Fair or foul: Top adidas exec alleges the Chicago Marathon (sponsored by Nike) wouldn't let any adidas athletes run the race

If true, I call foul. A marathon is a race, dammit, and it should take anyone who wants to compete on an equal basis. If a corporate sponsorship has an effect on the field - in any race, at any level - that needs to be made clear. Comped entries and travel money and elite status should be handed out using criteria that aren't determined by a corporate sponsor. If Nike says, we'll sponsor the race, but we get 10 elites, or whatever, I can live with that as long as I know about it. If Nike says, we'll sponsor the race, but only if everyone else gets 5 entries total or 0 entries, that's not okay.

If the NCAA had corporate sponsors who were putting a thumb on the scale of which teams got invited to XC nationals, we'd all recognize that as a corrupt deal that had to be removed immediately. This doesn't strike me as much better.

flyoverstaterunner wrote:

"It's their race. They can do what they want." - If this were a random marathon or something like Doha or Valencia, I might agree with you. I think it's short sighted. However, the main issue is that World Marathon Majors should be held to a different standard. Maybe you don't pay appearance fees to Adidas athletes or pay as much--fine--but to exclude them (if that's what happened) should jeopardize the race's status as a WMM.

Yeah. Even if Chicago doesn't care, you would think WMM would care, or World Athletics (who recognize WMM for ranking and qualification purposes) would care. It seems like to be a WA label event you should be required to accept any athlete ranked high enough.

Hardloper wrote:

flyoverstaterunner wrote:

"It's their race. They can do what they want." - If this were a random marathon or something like Doha or Valencia, I might agree with you. I think it's short sighted. However, the main issue is that World Marathon Majors should be held to a different standard. Maybe you don't pay appearance fees to Adidas athletes or pay as much--fine--but to exclude them (if that's what happened) should jeopardize the race's status as a WMM.

Yeah. Even if Chicago doesn't care, you would think WMM would care, or World Athletics (who recognize WMM for ranking and qualification purposes) would care. It seems like to be a WA label event you should be required to accept any athlete ranked high enough.

They aren't really excluding anyone right? Just choosing who they offer appearance money and travel expenses to?

I had a sponsors that used to financially encourage me to compete in certain events sponsored by companies that were their rivals, and loved it when I could do well in those events. Of course they encouraged me even more to compete in events they sponsored, and loved it more when I could do well in those

It is sort of like when you go to another school and beat them during their homecoming event.

I seriously doubt Chicago was rejecting any entries from East Africans (or anyone else) sponsored by adidas.

More likely is that money for appearance fees, travel and other invited elite athletes was limited this year, and they concentrated what they had on Nike sponsored athletes.

Nothing would have prevented any adidas sponsored athlete from paying the entry fee and running the race.

But with the way marathons are organized now, they may not have been able to get into the elite field corral/wave to start separately from the rest of the field. So you just about have to be an invited runner to be eligible for prize money in many races.

Many pro running races are now separate events. open only to a limited invited number of athletes. Running is not like it used to be, when

Precious Roy wrote:

Fine line between a right to contract for exclusivity and a violation of the Sherman Act. There is no exemption for pro running like there is for pro team sports.

You can quickly see that if this is a practice that is in place, it is going to lead to elite marathoning that is bifurcated by sponsorship. That can potentially tank the world marathon major circuit and create a situation where all the top marathoners are running for one sponsor over the other simply to be able to get into the top marathons controlled by the same sponsor.

You might want to reread Areeda & Hovenkamp.

I'm surprised the race sponsor doesn't make all participants, at least the elites, run in their gear. That would be fine with me.

If you are a Nike athlete and sign with Manchester United you still have to wear Adidas every game. Should be no different with running

This is a big problem. Chicago is one of only 3 races to qualify for worlds. I think it would be suitable for it to lose its status as a WMM and even a platinum (or whatever metal it is these days) world athletics race due to this.

LetsRun.com wrote:

Spencer Nel - who heads up adidas track and field sponsorship as the Director Global Sports Marketing Running - put out a very interesting tweet yesterday.

https://twitter.com/spencernel/status/1453445671571316736

The top 10 men's seeds were all Nike athletes. For the shallow women's field, all of the elites under 2:30 were Nike save for the Americans.

What do you think of a major marathon restricting elite Africans to a single shoe sponsor? Fair or foul?

What? Reed Fischer is an Adidas guy. I don’t understand the problem here.

ErolsInternet wrote:

LetsRun.com wrote:

Spencer Nel - who heads up adidas track and field sponsorship as the Director Global Sports Marketing Running - put out a very interesting tweet yesterday.

https://twitter.com/spencernel/status/1453445671571316736

The top 10 men's seeds were all Nike athletes. For the shallow women's field, all of the elites under 2:30 were Nike save for the Americans.

What do you think of a major marathon restricting elite Africans to a single shoe sponsor? Fair or foul?

What? Reed Fischer is an Adidas guy. I don’t understand the problem here.

Nevermind. Didn’t see the geographical specification.

I don't believe this for a second. And it seems to me Nike has people winning Berlin, years Adidas runners don't.

If Chicago wants a crappy race then fair enough. If they can't put together a good field next year, they should be put on notice to lose their WMM status. Valencia and Dubai are knocking on the door already

This is the way it is nowadays. Big brands are dictating all sports. Its a nike sponsored race so of course they wouldn't want an Adidas sponsored athletic winning. Same goes for Adidas sponsored races. How can they achieve this? Simple. Offer crappy prize money for winners but offer good appearance money for sponsored athletes. This will automatically deter non sponsored athletes. All these companies operate like this and unfortunately as consumers we are driving it

I reached out to Chicago for comment and they said, "Thanks for reaching out! The elite athlete program is a signature part of our event, and each year we’re proud to welcome a diverse field of athletes who represent many brands and many countries. We look forward to working with all athletes and their representatives as we continue the great tradition of elite racing in Chicago."

rojo wrote:

flyoverstaterunner wrote:

"It's their race. They can do what they want." - If this were a random marathon or something like Doha or Valencia, I might agree with you. I think it's short sighted. However, the main issue is that World Marathon Majors should be held to a different standard. Maybe you don't pay appearance fees to Adidas athletes or pay as much--fine--but to exclude them (if that's what happened) should jeopardize the race's status as a WMM.

Also this race is being used to pick US team members to Worlds. Imagine if they start enforcing it for US athletes as well. If it would never fly if it was applies to Americans, then it shouldn't fly with the African stars as well. I don't like how African stars are viewed as nameless commodities.

I was thinking the same thing. Given this is being used as a selection race for US World team, it seems unfair that this event had a watered down field where African elites were only allowed from one shoe company when the other events did not do that as far as we know. Now if US marathoners had known this was the selection criteria and Chicago sponsor discrimination was going on in advance, I guess you could argue that they all had a chance to run Chicago if they wanted since top 10 overall is a selection criteria, so less Africans and faster course for tie breakers makes Chicago much easier to make the team given the new criteria. I don't think Chicago should be considered a World Major top 4 event if they're gonna water down the field like that by not allowing elites from other companies to enter.

wejo wrote:

I reached out to Chicago for comment and they said, "Thanks for reaching out! The elite athlete program is a signature part of our event, and each year we’re proud to welcome a diverse field of athletes who represent many brands and many countries. We look forward to working with all athletes and their representatives as we continue the great tradition of elite racing in Chicago."

Classic administrative response that avoids a direct answer.

Dexy's Midnight Runner wrote:

He's tipping his hand: this is what Adidas does in Boston and Berlin.

This has to be the sport's worst-kept secret, not exactly newsworthy.

Really? Are you aware Galen Rupp, Jordan Hassay etc. etc. are Nike runners? Are you aware they have ran Boston ? Do you live under a rock in fear of who knows whatever doomsday fantasy dances in your shallow mind?

Nice boilerplate response.

The fact that the owners posted this,

Coupled with a whiny article about ‘unfair selection’ of the Worlds marathon team tells me that this is,

Click bait!

Chicago isn't really a major. Rotterdam should replace it of course.

Chicago had just 50 runners under 2:32.

Nike has been excluding Africans from Chicago for several years now, mostly to bolster Rupp,

When excluding athletes would bring bad press, they do accept entry but discourage most worthy entrants.