Olympics despite a long and successful career. Someone like Joey Woody got silver at worlds in 2003 but just missed qualifying for the Olympics. I wouldn't be surprised if he would prefer Olympic bronze, but he might not make that trade if it meant trading the rest of his career, too.
No one really cares about world championships as they're never competitive as the Olympics.
Athletes will be remembered far more for just winning an Olympic bronze than any WC gold medal. 😉
world champion hard to beat unless its an Olympic gold-worlds is still only every 2 years -I don't remember Emma Coburn's Olympic medal much compared to her win at worlds in 2017; Same deal with Jenny Simpson-getting the Olympic bronze still not as big a deal as being world champ-and that's what I remember her for most--my 2 cents...
No one really cares about world championships as they're never competitive as the Olympics.
Athletes will be remembered far more for just winning an Olympic bronze than any WC gold medal. 😉
Really? I feel like Kerr's Olympic bronze kinda gets overlooked/was seen as a fluke. His WC gold last year seems like it really cemented him as one of the top runners in the world, as opposed to just a medal contender.
See title. There are 9 possible "matchups" but there are only 3 that actually are questions (since I'd say every athlete would prefer Olympic "equivalent" (i.e. gold vs gold) medals to World ones, and obviously they'd prefer better Olympic medals to weaker World ones.
So assuming you'd only have 1, which would you prefer? For me, I think it'd be Olympic silver, World gold, Olympic bronze.
Since I’m not an athlete, and I have no financial incentive: Olympic Silver, Olympic bronze then Worlds Gold. Bigger stage and more prestige for the level of competition. For an actual athlete capable of those feats, this is a job. So whatever prize gets them the biggest payday from their sponsor would probably be the answer.
No one really cares about world championships as they're never competitive as the Olympics.
Athletes will be remembered far more for just winning an Olympic bronze than any WC gold medal. 😉
world champion hard to beat unless its an Olympic gold-worlds is still only every 2 years -I don't remember Emma Coburn's Olympic medal much compared to her win at worlds in 2017; Same deal with Jenny Simpson-getting the Olympic bronze still not as big a deal as being world champ-and that's what I remember her for most--my 2 cents...
It's interesting, because for me, Simpson's bronze was a much bigger deal given the quality of that field in 2016 compared to 2011 Worlds. It sounds like most responses depend on what people find more important: public perception (Olympic medals win out) vs. perception of those in the athletics world (World champ wins out).
See title. There are 9 possible "matchups" but there are only 3 that actually are questions (since I'd say every athlete would prefer Olympic "equivalent" (i.e. gold vs gold) medals to World ones, and obviously they'd prefer better Olympic medals to weaker World ones.
So assuming you'd only have 1, which would you prefer? For me, I think it'd be Olympic silver, World gold, Olympic bronze.
This is an interesting question because, although the Olympics may be slightly more competitive than Worlds, the difference is small. I strongly believe that winning a Worlds gold is a more impressive accomplishment than winning an Olympic silver.
Does anyone disagree with this? Do you think the Olympics is so much more competitive than Worlds that being second in the former makes you a better runner than being first in the latter?
Here is everyone in each category in the men's 1500 since 2008. Feel free to try other events.
World Champions: Kerr, Wightman, Cheruiyot, Manangoi, Kiprop, Kiprop, Kiprop, Kamel, Lagat, Ramzi, El G, El G Olympic silver medalists: Cheruiyot, Makhloufi, Manzano, Willis, Lagat, El G
If you ignore doping offenses (which you should, for the purposes of this question), the first list is easily more impressive than the second IMO. (interestingly, Ingebrigtsen appears on neither list)
In addition, I think that ON HERE, a Worlds gold is held in higher regard than Olympic silver. Just because, for us, the Olympics isn't *too* far above Worlds, and winning the race sure beats not winning the race.
On the other hand, the marketing potential of the Olympics is very high, so maybe the value to sponsors/relatives/casual fans of calling yourself an Olympic medalist for the rest of your life is so high that it's worth it. ("Oh you're a World champion for running? Does that mean the Olympics?...Oh, you didn't do the Olympics, it's some other world championship? My friend's uncle is like that, he won the world championship for triathlon in his age group") But as someone who is a big running fan and who very much isn't a global medalist, it's hard to know how much it matters.
I'll point out that both Meb Keflezighi and Leo Manzano had trouble with sponsors after winning Olympic silver. Whether they were too high or their sponsors were too low, I think this is an indication that even within the sport there are substantial disagreements on the value of the "minor medals".
Making an Olympic final but not medaling is worth 25+ World golds in terms of feathers in your cap. Only thing that can compete with the Olympics would be world records.
Making an Olympic final but not medaling is worth 25+ World golds in terms of feathers in your cap. Only thing that can compete with the Olympics would be world records.
OK, to test this, here's a list of select global finalists in the 5k. Some of them are from the 2016 Olympics, and some of them are from 2017 Worlds. How well can you tell them apart without looking it up?
Birhanu Balew Andrew Butchart Kemoy Campbell Elroy Gelant Awet Habte Abrar Osman Brett Robinson Cyrus Rutto Patrick Tiernan