Men's Trials in Central Park a disservice to competitors

I posted a very mediocre 2:24 nearly twenty years ago. Until that reality check, I was like many posters on this site: somewhat delusional about my abilities and what the sport "owed" me while railing against the TAC (now USATF) and how Ollan Cassel (now Craig Masback) was ruining the sport and shafting distance runners especially. It's amazing that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

After deciding that locally good roadie was about all I was ever going to be, I took my passion and went to work for a running shoe manufacturer for many years. This time and the continued friendships that I have in the industry gives me an insight that the vast majority here do not have. It may be hard for you to believe but, track and field in the USA is lucky to get any money or exposure in non-Olympic years. Most of you seriously overestimate the size and influence of the fan base. In short, this is a sport of beggars, not choosers. That's why you get crappy Golden League coverage on tape delay at 2:00AM on "The Ocho" while poker is now on about a dozen different cable channels in primetime.

When the BAA and the NYRRC step up with a package for events, the USATF and USOC are happy for that support and will not look the proverbial gift horse in the mouth. The athletes needs? HA! When distance running becomes like the PGA, we'll take those into consideration. Dollars for running are very scarce. The big shoe companies do not see much sales bounce off event sponsorships and very little traction on athlete deals. Once runners leave high school, they don't buy shoes because an athlete is paid to wear them. Joggers buy what feels good and what the store clerk tells them is good. The new economics of specialty running retail is that only about 30% of customers are committed runners. The rest are doctor referrals, walkers, and seasonal high school business.

The bulk of sports marketing dollars are spent to influence high school athletes to buy Brand X. The hope is that 15 year olds buying really cool Brand X spikes will continue to buy Brand X while they run and eventually become loyal consumers of Brand X walking shoes and golf gear as they get older. Does anyone truly think that the money men at Brand X, Brand Y, or Brand Z are altruistic and only want our sport to flourish? It's a laughable notion at best. I have been privy to many a meeting where grown men who love the sport have virtually prostituted themselves to keep an established major running event funded for another year when the corporate bean counters said it had maxed out its promotional usefulness.

Women now comprise 60% of all athletic goods purchases in the USA. The shift in how advertising and promo dollars reflects this trend. Less "hardcore" events and athlete sponsorships and more "soft and fun" events (Think Run Hit Wonder, Race for the Cure, Irongirl Multisports Series)focused on fun, health, and personal empowerment are the new hotness and they actually create better brand equity for the sponsors.

I've strayed a bit. Let me conclude by saying that the arguments and rants that we threw around in the 80's are just being recycled by today's runners. My advice is to accept and rise to the challenges presented rather than bitching about how "imperfect" or "unfair" they are. The Trials locations and courses seem set - how you respond will determine your success or failure. Good luck to all and may you find happiness and self validation in this imperfect life.

I have been reading the pros and cons of why or why not crowds will form for this race. Both have good arguements.

My own personal opinion is that this will draw large crowds because this is the Olympics is weak. First of all this is not the Olympics and is just a selection race which no one outside of the running community understands or even has any knowledge of the process. Even if there is a huge media blitz advertising that the Olmpic Team will be formed from this event will not be a huge draw because to most Americans this is just another marathon.

This is NOT THE OLYMPICS. Its a selection race which is a big difference. America is fascinated with the Olympics when they can sit on their ass in front of the TV and drink beer and eat Nachos.

I guess Tom Flemings' Central Park Record of 2:19:27 will go

in this race be it Sat or Fri.

As far a spectators-Friday trials would mean runners in town for the NYC Marathon would have to add another hotel day to the already high cost of visiting my home town. Will they????

Large crowds? Define "large".

But have no doubt, the trials in Central Park will absolutely draw larger crowds than it would in Mayberry or Bumblefudge. Duh.

- Many thousands of people would be in the park on a random day anyhow.

- There's just a whole lotta people living within several miles of the park. NYC metro area is considered to be well over twenty million people. It only takes a fraction of a percent of that to add up to a large crowd.

- Central Park races - the regular weekly five miler or 10k, not talking about dumbed down crowd pleasers like Run Hit Wonder - tend to draw five to ten thousand runners. Just to give you an idea.

I can't tell you exactly how many people will show up for this, but it'll be more than it would anywhere else in this country.

Fleming (et al.) ran an entirely different course, namely the 6 mile full loop with all the hills, and so his record is safe for now. Since Tom was a 2:12 guy in Boston, I would say that the very fastest that that course could be run by an elite is 2:11, but probably closer to 2:12. I don't know what direction they ran those marathons, but I assume it was counterclockwise (up east and down west).

It is interesting though, the differences in the hills when you reverse directions in Central Park, it is concurred by NYC runners that clockwise is easier, and in consideration of this, they have taken the 8k course and done so. The effect is that it makes most of the upgrades longer and more gradual, and the downgrades slightly steeper but shorter.

I think a bigger consideration than the course is the weather. Both Columbia and Pitt in '00 were slow not b/c the courses were tough (although they were fairly challenging), but the weather was brutal.

Boston could be anything from snow flurries to a heat wave (and indeed, last year I froze my a** off at the Sox game Fri. night and was standing around comfortably in shorts & T-Shirt on race day).

NY, OTOH, has seemingly been on a warming trend the past couple years (perhaps another bit of evidence for Al Gore's global warming theory). It seems that Indian Summer has been tending to peak right around the last week of Oct/first week Nov. (that's why Marine Corps, the week before NY, is traditionally warm). At least the 7:30 am start, and potential shade in CP (assuming the leaves haven't fallen) may help.

But even if only 5% of NYC shows up, how many people would that be?

Some national 8K race is NOT the OLYMPIC TRIALS.

JimG wrote:

NY, OTOH, has seemingly been on a warming trend the past couple years (perhaps another bit of evidence for Al Gore's global warming theory). It seems that Indian Summer has been tending to peak right around the last week of Oct/first week Nov. (that's why Marine Corps, the week before NY, is traditionally warm). At least the 7:30 am start, and potential shade in CP (assuming the leaves haven't fallen) may help.

If Al Gore is in town, it will have record low temperatures!

God this is some funny stuff. This is Running and no matter how you spin it, this is not exciting to most people. Regardless if its the Olympic Trials or not. The Olympic Trials dont mean anything to the average person!

The problem the Olympic Trials runs into is that it's not held every year so it's difficult to build interest. For the most part these National Championship Races are held in conjunction with local races that have been around for years so you'll have a few thousand people show up just to run the open race. So..."some national 8k race" is going to attract a lot more spectators simply because of the local race attached to it.

I wonder what will happen to those who dip under 2:22 in Chicago in 2007 only a few mere hours after the cut off date?

Alan

Alan, I hope this comes across in a non-demeaning manner, but the barely sub 2:22 runner should be very low on the list of priorities.

Don't try and go the math based on Tom Fleming having run 2:19 in Central Park and 2:12 elsewhere. He was not at his peak as an athlete when he ran that 2:19

And Millrose attracted something like 16,000..not 10,000.

I'll bet Tom was good for 2:17 or so on that course if he had been pressed, since he was in (or near) the top shape of his life in 1975, having run 2:12:06 at Boston that same year. Tom won NYC in 2:19:27, while 2nd place was way back in 2:25:20.

The problem the Olympic Trials runs into is that it's not held every year so it's difficult to build interest.

Yeah, same problem with the Olympics themselves. In fact not only is it once every four years, they keep moving it around! How're you supposed to get any kind of momentum to build a fan base like that??

Tom Fleming has a 2:20 ish race from 83 I believe... when he was 180 lbs after foot trouble prevented him training.

Tom was never a whispy size guy but 180 had to be plus 20 pounds for him.

RunningArt

Do your homework for a change and READ the press release.

As usual - you should from the hip/lip without thinking.

http://www.usatf.org/news/view.aspx?DUID=USATF_2006_06_22_07_04_52

Do you think the date October 7, 2007 is significant?

Could it be a last chance to chase the Olympic Trials qualifying standard for those running Twin Cities and Chicago?

DUH

shoot not should

You guys... I just don't know wrote:

Don't try and go the math based on Tom Fleming having run 2:19 in Central Park and 2:12 elsewhere. He was not at his peak as an athlete when he ran that 2:19

And Millrose attracted something like 16,000..not 10,000.

I'll ask again. Do you know central park? Have you run there? Heart break hill(s) or not, central park is slow. I'd love to be able to wager some money on this! No one is running 2:11 there. At least not from this country.

Spare...my bad, I was mistaken.

Pete Athas...then why have a 2:22 cutoff if it's "not a priority".

I still think having the trials a year before the games is a bad idea and have yet to hear a good reason why it is better than a spring trials in Akron. I also don't understand why there needs to be seperates dates for Men's and Women's trials...aside from the money issue. Fan interest is created not through local but through promotion.

Alan