David Torrence Responds To John Bingham: The blaming of the elites has to stop

---

agip wrote:


But what the sport needs is charismatic medalists - and right now KGoucher and Ryan Hall are about all we got. Change that, and the sport changes.

---

---

some thoughts: wrote:

7) there seems to be a LOT of competition for TV audiences these days with UFC, BKB, every sport you can imagine. but if you actually sit there and watch a tv show, they are all pretty horrible. if we cant come up with anything to compete with that, maybe our sport should die once and for all.

---

---

Flagpole wrote:

I agree with Torrence that elites are not to blame, but I disagree with him that television is. There simply IS no blame here. Americans don't like running. That much is clear. The vast majority who do participate in a marathon do so as a charity thing or a bucket list thing, and once that's over, they don't care about it any more.

The other sports in our country benefit because for the most part they are FUN; they are GAMES. It's fun to play a game is it not? Running is not a game. Running is hard. MOST people hate it. And, unless you are already a fan of distance running, it doesn't really lend itself to being a spectator sport.

Distance running in The United State will NEVER again be popular as a spectator sport. We just have TOO many other things that compete for our sporting entertainment attention compared to the 70s for example. Professional soccer is here. The X Games. MMA. Football (both college and pro) is bigger than ever. NASCAR is HUGE compared to the 70s.

We could start our own network, put ONLY running on it, and even then the popularity of or sport would not come back. It is what it is...a niche sport for sure, and when you consider how many people actually participate in cross country and track in high school, and yet they don't continue to be interested in it beyond high school, it's apparent that our sport is dead...that is DEAD as a spectator sport here in the US.

---

I think Torrence was spot on in his letter. As far as Bingham's remarks on elites, and some above posters' comments, I am confused by the apparent rewriting of history by recreational runners:

Elite and competitive distance runners have always been the essence of the sport. They came first. "Jogging" was brought over and became a phenomenon under Bowerman, as the legend goes. Until then, distance running was just considered a crazy waste of time participated in by a very few who were designed for it.

Once running became more accepted and practiced, even in a very limited way by some (e.g., minimal training, jump in a race for the bucket list), that didn't flip reality to mean elites (or experts) have to re-establish or prove themselves to the pack runner who now apparently rules the sport. That is completely backwards in all areas of sport, and life in general (although it is a trend in politics and science of late).

Are these people so self-absorbed that they have rewritten the history of distance running?

I don't blame TV, or even to a certain extent, blame the recreational runner. I put the blame on the long line of race directors who blurred the line of what a race really is. By coupling the elites with recreational runners in the same race, although in the early stages it created a "we" mentality, it now has backfired for the elites who have now become subsumed by the fleeting masses who have no historical perspective.

There's a lot wrong with how the sport is publicized and put out to the world. Everybody knows that. We know what's wrong.

What can we do RIGHT NOW to begin to CHANGE this? As in, get the announcers FIRED right away, get the detrimental USATF leaders changed out to people WILLING to DO something for our sport, etc.

Who votes for the USATF president/other members? If they choose themselves, that doesn't seem fair. F*#% the USATF anyway I don't like them.

I love running. I love racing even more. And I'm tired of it not getting the respect it deserves (I don't mean not enough people watching it, I mean not enough people at the higher level - USATF - TRYING to MAKE it into something again.)

---

agip wrote:

---

Flagpole wrote:

I agree with Torrence that elites are not to blame, but I disagree with him that television is. There simply IS no blame here. Americans don't like running. That much is clear. The vast majority who do participate in a marathon do so as a charity thing or a bucket list thing, and once that's over, they don't care about it any more.

The other sports in our country benefit because for the most part they are FUN; they are GAMES. It's fun to play a game is it not? Running is not a game. Running is hard. MOST people hate it. And, unless you are already a fan of distance running, it doesn't really lend itself to being a spectator sport.

Distance running in The United State will NEVER again be popular as a spectator sport. We just have TOO many other things that compete for our sporting entertainment attention compared to the 70s for example. Professional soccer is here. The X Games. MMA. Football (both college and pro) is bigger than ever. NASCAR is HUGE compared to the 70s.

We could start our own network, put ONLY running on it, and even then the popularity of or sport would not come back. It is what it is...a niche sport for sure, and when you consider how many people actually participate in cross country and track in high school, and yet they don't continue to be interested in it beyond high school, it's apparent that our sport is dead...that is DEAD as a spectator sport here in the US.

---

...unless a charismatic, ultra-American guy emerges and wins everything. That is why Pre lingers in the imagination - guy was classic American, of his time and charismatic. he never won internationally, but he died so young.

Could happen - Lukas V might have been on the road to that. I'll never forget how that guy ran at the dream mile in NYC - unearthly, and the crowd was behind him.

But the point is, Americans like superstars, and until we have one, distance running at the pro level won't grow very much.

---

Some thoughts:

I remember running races in the early 80's and being able to hang out with guys like Bill Rodgers and Craig Virgin afterwards. I have no idea how many other people thought that was cool, but it was a BIG deal to me.

I remember running a big half marathon several years ago, and right around the 9-mile mark, I noticed I was running next to Steve Jones and Henry Rono. Again, a really big deal to me, and gave me a huge shot of adrenaline that helped me run a PR. The thing was, it was a TOTAL surprise to me. I had no idea they were running or even in town for the race or expo. There was no mention that they would be there in the race literature, advertising, etc.

I imagine a tiny fraction of the runners who run any race could tell you the winner's name the following day. Whether the winner was "elite," or not. I've told many "serious" runner my Rono/Jones story, and almost none of them had any idea who I was talking about.

American running stars 30-40 years ago were definitely more charismatic. They were also more successful.

I'm not going to chastise a slightly older person who has a busy life and goes out and runs a 4:45 marathon. But for Bingham to praise everyone who just STARTS a marathon would be like praising me for going to a movie.
Plus, his comments about elites show, frankly, that he's a fundamentally mendacious and bad guy.

so FP maybe a better question is if pro distance running has EVER been more popular than it is today.I think it was.

I wasn't around in the Shorter/Pre era. I was around in the 80s in the Salazar/Decker/Steve Scott/Benoit era though - and it sure seemed everyone cared more about distance running when we had the best distance runners in the world. (But fair enough - I was in high school and a massive track nerd so maybe it just mattered to me and my team and not the general population as much as I remember)

but think about it - Al Sal set a world record in NYC and was a favorite in the 84 Olympics. Scott led the 84 olympic 1500 and ran 3:47 in the 80s. Decker double golded at the WCs and probably set a WR at some distance. Benoit was the best marathoner in the world, winning the OG by a ton. Add in Carl Lewis and these are massive stars incomparably more famous than K Goucher or Ryan Hall.

There is just no American with that kind of stature right now and pro distance running is suffering b/c of it.

The phelps example...have to think about it. I suppose I can say in reverse that when Phelps was swimming, swimming was the biggest sport in the OG, if you watched US coverage anyway. So maybe it proves my theory more than yuors - if there is a superstar, you will get coverage. When there is no superstar, you will not get any coverage.

No, you're right--track and road racing was a bigger deal then. It wasn't just you.

---

Flagpole wrote:

There has NEVER been a bigger star in swimming than Michael Phelps, and it took next to no time after the Olympics for us to forget about him. We don't have lots of televised swimming. It's the same as running here in the US. No one gives a rat's a$$. Now, Phelps is NOT charismatic, but I don't think even that would help. Fit, thin people racing either in water or on land or on a bike for that matter, is just NOT what Americans identify with. A 320-pound lineman...yeah, Americans identify with that. A dude riding something with an internal combustion engine...yeah, Americans identify with that. Two dudes beating the hell out of each other...again, we have a winner.

Some dude - "Track and field? Don't they all use steroids?"

---

---

agip wrote:
But what the sport needs is charismatic medalists - and right now KGoucher and Ryan Hall are about all we got. Change that, and the sport changes.

---

I have no idea if swimming got coverage outside the OG even when phelps was swimming - I didn't see much but I wasn't looking either.

Maybe that is your point - the OG is one thing but after the games swimming returned to low coverage even when phelps was active.

what the sport needs is charismatic medalists. Change that, and the sport changes.

This ^ is fact. But in addition to that, the medalists that are willing to be charismatic need better platforms than twitter and flotrack. As a total fanboy I love them both, but neither are going to grow interest in the sport. Both are there to sustain those that are already interested.

---

say what now wrote:

---

agip wrote:
But what the sport needs is charismatic medalists - and right now KGoucher and Ryan Hall are about all we got. Change that, and the sport changes.

---

Ryan Hall has a medal?

---

---

mmuh wrote:

Regarding his comments on track not being inherently boring, I'm a fan of track and I "KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON" and these sit and kick distance races still bore me. I want to see an honest race not a bunch of people running tempo pace or slower.

---

He's not an "elite" but he is well-known in spite of irking some and I saw Dane Rauschenberg at the end of the Quad Cities Marathon removing chips from people's shoes. Sitting there unassumedly after having just finished the marathon, congratulating others.
Bingham couldn't be more wrong about elites and those well-known not giving back.

---

agip wrote:

---

say what now wrote:

---

agip wrote:
But what the sport needs is charismatic medalists - and right now KGoucher and Ryan Hall are about all we got. Change that, and the sport changes.

---

Ryan Hall has a medal?

---

are you being constructive here or just feeling that lrc need for absurd aggression?

You contest for the win regularly in the Boston or NYC marathons and that is as good as a medal.

---

---

rojo wrote:
Jenny Simpson is incredibly talented but she's also worked incredibly hard for the last decade - two, three, four,hours a day on her craft, day after day.

---