Marc Bloom article about Cheserek

NOT MB wrote:

http://runningtimes.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=24782

Normally I think Marc Bloom is a decent writer, but the article by him in Running Times about Cheserek purposely running slower at Footlocker because of his new friendship with Futsum, was absolutely horrible. He is basically saying Cheserek tanked the race, but his only "proof" was they became buddies in San Diego and Cheserek is a nice guy. Okay that makes sense. I think most people that follow running a little realize Cheserek knew Futsum was going to be his first real challenge of the year and he didn't want to take any risks by going out too hard and trying to get the record. He ran a tactical race because he knew it was the safest way to win, not because he was buddies with his main competition. How absurd is that thought?

+1 I think it's complete bs.

I think that Marc Bloom is a pretty good running writer but is becoming out of touch with HS running outside of the NE. His article is essentially just as speculative as a typical LRC post. He states that his opinion about Cheserek intentionally holding back is based entirely on watching the webcast, without speaking to any of the individuals involved.

Before writing an entire article about someone's tactics or intentions, I would think that a professional journalist would make an effort to get some facts.

Whether he meant to or not, his implication that Cheserek tanked the race is pretty classless. Think before you write an article making a high school kid look bad, especially one that is supposedly as good of a kid as Cheserek is. There is a lot of controversy in running that you can write about; drug cheats, people cheating in marathons, coaching changes, etc. Stay away from a high school kid running a tactical race and trying to find something that clearly wasn't there.

Not to take anything away from Cheserek, who sounds like a great guy, I feel that the article is somewhat disrespectful of Zeinasellasie's effort. When I watched the race, I saw it as an amazing duel between two great runners (just like Finn and Seidel in the girls' race).

envewi wrote:

Not to take anything away from Cheserek, who sounds like a great guy, I feel that the article is somewhat disrespectful of Zeinasellasie's effort. When I watched the race, I saw it as an amazing duel between two great runners (just like Finn and Seidel in the girls' race).

You bring up a good point in that Bloom ended up being disrespectful to the top two high school runners in the country, instead of focusing on the outstanding duel between the two. A last mile in 4:30 and the outcome of the race not being decided until the very end.

Yeah, from what I saw, it looked like cheserek was working hard and very tired at the end. He made this huge push going up the hill that looked like he was trying to break Futsum, and when it didn't work, he looked like he was very tired coming down the hill and in toward the finish.

envewi wrote:

Not to take anything away from Cheserek, who sounds like a great guy, I feel that the article is somewhat disrespectful of Zeinasellasie's effort. When I watched the race, I saw it as an amazing duel between two great runners (just like Finn and Seidel in the girls' race).

The article comes off as extremely disrespectful to Zeneselassie.

It was just terrible to read all this speculation when the author didn't even interview Cheserek. Like another poster stated I agree that it was a great race and there is no way that Cheserek was deferring and toying with Futsum. Come on Marc--return to good journalism and don't speculate with young athletes.

Horrible article based on only speculation with no evidence whatsoever. I couldn't even imagine the point of Cheserek wanting to barely win. This bloom character's thought process is so ass backwards it's ridiculous.

Yeah, man, it looked to me like it was a real close race; for a minute there at the end it almost looked like Zeinaselassie was gaining on him and might have gotten him if there were another 50 meters.

Consider This wrote:

Yeah, man, it looked to me like it was a real close race; for a minute there at the end it almost looked like Zeinaselassie was gaining on him and might have gotten him if there were another 50 meters.

Supposedly by Marc Bloom's warped view of the race, he thinks the close race was by design; Cheserek could have easily ran away from Futsum and won by a wide margin, but kept the race close because he is so "kind". After reading the article again, I not only think the article was a bit strange, it is downright rude to two great runners who ran a tactical race and crushed the rest of the field with an amazing and gut-wrenching 4:30 last mile. Clearly with that fast of a last mile, they both could have run a much faster 5k had they chose to go out harder, but the point of a national race is to win, not set the course record (or to purposely run slower to be "nice" to your new friend). Truly a bizarre article that Bloom should be embarrassed to have written upon further reflection on his part.

It's hard to say which of the Footlocker and NXN finals I enjoyed the most. All four races were excellent, but they played out so differently.

My votes:

1. Finn/Seidel duel at FL - Finn coming back on the last downhill after Seidel reeled her in was just so gutsy

2. Futsum breakaway at NXN - absolutely FLYING on the backstretch with 1km to go. (Honorable mention to the Manlius guy who hung on when the pack got him.)

3. Cheserek/Futsum duel - more moves than a John Travolta disco movie

4. Baxter at NXN - I watched her run in 4 inches of snow in Reno as an 8th grader at USATF, and this was a replay, except this time she pulled away. XC running at its best.

Like any lousy speculative LRC troll post, his post should be deleted.

This is just sad. How can he argue this without quotes, without proof. I agree with the OP, just disgraceful to attack a high schooler like that.

Bloom lost respect in my book.

It would probably have been wiser for Marc to have gotten quotes, knowing that a speculative piece like that could have rubbed people too much the wrong way.

But I don't necessarily think the possibility that Ches ran just hard enough to win is completely off base. Part of the reason may have been to just run smart; part of it may have been because of the friendship. If you know Ches a little, and Marc does, that wouldn't be shocking.

As good as Futsum is, I think Ches is 10-15 seconds better in a 5k, if you're both going all out.

The OP is overreacting and everyone else is piling on.

That said, it's one thing to think that, but it's another to publish it in a story w/o talking to everyone, and that probably wasn't the best idea. Still, back off everyone.

Wow.....pure, shoot from the hip, facts not needed, 100% tripe by Bloom.

Could the boys had run a faster time? Yes. Might Cheserek been able to beat Zeinasellassie by more? Perhaps. Might Futsom have won had he gone hard from the gun? Perhaps.

Is Bloom full of it? Absolutely.

It doesn't even make sense on the face of it. Cheserek has been destroying people he knows all season, and all of a sudden he decides to take it easy on a guy he met 3 days ago?!?

His coach probably told him to go for the win and not the CR, so it's true that this might not be the fastest he could've run.

People, people, people...let's get the story straight. This was a great duel between two twenty-something athletes that never should have been running in a high school race. To me, that was what was truly disrespectful.

[quote]xbalance wrote:

The OP is overreacting and everyone else is piling on. quote]

So are you disagreeing with my post?

[quote]xbalance wrote:

That said, it's one thing to think that, but it's another to publish it in a story w/o talking to everyone, and that probably wasn't the best idea. quote]

Or agreeing with me.

I don't really care what Marc Bloom thinks. The reason I started this post is because he PUBLISHED his point of view for all to see, with no basis for writing what he did. I don't have a probably with an opinion piece if it has at least some basis to it. In this case it was an opinion piece that made two high school runners look bad, with absolutely no logical basis for it. Cheserek runs slower in practice with his teammates, so therefore he is going to run slower so his friend of three days won't look bad. How does someone even begin to come up with such an absurd conclusion.

No, Cheserek did not tank the race and yes, Futsum would have still made it a good race even if the pace had gone out harder. There was no reason to write this article and it was insulting to two kids that just ran one of the greatest Footlocker races ever. How exciting was that last mile? Maybe write about that Marc.