IOC in Talks, Pondering to Remove 10k/200m from Olympics

The fact that they want to replace it with surfing is pretty ridiculous

The only good reason to remove the 10k would be to replace it with an XC race

Surfing and Karate? Jesus Christ. F**k the IOC

Flo'da boy wrote:

The only good reason to remove the 10k would be to replace it with an XC race

Or a road half-marathon. But I like the XC idea better.

FAST wrote:

Flo'da boy wrote:

The only good reason to remove the 10k would be to replace it with an XC race

Or a road half-marathon. But I like the XC idea better.

The reason I say XC over road is that it feels like road is covered by the Marathon (not that both wouldn't be fine for track fans, but then again we like the 5k and 10k as is).

Also, wasn't the 10k one of the more popular events in 2012? In a lot of the non running media I looked at it seemed the general populace was surprised by how exciting they found it.

Also, the 200m is effectively the original Olympic event (the Stade). I would almost rather see the 100m traded for a 60m

Flo'da boy wrote:

Also, wasn't the 10k one of the more popular events in 2012?

Yes, and the 5K was up there as well

Assuming they need to reduce the number of events in athletics, I think they should alternate events instead of cutting them completely. They can hold men's or women's 10k, 5k, shot, 200m, XC every 8 years instead of 4.

Flo'da boy wrote:

FAST wrote:

Or a road half-marathon. But I like the XC idea better.

The reason I say XC over road is that it feels like road is covered by the Marathon (not that both wouldn't be fine for track fans, but then again we like the 5k and 10k as is).

Also, wasn't the 10k one of the more popular events in 2012? In a lot of the non running media I looked at it seemed the general populace was surprised by how exciting they found it.

Also, the 200m is effectively the original Olympic event (the Stade). I would almost rather see the 100m traded for a 60m

I think the half is worth considering, but I agree that XC would be better.

Might the 10k's popularity in 2012 due to Farah's popularity? He was track and field's second biggest star winning in his home country in what was a pretty interesting race. I'm not sure that's repeatable.

I can see taking the 10k out, but not the 200. I think it's a much more iconic race.

FAST wrote:

Flo'da boy wrote:

The reason I say XC over road is that it feels like road is covered by the Marathon (not that both wouldn't be fine for track fans, but then again we like the 5k and 10k as is).

Also, wasn't the 10k one of the more popular events in 2012? In a lot of the non running media I looked at it seemed the general populace was surprised by how exciting they found it.

Also, the 200m is effectively the original Olympic event (the Stade). I would almost rather see the 100m traded for a 60m

I think the half is worth considering, but I agree that XC would be better.

Might the 10k's popularity in 2012 due to Farah's popularity?

Britain won 29 gold medals in 2012, but Mo Farah's was the most watched on TV - second overall only to the 100 meter dash.

My bet is one of the walks will be dinged (thank god) - not the 200 - that is a glory event. gets a lot of press. They should ding the 10k but I doubt they will.

for the record, these are the events under discussion:

10,000m, 200m, shot put, 20k race walk, and the triple jump.

To be honest I think if we had to remove a distance event, the 5k would be a more sensible candidate (though it's true that audiences at least vaguely understand the distance). Though both races have a habit of devolving into kickers games, I've seen more 10ks that have that true distance grind in them. The 5k seems to occupy that odd middle ground where it just draws the stronger milers away from the 1500 and takes some of the quicker 10k runners away from the latter event. I love the 5k but I say it's the one that is least representative of a skill set (I may be somewhat biased as so many of my favorite sports moments were 10ks)

I'll have to assume at least a dozen swimming events will be on the block if the 200 on the track is in question.

The biggest upset in Olympic history:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5vOhMwRQwI

Sprints and field events are killing the interest in athletics

The 200 is a joke, just something the 100m runners do coz they can without having to do any extra work

FOUR throwing events. Gimme a break. Another joke. Triple jumps? Thats just what the less talented long jumpers do.

Pole vault. Sorry but what's the point? Great athletes but they could as well do cross fit

fvcking ridiculous. The only event I can see them taking out is racewalk - again, a race to see who can whisper the loudest. 200m and 10k are iconic.

I would really hate to see the triple jump go. It's a really interesting event that has seen some truly brilliant athletes (Sanayev, Edwards, Taylor presently). I would argue it might require more true athleticism than the long jump.

Is Nobby still out there? The TJ needs defending!

Track Rvents:

100m

400m

1500m

110HH

3k Steeplechase

Long Jump

High Jump

Javelin

Shot Put

If Coe has a problem removing the triple jump, what does he say about the 10k? The 10k is legendary and shouldn't be removed. Even my wife, a non-runner thought the 10k at 2012 London was THE #1 most exciting event for the WHOLE olympics!! What is wrong with the IOC? Just merge with the X games already if that's what you want.

The issue isn't too many events, the issue for the IOC is that they won't put up more than 10,000 athletes or whatever the number is in the olympic village.

Don't cut events, just raise the qualifying standards so there are less athletes competing. We get to watch all the events and with better competitors, the IOC stays under their quota. Win for everyone except the athletes who don't qualify.