Stockholm Marathon will not give price money to an east african if they win the race.

Really? Who on the Swedish national team is naturalized? Who is even black? Are we watching the same team?

I wouldn't expect 2:28 runners to push each other to world class times. But there might be some guys running 2:20 behind a pack of Africans who would push each other to 2:16-2:18 if they were running for the win. Or there might be 29:00-30:00 ten kilometer guys or 1:06 half marathon guys who aren't running marathons because they don't think it's worthwhile to run a marathon and finish behind a pack of Africans but who would move up to win a semi-major marathon.

I recall that the Dublin Marathon in 2013 (?) for some reason didn't invite foreigners and had its first Irish winner in many years. That was pretty well received by the Irish media and whoever in the public was paying attention so who knows what would happen in other places if something similar was to happen. "Maybe" is a big word here but I think it would be kind of interesting to watch it play out.

Kingkong wrote:

Most of you are missing the point.

Never mind the east africans. Thing is, if lets say, a decent marathoner from England decides to take the cheap 1,5 hour flight over to Stockholm and participate in the race and win (which is very likely, since the Scandinavian runners can't even run under 2:20) he would have gotten ZERO prize money.

This is the problem here. Nothing else.

How is that a problem? If prize money is given to anyone who places high enough the British guy will probably come up empty because there will be a pack of East Africans winning it. So he's in no worse shape for the money only going to Scandanavians than he'd be if the money was open to all. He could look around for a race that's doing what the Dutch one someone mentioned did and restricts prize money to runners from EU countries.

The problem is that you can participate in the race, win it and not receive a dime, because you aren't from Scandinavian country.

That is just plain stupid.

The fastest runner in the race should receive the biggest check.

End of story.

Kingkong wrote:

The fastest runner in the race should receive the biggest check.

Unless they're Kenyan.

This has nothing to do with skin color.

E.g. someone like Mo Farah brings a lot to the table. He gives interviews, hangs out at the expo, throws around some jokes, signs autographs etc.

The Kenyans, come to the race, win, leave and go home. When interviewed they struggle with English and say something along the lines of "Today, good race for me. Very happy, will like to come back next year". Mmmm, k.

NEXT

Or maybe you think it's logical that somebody that places 7:th in a race gets a big pay check, but the winner of the race gets nothing?

This is possible with this kind of thinking.

To me that is just crazy. Everybody should compete on the same premise. Fastest from A to B gets the money.

Kingkong wrote:

Or maybe you think it's logical that somebody that places 7:th in a race gets a big pay check, but the winner of the race gets nothing?

This is possible with this kind of thinking.

To me that is just crazy. Everybody should compete on the same premise. Fastest from A to B gets the money.

Yes it is crazy... that those 6 people ahead chose to run the race. They had no obligation to run a race knowing they would make no money.

El Kenyano wrote:

Kingkong wrote:

The fastest runner in the race should receive the biggest check.

Unless they're Kenyan.

This has nothing to do with skin color.

E.g. someone like Mo Farah brings a lot to the table. He gives interviews, hangs out at the expo, throws around some jokes, signs autographs etc.

The Kenyans, come to the race, win, leave and go home. When interviewed they struggle with English and say something along the lines of "Today, good race for me. Very happy, will like to come back next year". Mmmm, k.

NEXT

Whatever. This is running. It's about getting to the finish line first. Kenyans are very good at that. They should be rewarded if they win, as should anyone that wins a race. Everything else is just bull crap.

It's never that simple. wrote:

Kingkong wrote:

Or maybe you think it's logical that somebody that places 7:th in a race gets a big pay check, but the winner of the race gets nothing?

This is possible with this kind of thinking.

To me that is just crazy. Everybody should compete on the same premise. Fastest from A to B gets the money.

Yes it is crazy... that those 6 people ahead chose to run the race. They had no obligation to run a race knowing they would make no money.

If they decide to run the race or not is irrelevant. The winner of a race should be rewarded, otherwise it is not a race.

Kingkong wrote:

Or maybe you think it's logical that somebody that places 7:th in a race gets a big pay check, but the winner of the race gets nothing?

This is possible with this kind of thinking.

To me that is just crazy. Everybody should compete on the same premise. Fastest from A to B gets the money.

That's unlikely because someone who is running in hopes of winning money will not run in a race where they won't win. We have races in the US where only Americans can win money. Generally foreigners skip them. Why shouldn't other countries do what we sometimes do?

Well the Africans or those with African ancestry OBVIOUSLY have an unfair advantage. It would be like running male and female runners together. I typically come in in shorter races ahead of all the females. So do many other males. Look at some race results. I am a behavioral neuroscientist and evolutionary psychologist and I have looked into the physiology behind all this - African females have more testosterone than European females and the differences in such things is on par with the male-female difference within Europeans. Sure this varies by individual and by which European or African subgroup, but in general there are these sorts of differences. It makes it an interesting philosophical dilemma - which gets at our ideas of race and gender. It is definitely something that thoughtful people can and should discuss. Africans that do not care so much about the fame and achievement ( I saw some Ethiopians interviewed) come over here to run these races as an occupation - and easy way to make more money than they ever could otherwise. They don't even have to work at it.... Anyway. It is all very interesting to see where this will go. In todays politicaly-correct social milieu, I can't see this being discussed objectively by the numbers or anything.

I agree. White people aren't good enough to compete with the best in the world. There should be special white-only races at the world championships this summer so white people will care more about what is happening.

savethewhites wrote:

I agree. White people aren't good enough to compete with the best in the world. There should be special white-only races at the world championships this summer so white people will care more about what is happening.

*Slow clap* ^^^This!

Out of curiosity, does anyone know of another sport where individuals of Caucasian decent from certain nationalities are banned from receiving prize money because of their dominance. For example, has the need to ban prizes for certain outsiders in swimming, ice hockey, skating, skiing, rowing etc been felt? I guess there is a slight difference into how the events in these sports are organised bu maybe a triathlon in more similar in organization to a road race or city marathon. Do you know of triathlons where, for instance, Russians are banned from receiving prize money?

Kingkong wrote:

Whatever. This is running. It's about getting to the finish line first. Kenyans are very good at that. They should be rewarded if they win, as should anyone that wins a race. Everything else is just bull crap.

Posted like a runner who can't figure out WHY she/he has trouble finding and keeping any kind of real money sponsor.

Mo is exactly what the event promoter wants and what a real-money sponsor wants. Spreads the word, is super friendly with the hobby runners. Yes, some high-end results matter.

This is not college. It's a business. Mo can come in top-30 and he will still have real money sponsors because he's a good business partner. The marathon is a business and the business could do better by supporting local-ish runners.

Kingkong wrote:

Or maybe you think it's logical that somebody that places 7:th in a race gets a big pay check, but the winner of the race gets nothing?

This is possible with this kind of thinking.

To me that is just crazy. Everybody should compete on the same premise. Fastest from A to B gets the money.

I agree with you 100% on this. However running is not like this. How much prize/appearance money has Paula been awarded for running 2-15? How much prize/appearance money has a 2-14 marathon runner been awarded? One could well be living in abject poverty whereas the other is a millionaire with a tax haven in Monaco even though they are the slower runner. The same goes for masters, Boston gave out 10000 dollars to former drug cheat who ran 2h 45 mins!! How many runners in the race ran faster than 2h 45 mins yet never received a dime for their efforts?? The way money is distributed in running races is as much due to marketing factors than it is to performance.

The best argument for not awarding East African runners prize money is related to the drugs issue. Competing for prize money in a race does require that you abide by a certain set of rules. If you consider that around 40 Kenyan runners have tested positive for PEDs within the last 2 years with only a rudimentary testing system in place in their geographic area then it is not clear that they are playing by the rules. Nations have been banned from competition before as a result of suspected widespread drug use - the Chinese swimming team was banned from the 1995 Pan American games and were fortunate not to have been banned from the Atlanta Olympics.

People are trying to project their xenophobia on Swedes yet the Swedes themselves have rejected xenophobia.

Plenty of Americans would not be good with the media in Sweden either.

In my experience, most city marathons want top tier East Africans. Several years ago I was listening to the mayor of Baltimore promoting the Baltimore marathon by saying they were able to get a commitment from some 2:10 Kenyans.

Years ago I read a story about a race in Italy. A local won the race, but the public and the media reacted derisively by saying "He only won because there were no Kenyans". In other words, the Italians want to see their top runners beat the East Africans in order to prove their worth.

Most New yorkers are not losing any sleep because Americans do not win. They simply like the prestige of having a world class marathon. I think the Swedes are also eager to make their race a world class race. Every city wants prestige. They do not want sore losers.

People want to see their heroes challenge the East Africans and beat them. Did you see how excited the crowd in Oregon was when Mary Cain left the Kenyans chasing her over the last 100m?

People want their heroes to stand up to the best. Most don't want losers who can only win against mediocre talent. This the whole "I am taking my ball home because I cannot win" syndrome.

I'm just repeating what someone wrote earlier:

There are two championships in this one race. Within the race there is the swedish championship and the nordic championship. The swedish championship has always been there, while the nordic is new.

The idea was to give price money only to the top finishers in these championships. Previous years they have invited unknown, decent foreign runners. They have probably given them a fee just for their appearance, and some of them have also ended up with the price money. This year they are not gonna invite any runners except for the scandinavian national squads. They probably figured this would be enough for the audience, since, believe it or not, there are sub 2.20-runners in scandinavia as well. It would also mean that there would be an actual championship race, instead of having every second runner in the front being a non-participant.

Personally, I think the idea of a nordic championship is stupid. But it is what it is. Since they're gonna have it, they might as well do it right. And even though they've changed their minds about the price money, I still don't think they are gonna invite any other elite runners, so there still won't be any non-scandinavians who don't get any price money. IMO, this whole thing doesn't mean shit.

spiralsun1 wrote:

Well the Africans or those with African ancestry OBVIOUSLY have an unfair advantage.

Being born with talent is an unfair advantage irrespective of your ancestry, yes? Would you agree that a marathon between David Nilsson, Sweden's fastest marathon runner of 2015 at 2hrs17, and Japan's Masato Imai, who ran 10 minutes faster than Nilsson earlier this year, would be an unfair contest because Imai clearly has an unfair advantage compared to Nilsson?