so there seems to be some outrage about the results of the Chicago Marathon and Nike Marathon - seems that age groupers placed in both of these races and were denied their awards (and cash in Chicago) because they were not entered as "elite"
blogs I link to have posted the article and Endurance Sports Bar (see link to right) is going to do a piece on it tomorrow.
I wish I could see the official rules of either of these races or the official race entry to see if it says so something on the entry about being entered as an elite to get prize money or overall awards - if it does then there is zero controversy on this issue - if the rules or entry do not say anything about that then we have to go to USATF and see what their rules says. I scanned the rule book and could not find anything that addresses this issue. There was a USATF official at both Chicago and San Fran and it sounded like he made a ruling but did not state a specific rule for his decision.
The ruling by the official was that since the runners did not start with the elite field then the elites did not know their competition and were not racing against the age groupers - that is pretty damn flimsy if you ask me. This is done in triathlon all the time - the first person across the finish line is not always the winner - usually but not always.
I remember a race in Clermont one year and the elite women finished early because they were in the first wave - however 2-3 age groupers ended up having better overall times and won the overall awards for the race - FASTEST TIME WINS - i could care less if the elite folks knew they were there or not.
I do feel bad for both of these runners - what we do not know is - did the rules state this before they ran? If the race rules stated this (I bet Chicago does) then they have no gripe at all.
However, I do have one overriding questions - since when does a women's "elite" race get won in 3:06:00 - that is a good age grouper not an elite time. I could not find the times needed to qualify for elite in San Fran but I guess it is slower than many of the big marathons because this one is more of a niche marathon than one of the biggies like NY, Chicago, Boston, London, Paris?
No matter what you think about it - Nike was definitely caught off guard by this and they blew a huge opportunity for some great publicity - can you see the headline - "Age Group Woman come from no where to win the Nike womans marathon - are you next?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hey Bill, just saw that Nike has changed their minds and decided to give O'Connell the same prize as the winner. She is now declared a winner but not "the" winner. This way folks angry with the earlier decision might still buy Nike products ;-)
Still, I think this story brings up some good questions. According to the Nike Race FAQ, acceptance into the Elite division was based on a resume that had to be submitted. So with a previous PR of 3:07, who knows if O'Connell may have gotten in even if she'd applied. I usually think of elite women marathoner times being sub-3.
Post a Comment