If you staggered the second race based on the results of the first, you would solve GST's two biggest problems.

I wish they had a full field run each distance, then the 2nd race they just mixed and matched athletes to races in ways that would be the most interesting. Like have a full field of 1500m runners run a 1500m on Friday, then have them all race a 400m on Sunday. Or put half of them into a shorter race, and half of them into a longer race based on their strengths. Or hold an elimination mile that’s half 1500m guys/half 800m guys. Or a mile race with all the top sprinters. Or a mile steeple. Or an exhibition race like that Warholm/Duplantis 100m. Or, as you mentioned, a staggered race. Could even do a staggered mixed-gender race like that one they do in that Australian mile. Basically one race that is classic track, getting all the top athletes to race head to head at their main distance, then another race that’s more fun/lets us see hypothetical races we’d never normally get.

That should result in reasonably serious fans not watching the meets. Do you believe your strategies will bring in new fans to replace them?

Sounds like a middle school track day. Sounds silly.

Just give a fat bonus for winning both events, problem solved.

I agree that a gimmicky solution is going to alienate fans -- probably more fans than it'll draw.

Here's a stab at a totally different kind of solution: eliminate the race groups altogether, but allow runners to compete in a second event and add a bonus for placing in two events. You can still have four "racers" for each event, but the "challengers" can include "racers" in other events. This would allow someone to do a 400m/800m or a 1500m/3000m. I'd also advocate keeping the scoring system to see who is the grand slam champion at the end of the year.

Base prize money would be the same for each individual event, but double the money for runners who ran in other events. The huge increase in payout would incentivize runners to still run in two events. For example, Grant Fisher won $150,000 in Miami, but under my system he would have won $250,000 ($50k for 2nd in the 3000, $200k for 1st in the 5000).

There are still problems with this system (it's rigged against runners who are really only good at one event), but it would solve the much bigger problem of anticlimactic second races.

Trying to be in peak shape for GST spreads a runner too thin over a track season. Your fat bonuses would create a conflict between greed, and wanting to become one of the GOATs by winning WC and Olympic medals.

Timed rope climb between races

I'd like to see something like this. But it think race 1 would still be a sit-and-kick with no separation and the second would basically be a scratch race.

Not really, have you ever seen the handicapped Australian mile races spanning everyone from pros to hobby joggers on a grass track?

bringbackthemile.com

Aussie Milers, McSweyn & Hoare, tangle in Tasmania

“This is 100% good for the sport. Events like this are a rarity, and people are engaged with it so much that I think it’s another option that should be invested in.” By Sean Whipp for World Athletics On a cool night on the no...

Link:bringbackthemile.com/news/detail/aussi...

I think the same idea should be used in the 1500m for the Decathlon!

You would also have a lot less athletes signing with GST if those were the rules.

No because then you would get athletes sandbagging the first race / slower first race to try and influence their start position in the second race.

GSTs biggest problem is that people don't want to watch a long, drawn out event. People want instant results, race after race and no filler

If you want to increase athlete's incentives to run fast, how about a time trial? This will not work on the sprints, but for 800m and up and it should be fine. Each athlete goes off 15 seconds after the previous one. If we like we can put the person with the slowest PR first.

This is not even possible because some people would be forced to race longer than the true distance.

If you start 10 meters behind in a 1500, you are running 1510 and your time won't even be eligible for anything. Or someone would be running 1490.

No athletes want to race that and no fans will be interested to watch a race where only 1 person gets a real FAT time.