"Olympic silver medallist Catherine Ndereba and Gete Wami were well off the pace causing Wami to tie with Irina Mikitenko for the World Marathon title. The World Marathon Major race directors were then the left to vote to break the tie. The voted for Mikitenko and just like that she got $500,000 and Wami nothing."
-
I suspect racism here.
"Olympic silver medallist Catherine Ndereba and Gete Wami were well off the pace causing Wami to tie with Irina Mikitenko for the World Marathon title. The World Marathon Major race directors were then the left to vote to break the tie. The voted for Mikitenko and just like that she got $500,000 and Wami nothing." -
Why not $250,000 and $250,000 for each? They 'voted' on performances that were run in different marathons, very strange! How about using somewhat more objective criteria?
-
They give their reasoning right here:
http://www.worldmarathonmajors.com/US/news/193/
It sounds reasonable to me. Quit trying to use race as an excuse. -
Irina scores the same number of points in fewer races and her average time was better. Makes good sense to me. Not racist in the least.
-
actually...it makes perfect sense
-
It does seem to be silly, though, to not have an objective tie-breaker set up.
Something like:
1) record in head-to-head WMM races in this WMM period
2) most wins in WMM races in this WMM period
3) fastest time in WMM races in this WMM period -
I don't see it as racism either, but seems kings of crazy to have a competition with a $500,000 prize, without a clear method of determining the winner.
Fast times are good... but if average times are going to be the tie-beaker, then they should have been told beforehand that it might be an advantage to run a flat course like Berlin rather than Boston or NYC. -
This decision is bad for ING NYC Marathon. The winner in a tie breaker was the athlete that said " I don't care enough to try to win the title by picking up an extra point in New York". The athlete that realized that she needed to run New York (Wami) to win the title even though it was probably one too many races, was then punished for her decision. Her poor performance in New York counted against her.
New York was trying to get both athletes for the showdown. What would of happened if both came and both ran poorly? The Half Million dollar winner won because she said NO to New York. -
Not An Expert wrote:
It does seem to be silly, though, to not have an objective tie-breaker set up.
Something like:
1) record in head-to-head WMM races in this WMM period
2) most wins in WMM races in this WMM period
3) fastest time in WMM races in this WMM period
Head to head is the tie breaker. The two women were 1-1 against each other. I agree that they need some further tie-breakers. -
I suspect trollism here.
-
Wami won the majors last year by winning Berlin in a relatively easy time then finishing 2nd in NYC in a hard performance. Since then she hasn't been herself. 3rd in London, Olympic disaster, and bad showing in NYC this year.
Mikitenko ran sub-2:20 in Berlin and she is supposed to jeopardize the rest of her career by coming to fight Wami in NYC for a single payday, admittedly a large one? I don't think the intent of the World Marathon Majors is to make top athletes make suicidal career decisions. At least I hope not. -
The fact that Irina scored her points in fewer races and had a faster average time is really peachy and all that, but they didn't come up with that criteria until yesterday. Plus Wami had run in NYC which is known to be a slower course than the ones Mikitenko ran on.
Frankly, the whole series is a joke that has completely failed to capture the imagination of the public. And if Wami won, she'd essentially be being rewarded twice for the same thing (the vast majority of her points came from 2007). -
helping you out wrote:
I don't think the intent of the World Marathon Majors is to make top athletes make suicidal career decisions. At least I hope not.
Are you kidding me? New York is known for bringing athletes back from WC or Olympics. Agents believe in striking while your athlete is hot.
Meb ran great at NY following his Olympic Medal. Now he is consistently hurt for those poor decisions earlier.
Deena was also offered big bucks and ended up not finishing in NY following her Olympic Medal.
Ndereba has run poorly at NY both this year and last year following the Olympics and WC.
Dan Browne was cashing in after the 2004 Olympics by running a 2:30 NY that same year, and it took him 3 years to recover.
Monti and Wittenberg would have been pleased to sign any 2008 Olympian to this years event. It was the athletes that said NO. -
Wami and Mikitenko went head to head twice each beating the other once. But if you add their times together from the same races:
Wami did 2:23:17 in Berlin and 2:25:37 in London
Mikitenko did 2:24:51 in Berlin and 2:24:14 in London
Totals: Wami 4:48:54 Mikitenko 4:49:05
Wami was better by 11 seconds. She should have won the prize.
Wami got robbed. -
Hard to consider Wami "robbed" when she already got $500,000 once for the races she ran in 2007. The fact that a single year is part of the scoring system of TWO of the series is silly.
-
I thought Mikitenko broke 2:20 in Berlin?
-
They should have developed a tie-breaking system BEFORE they got to this point. Fair thing would have been to split the $$$ in half for each runner. Then they could have come up with a system for the future. I agree, if everyone had known what the system was ahead of time, perhaps they would have run different races (London and Berlin).
-
they should have split it.
voting is stupid. -
"spreading the wealth"- you must be an Obama guy.
-
I suspect Dibaba will also get shut out of the World Athlete of The Year.
African athletes.. must generally win by a big margin... if its a small margin.. others will get the nod.
Wami, should've finished 1st or 2nd. she can only blame herself.
I think she just had a bad day!
She will be back.
