So a ton of you always state you'll take the Olympic gold over the world gold. Would you say the same for Olympic silver/bronze vs Worlds silver/bronze?
Sidenote: why do we as avid serious running fans care what society thinks(only watches every 4 years, and probably doesn't even know/care that track has a world championships). We are letting casuals dictate what matters in our sport. Imagine people who don't watch basketball saying olympic basketball is the highest level of basketball.
Olympics / Worlds are essentially the same for track and field. Maybe you'd take Olympics in a tie-break but obviously a single gold in the worlds beats a million silvers at the Olympics.
Olympics / Worlds are essentially the same for track and field. Maybe you'd take Olympics in a tie-break but obviously a single gold in the worlds beats a million silvers at the Olympics.
Disagree. You think famous track, swim, gymnasts would be a common name without Olympic titles?
So a ton of you always state you'll take the Olympic gold over the world gold. Would you say the same for Olympic silver/bronze vs Worlds silver/bronze?
Sidenote: why do we as avid serious running fans care what society thinks(only watches every 4 years, and probably doesn't even know/care that track has a world championships). We are letting casuals dictate what matters in our sport. Imagine people who don't watch basketball saying olympic basketball is the highest level of basketball.
You're "only watches every four years" applies to the USA. The rest of the world watches, especially Europe.
So a ton of you always state you'll take the Olympic gold over the world gold. Would you say the same for Olympic silver/bronze vs Worlds silver/bronze?
Sidenote: why do we as avid serious running fans care what society thinks(only watches every 4 years, and probably doesn't even know/care that track has a world championships). We are letting casuals dictate what matters in our sport. Imagine people who don't watch basketball saying olympic basketball is the highest level of basketball.
You're "only watches every four years" applies to the USA. The rest of the world watches, especially Europe.
Glad to hear that. We americans need to get on board and make our stars bigger, grow the sport, increase participation etc
I think winning/medaling at worlds is just as impressive as doing it at the olympics. All the best runners compete and care about winning at both. I think you'll occasionally see someone do something at the olympics like double or run additional relays where they'd only run one event at worlds, but I think the level of competition is basically the same at both.
But, because the olympics gets so many more viewers, it's also just true that if you're a professional runner having success at the olympics will mean more to your sponsor and mean more for other career opportunities.
I think winning/medaling at worlds is just as impressive as doing it at the olympics. All the best runners compete and care about winning at both. I think you'll occasionally see someone do something at the olympics like double or run additional relays where they'd only run one event at worlds, but I think the level of competition is basically the same at both.
But, because the olympics gets so many more viewers, it's also just true that if you're a professional runner having success at the olympics will mean more to your sponsor and mean more for other career opportunities.
Imagine Nike tells all of their athletes this year you need to try making the world indoor team. Instantly the star power of the meet would go up and sponsors would follow. This sport needs to be restructured desperately. The shoe companies are making it hard for it to prosper.
Olympics and outdoor worlds are on par for all track and field except the marathon. For marathon, Olympics >>>> worlds. Many of the greats skip world marathons in favor of big paydays at majors
Imagine Nike tells all of their athletes this year you need to try making the world indoor team. Instantly the star power of the meet would go up and sponsors would follow. This sport needs to be restructured desperately. The shoe companies are making it hard for it to prosper.
I agree. I personally would enjoy watching 2 world championships per year of equal significance, one indoors and one outdoors. It's tough though - the shoe companies are also where all the money comes from for runners to actually make a living in this sport. It would be nice if all the shoe companies and world athletics could get together and jointly agree on an incentive structure that they think would maximize fan interest in the sport, but unfortunately that doesn't seem realistic.
So a ton of you always state you'll take the Olympic gold over the world gold. Would you say the same for Olympic silver/bronze vs Worlds silver/bronze?
I don't know, I would say the difference is greater for silver & bronze than for gold? With the world champs, you're playing for the title of "world champion", so it's a little bit more 'only gold matters' rather than 'celebrate every medal'. An Olympic medallist will always get called an Olympic medallist by the press, and a world champion will always get called a world champion, but 2nd or 3rd place at the worlds..... maybe not? As for Olympic gold vs the title of world champion, I think both are valued close to evenly, maybe a little bit more on Olympic gold just because of the hype at Olympic time compared to less coverage for the worlds, but most people would still recognise both as meaning the athlete is at the pinnacle of their sport.