yes - it was long. the course was supposed to have just gone briefly inside city park, but somehow on race morning it ended up going around city park ... or something similar.
Big surprise.
USATF National Championship? Disgraceful.
zip gun era wrote:
USATF National Championship? Disgraceful.
USATF National Championship??????
Fortunately, not many people run high-altitude, net-uphill marathons in order to get PRs.
zip gun era wrote:
USATF National Championship? Disgraceful.
Have you been paying attention to how USATF operates recently? Olympic Trials for the marathon got hijacked by deep pockets, why wouldn't the same have happened here? Anyway, it was a race and not a time trial.
USATF doesnt go out and measure courses. if they certify a course and it gets changed, there is nothing anyone can do about it. everyone had to run the same distance, so doesnt that count for something? dear god you guys are f***ing babies.
Just to clarify.....It was the USATF National Club RELAY Championships not the USATF Marathon Championships.
altitude wrote:
Just to clarify.....It was the USATF National Club RELAY Championships not the USATF Marathon Championships.
I didn't realize that there was a national club relay marathon championship. That's even more pathetic than a national 50K racewalking championship!
If you say so. Japanese ekidens aren't considered pathetic, for some reason. USATF did it to replace the 5k, 8k, 10k, 12k champs, to consolidate them for clubs whose members can't easily travel so much. It helps the clubs and club runners and it probably helps USATF's bottom line at least a little, too. Don't know why it would be held on an uphill course in warm weather at altitude when most of the elite development clubs are based near sea level, probably it was just a case of nobody else would offer as much prize money for the event. Yeah, USATF is pathetic, but that shouldn't be news worthy of exclamation.
Super Bowls don't go to cities that can't meet certain criteria. PGA events must adhere to certain criteria. Even bowling alleys have to have a certain standard to host PBA events. USATF should demand the same or not stick their name to it. There is something they can do about it. Not have it there next year.
I'm not crying about the course. Yes, it's the same for everyone. I'm pointing out that USATF should protect their reputation.
zip gun era wrote:
I'm not crying about the course. Yes, it's the same for everyone. I'm pointing out that USATF should protect their reputation.
Actually, the course (or at least the air surrounding it) is different for runners based at altitude than it is for runners based in the rest of the country.
not organized by runners wrote:
Japanese ekidens aren't considered pathetic, for some reason.
Obviously, in Japan, there is a real club infrastructure, with excellent runners participating and widespread public interest in the events. I agree that a national club marathon relay championship (or whatever it's called) doesn't HAVE to be pathetic.
Sure, and USATF does bear (some) responsibility for the club infrastructure in the US or lack thereof. I don't see the use in denigrating the event or the runners who do participate, nor do I think taking an axe to the event to be necessarily beneficial. It's a good concept, but poorly implemented. It should be held on a sea level course, maybe in the late fall or winter, and USATF should offer more to clubs than tokens that aren't of greater use. Welcome to our imperfect world.
not organized by runners wrote:
I don't see the use in denigrating the event or the runners who do participate, nor do I think taking an axe to the event to be necessarily beneficial. It's a good concept, but poorly implemented. It should be held on a sea level course, maybe in the late fall or winter, and USATF should offer more to clubs than tokens that aren't of greater use.
It doesn't matter much to me whether there is such an event or not, although I see some advantage to restricting the term "national championship" to events that can reasonably be expected to attract national-caliber athletes, just as events are generally not accorded Olympic status until there is a significant level of international competition. I don't see why it should make much difference whether the race is held at sea level or a higher altitude. I would just hold the event where it attracts a reasonable combination of good runners, enthusiastic spectators, and competent race management.
Avocados Number wrote:
It doesn't matter much to me whether there is such an event or not, although I see some advantage to restricting the term "national championship" to events that can reasonably be expected to attract national-caliber athletes, just as events are generally not accorded Olympic status until there is a significant level of international competition.
There is also a club t&f national championship and a club xc national championship. How else would there be meaningful competition among club runners? Europe has club championships, too. I don't see any disadvantage in providing national championships for them, maybe you do.
I don't see why it should make much difference whether the race is held at sea level or a higher altitude. I would just hold the event where it attracts a reasonable combination of good runners, enthusiastic spectators, and competent race management.
Basically because hosting it at a venue at altitude suppresses one of those facets unnecessarily. Most of the clubs are based near sea level, going to altitude to race puts them at a disadvantage to those that are altitude-trained. It slants the field unfairly towards those who train at altitude. It's easier to justify making the trip to an event, especially for a club runner type, where you don't have to automatically concede over a minute to a certain subset of competitors based just on the venue location. Hansons won because, though they are not altitude-trained, their talent was enough to overcome the talent of the altitude-trained runners in the race. They would have won by at least as much (if not more) over the same field if the race had been held somewhere like Portland or DC. Then again, holding it somewhere like Portland or DC would have attracted more entries and probably have made for more meaningful competition.
Well, since you brought it up, I've never thought much of a national cross-country championship race for clubs. (I didn't know that there was a national track and field championship for clubs.) But I don't much care, as long as they don't interfere with, dilute, or cause confusion with the REAL national championships.
Avocados Number wrote:
Well, since you brought it up, I've never thought much of a national cross-country championship race for clubs. (I didn't know that there was a national track and field championship for clubs.)
Are you aware that there are masters national championships events, too?
But I don't much care, as long as they don't interfere with, dilute, or cause confusion with the REAL national championships.
Well, they're no less real due to any arbitrary conceit of yours and I don't see how anyone besides you would be confused by such things.
Have you been to Japan? While there may be a few clubs, I certainly wouldnt even go close to saying there is widespread public interest!
I am aware that there are masters championships. And junior championships, high school championships, women's championships, and various other championships that generally exclude the best runners in the country. I have no problem with any of that.
I suppose you could have, along with national "club" championships, national championships that pit counties against counties, cities against cities, states against states, and arbitrary collections of runners against arbitrary collections of runners (which, in fact, pretty much describes the national "club" championships).
I understand that, in earlier years (back in the days of the AAU), there was real national competition among athletic clubs. That may still be true in other countries. I don't think that club competition plays a significant role in U.S. distance running today at a national level.