I think Michael Johnson said on a Citrus Podcast, it is $2K regardless of the runner.
All Challengers receive $2K + a guaranteed $10K. If an athlete is accustomed to being paid much more than that then they’re probably looking at winning $50/$100K.
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!
I have been criticising GST as I don't like the whole format and the approach it has taken, but this may be one of the very few things I like about it. The fact that the FULL field is published in advance should be a MUST in all meets.
As a fan I hate not knowing who is actually racing at a meet until the very last 2 days. As an athlete I hate being told by the meet organiser that the field is full with better athletes and that I am placed as a reserve (without knowing if this is actually true or just a matter of favoritism) just to find out athletes much slower than me have been added to the field.
So yes, transparency is a thing that is really missing in track and field in general and is very much appreciated when it is there. For example, most of the Belgium or Dutch meets are constantly updating on the website the athletes as they get confirmed to the meets.
As for people pulling from meets, this is something inevitable with injuries or the commonly established mindset by many of the best athletes of competing so few times through the season (which is why I am also quite sceptic about signing athletes for full seasons and then seeing them pull out from a meet without really knowing the true reason behind it).
I don't necessarily believe that the potential problem is announcing the fields early, but rather our sport doesn't really allow for such contractual commitments to work.
It's extremely clear that GST isn't the true focus of any of these athletes seasons. As such, athletes have to scratch these meaningless meets all the time to do what's best for themselves long term. Not a new problem. GST just isn't important enough to create a product that the fans can get excited about. And if we get excited, scratch, replacement. GST is just another meet with gimmicks.
I respectfully disagree. Several athletes have said that GST is a big deal to them, and they are taking it seriously. It's not just talk. We saw a number of top athletes skip world indoors this year because they prioritized getting ready for the Kingston meet. Of course, the global outdoor championships will always be #1 on the priority list, but it appears many athletes have made GST #2.
And in defense of Grand Slam Track- why all the naysayers? They're trying something new, Give it a chance.
Because there's nothing wrong with the current format. There's a simple reason for why diamond league events mainly focus on Europe and it's because the interest in track and field is much bigger here compared to the US.
I see a few problems...
1) Racers dodging each other is a big issue. Sports do well when there are rivalries, and those parties need to meet at least time to time and in a regular fashion.
2) The US is a huge market with 330M people and it seems like there are enough track fans (albeit spread out) to make it worth trying to capture a share of.
And in defense of Grand Slam Track- why all the naysayers? They're trying something new, Give it a chance.
Because there's nothing wrong with the current format. There's a simple reason for why diamond league events mainly focus on Europe and it's because the interest in track and field is much bigger here compared to the US.
O agree there's nothing wrong with the current format and I think the biggest problem here is poor marketing. But this is something new and let them try. It's more track for us to watch and follow and will give us some real races.
Because there's nothing wrong with the current format. There's a simple reason for why diamond league events mainly focus on Europe and it's because the interest in track and field is much bigger here compared to the US.
Do you think it was a good idea for F1 to expand into the US market? To grow the sport, you have to do something different.
F1 didn't do anything fundamentally different, it's simply expanding into a new market.
The US market is simply not interested in distance running, and changing the format to place an emphasis on rivalries is unlikely to change that.
Because there's nothing wrong with the current format. There's a simple reason for why diamond league events mainly focus on Europe and it's because the interest in track and field is much bigger here compared to the US.
O agree there's nothing wrong with the current format and I think the biggest problem here is poor marketing. But this is something new and let them try. It's more track for us to watch and follow and will give us some real races.
It's outrageously expensive here in Europe, like 40 bucks a month for the subscription to watch it. They're banking hard on the US market to keep it afloat, which is unlikely to be viable long term.
This is great that Merber jumped on. I'll first say that GST is doing great work. Ultimately, the more that professional, truly elite, track is on tv, the better. We're getting 8 more days a year of elite track on broadcast tv in prime time slots. Awesome! Any of my criticism is sort of just nitpicking when considering the bigger picture.
I'm a fan of the 3 day format. I wouldn't attend all 3, but day 3 is the one that matters and being interested in day 3 gives me reason to at least tune into day 1 and 2. Also, casually watching day 2 on tv might mean I HAVE to tune in to see day 3. The more track that is on tv, the better. It is the best advertisement for itself. This is similar to F1 weekends.
I'm not a fan of the venues, but that is true of all outdoor tracks for me. Outdoor tracks are too large, too spacious. Move these meets to a short track (indoor or out) and I'd be attending/watching all 3 days.
Pole vault, long jump, javelin (even without the top stars) are way more interesting than some of these event groups.
My biggest "complaint" is that this meet is way over indexed for hurdlers. With 96 athletes total, having 32 hurdlers is way too many. You're telling me that a third of the elite track athletes in the world are hurdlers? Having the 8th hurdler signing up run in a flat event just doesn't feel like a truly elite race (not even close). Neither of the hurdle groups are particularly interesting either. They could have combined the hurdlers into one group and perhaps rotated what events they'd do from meet to meet (Holloway in the 400m hurdles is WAY more compelling than seeing him run the 100 flat and high hurdles against his regular competition). I don't know why hurdles is even in this meet and pole vault/long jump/javelin aren't.
I think Michael Johnson said on a Citrus Podcast, it is $2K regardless of the runner.
All Challengers receive $2K + a guaranteed $10K. If an athlete is accustomed to being paid much more than that then they’re probably looking at winning $50/$100K.
Total BS. The challengers do NOT receive $10k for showing up to a track meet. Is this another April Fools joke?
All Challengers receive $2K + a guaranteed $10K. If an athlete is accustomed to being paid much more than that then they’re probably looking at winning $50/$100K.
Total BS. The challengers do NOT receive $10k for showing up to a track meet. Is this another April Fools joke?
Last place guarantees $10k, so yes, every challenger is guaranteed $10k.
Do you think it was a good idea for F1 to expand into the US market? To grow the sport, you have to do something different.
F1 didn't do anything fundamentally different, it's simply expanding into a new market.
The US market is simply not interested in distance running, and changing the format to place an emphasis on rivalries is unlikely to change that.
For many of the reasons already listed, track has some fundamental challenges as an individual sport and the current infrastructure makes it difficult to overcome them.
I think there is a lot of criticism from people like yourself on the differences in format, whether it’s the doubling, Racers/Challengers, etc. and not the result of those changes.
Look at the actual product: the races.
It is the first week of April and you will see the podium of the men’s 1500m facing off against 1-2-4 in the 800m. The Olympic 200m Champion is racing the Olympic 400m Champion… twice!
The athletes are very excited and I think most track fans are too. What college meet were you going to otherwise watch this weekend?
F1 didn't do anything fundamentally different, it's simply expanding into a new market.
The US market is simply not interested in distance running, and changing the format to place an emphasis on rivalries is unlikely to change that.
For many of the reasons already listed, track has some fundamental challenges as an individual sport and the current infrastructure makes it difficult to overcome them.
I think there is a lot of criticism from people like yourself on the differences in format, whether it’s the doubling, Racers/Challengers, etc. and not the result of those changes.
Look at the actual product: the races.
It is the first week of April and you will see the podium of the men’s 1500m facing off against 1-2-4 in the 800m. The Olympic 200m Champion is racing the Olympic 400m Champion… twice!
The athletes are very excited and I think most track fans are too. What college meet were you going to otherwise watch this weekend?
And I appreciate the dialogue!
I would watch another sport, not track if there aren't any meets on. I pay about 40 bucks a month for my sports streaming package, which gives me my countries soccer league, the Spanish and Italian soccer leagues, Diamond League, tennis, rally, NBA and a bunch of other sports on free to air TV.
If I want to watch the GST I have to pay another 40 bucks a month on top of that. The unique appeal of the GST of watching 800 specialists running the 1500 and 1500 specialists running the 800 doesn't particularly move me enough to not be able to wait for the summary on YouTube afterwards.
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.
The way I see it is that it is an American Track League primarily focused on the western hemisphere for athletes who cannot attend most of the diamond leagues on the eastern hemisphere. All of this talk about head to heads and rivalries is nonsense. We get all of that in the diamond league plus more with the field events. Just look at the list of racers and challengers. Mostly Americans or Caribbean athletes with a few Europeans sprinkled in. It’s a smart move since track is not as big in America but this is what it ultimately boils down to.
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.
The issue isn’t that we aren’t creating rivalries (most of the people who pulled out are “challengers” and not “racers”, who are supposed to be regulars on the circuit) it’s that this just shows the GST meets themselves aren’t the end all be all.
But they are great early season matchups. Let’s hope they are well produced and can be a continuing thing on the circuit.
A bigger concern for me is you don’t have any of the biggest 4 Jamaicans in the sport at the meet and I think one of them is competing elsewhere this weekend. That to me structurally is a bigger problem for GST and the sport in general. The forced doubling has always been a concern for various reasons but you can’t expect everyone to embrace this right off.
F1 didn't do anything fundamentally different, it's simply expanding into a new market.
The US market is simply not interested in distance running, and changing the format to place an emphasis on rivalries is unlikely to change that.
For many of the reasons already listed, track has some fundamental challenges as an individual sport and the current infrastructure makes it difficult to overcome them.
I think there is a lot of criticism from people like yourself on the differences in format, whether it’s the doubling, Racers/Challengers, etc. and not the result of those changes.
Look at the actual product: the races.
It is the first week of April and you will see the podium of the men’s 1500m facing off against 1-2-4 in the 800m. The Olympic 200m Champion is racing the Olympic 400m Champion… twice!
The athletes are very excited and I think most track fans are too. What college meet were you going to otherwise watch this weekend?
And I appreciate the dialogue!
Here come some questions.
Is forcing 1500 and 800m specialists to face each other at these 2 events really the best thing? Is the possibility of not winning any of the events but still be declared as champion the best thing?
Why do we need to create this specific groups and sign Racers for each of them and then have them compete in a completely different group? Gabby Thomas is a racer in the short sprints group (100-200m) but she will race in the long sprints group (200-400m) in Kingston. Therefore, is it really necessary to create these groups?
What about having different groups racing the same event but not facing each other and having different champions? Short sprints and long sprints both racing the 200m, short hurdlers and short sprinters racing the 100m, long hurdlers and long sprinters racing the 400m. Why not have Sydney face Paulino in the same 400m heat, without having to switch groups. I LOVE the fact that some of the athletes will have to compete much more than what they usually do, but I'd also love if they were able to enter whatever event suits them best at that time of the season and be able to face anyone.
Also, Tebogo the 200m Olympic just raced in Melbourne in March, as well as two of the biggest upcoming talents (Gout Gout and Cameron Myers). Many Olympic medallists will also be racing in other meets in April in Botswana, China... Fields might not be that loaded, but it is not as if we wouldn't be able to watch any top class meets in the mean time.
And in defense of Grand Slam Track- why all the naysayers? They're trying something new, Give it a chance.
Because there's nothing wrong with the current format. There's a simple reason for why diamond league events mainly focus on Europe and it's because the interest in track and field is much bigger here compared to the US.
Yes, for everyone liking the tried and true Diamond League format this can only make it worse (through inluencing the format or by making athletes less interested in competing in DL).
I just want the worlds best compete against each other, and having track and field together also works well.