Records set at National Senior Games in technicality limbo
In late August, national masters chairman Gary Snyder wrote that he was seeking âmiddle groundâ in the case of age-group records set the National Senior Games. On Monday, I wrote him for an update, and noted that the Palo Alto meet didnât need a USATF meet sanction since the parent organization â the NSGA â already was a USATF member organization (as noted here). But that isnât enough, Gary replied yesterday. âMy understanding,â he wrote, âis that when referring to âmember organizationsâ we really mean the 5E Members:
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics. . . National Collegiate Athletic Association . . .
National Federation of State High School Associations . . .
National Junior College Athletic Association . . .
Road Runners Club of America (and) . . .
Running USA.
There are also 5F Members which do not receive the reciprocal sanction privilege.â So many technicalities, so little justice.Â
10 Responses
“Justice,” as your posting suggests, Ken, is the key word here. What were the athletes supposed to do? Were they supposed to call first to find out what the sanctioning status of the Sr Games would be? It was sanctioned in 2007; why would there be any difference?
I made a few calls to the NSGA for another purpose and believe I talked to only one actual human being, someone who could not possibly have known about sanctioning. And the rule about reciprocal sanctioning, we find from Gary’s message, has been interpreted to mean that “5E” members have the privilege of reciprocal sanctioning, but “5F” members do not. Does everyone (even anyone) on the Sr Games staff know about such a distinction? I doubt it.
Was Hall of Famer Audrey Lary (W75), who traveled all the way from Frederick, Maryland, to California for the meet and broke the American 400 record, supposed to call someone in the NSGA office to inquire about whether they were a 5F or a 5E member? Was that her obligation?
Was Don Pellmann (M90), who lives in a retirement community in Colorado, I believe, supposed to leave a message with the NSGA about the sanctioning status of the Sr Games? Would they have called him back? Don broke the M90 pole vault record, and as I recall the mark he broke was set in June 2005 in Pittsburgh. Now that would have been the Sr Games, would it not? Given the meet’s history, how can we expect the athlete to know (or care) about such arcane distinctions as 5E vs. 5F?
Perhaps the point is that we are really talking quality here. But as we have seen time and time again, a sanction does not mean quality (see Landover 2009 and ask Earl Fee or Karla Del Grande or Don Drummond if you have more questions). We have to find out whether there was something materially wrong with Irene Obera’s record 100 (Irene is an original-class Masters Hall of Famer) at this year’s Sr Games, something amiss with Audrey Lary’s record 400, something that was not done right with Don Pellmann’s record pole vault, and so forth.
If there was nothing wrong, I conclude that they are records. We cannot and should not impose these impossible standards on our athletes. Nor should we cast aside the wonderful efforts of our officials at these meets; officials who sign off on records that are later dismissed for God only knows what reason.
Wonderful Post P.T.!!
Gary wrote – somewhere – cannot find it now – that instead of whining about what USATF should or should not do – that we should let the masters leadership know what our wants and desires are- sort of hinting I guess – that turning up at the annual convention would be a good way to do that.
Most of us are not going to go to the convention – I am a 4th alternate for the NE association – which basically means that if I go it will not be as a delegate and it will be on my dime. Having just spent a boatload of dimes going to Lahti and Sydney – the piggybank is empty- no dimes for Indianapolis.
So – what do I want – how about a leadership that pays attention to such things as the nonsense about certification of meets and gets the records set at the NSG ratified?
How about a leadership that works in harmony with the NSG track and field folks and the same for the World Masters Games instead of looking at those organizations as “competition”?
And Gary – how about actually writing on your blog – instead of just saying you have one and not writing a thing since last May. Hello Gary- it is now October 29th -over 5 months since you wrote anything on the blog. Talk to us Gary – say something about this records mess –
and – do something about the associations that hold members hostage when they want to affiliate in another association.
Right now Ken’s blog seems to be the conduit for communication between masters and USATF -nice of Ken to serve that purpose – is his check in the mail?
Sorry if I should “whiney” -I prefer to think of it as being cranky – still jetlagged from the trip back from Sydney to Boston – 14 hour time difference and I have been home 9 days – 5 more to go to get the body clock reset. And btw – the WMG track meet was pretty darn well run – not without issues but no meet is perfect – but the lap counting in the 5k on the track – great!
Hi Mary,
Regarding the Bolg:
Essentially I see no reason to compete with Ken and I have reverted to my previous method of communication which was a monthly email distributed to about 100 folks. Email me if you want to be included. Below is the article you mentioned:
Changing the Conversation
In every issue of National Masters News there is a listing of the Masters Track & Field Committee which is also found on the USATF website. Take a few minutes to take a look at the committee make up and the names of the members because these are the people who will attend the upcoming USATF Annual Meeting on December 2-6. Iâm sure you will recognize a few names and may be surprised to discover who we are. Why is this important you may ask?
The fact of the matter is that nearly all decisions that affect Masters T&F are made by the committee during the meeting.
The meeting agenda contains the usual items such as minutes, budgets and reports but the most interesting portion is New Business because thatâs where change is introduced and discussed. A number of masters competitors are quite outspoken and are quite ready to be post their ideas and criticisms on public blogs, well here is an opportunity to be âheardâ where it counts. Perhaps even âanonymousâ will contribute. I know some of you think a few of us sit in a room and dream up changes but thatâs far from the reality. All issues including competition rules, records, schedules, budgets etc, are brought to the meeting floor and voted upon by the meeting delegates. So instead of being classified as a âwhinerâ be part of the solution and send me email with your comments and suggestions regarding:
Records Process
World Masters Athletics Relay Selection
Senior Games
Paid Admission at USA Championships
Ribbons for 3-6 Place
Medal Standards
Meet Timing Requirements
The above are just a few of the issues to be discussed and Iâm sure you have others.
As always I can be reached at: garysnyder@att.net
Gary Snyder
Not much interest in this topic? Oh, well. Because our chair, Gary Snyder, apparently reads this blog I will ask him a question, because the suspense is killing me.
Are the 40 or more world or American records set at the 2009 Sr Games (Palo Alto, California) going to join the countless other records set by masters in the last few years that never got ratified? In other words, is there no hope at all, or is there a little hope?
One would think there would be some hope, given the history of the meet (at least some records from previous Sr Games were accepted), the caliber of the athletes, presumed use of a good FAT crew, quality of officials, excellent venue, the fact that it was a national championship, etc. Or should Audrey Lary (W75), Don Pellmann (M90), Flo Meiler (W75), Irene Obera (W75), and all the others who came to the meet in good faith and shattered the existing records be denied?
Hi Peter,
As the saying goesâThe ball is in their courtâ. According to the information I have they still have not applied for a sanction. I know you and others believe the sanction should not be required for certain meets, which I support, but unfortunately NSG does not fall into that category. At this time the record applications have been received by the USATF Master Records Chair and remain in limbo awaiting NSG movement.
Gary Snyder
Chair
USATF Masters T&F
Thanks, Gary. I do hope, as indicated above, that we can get some movement on these records and countless others (literally too many to count).
PLT
I think the NSGA has to pay the USATF about $5,000 for a sanction fee, but I don’t know the number of participants in Track & Field, which the fee is based on.
And I doubt if the NSGA will do that, especially now that the event is over.
Mary,
Just because you are an alternate from the NE Association doesn’t mean you can’t be a delegate. I don’t recall that I ever have gone to a Convention (and I’ve now been to 7) knowing in advance that I’d be a delegate. However, there are about 20 (I can’t remember the exact figure) active athletes who are elected by the active athletes who are there as delegates and that’s always been how I’ve become a delegate. As a matter of fact I only recall one year (2000) when there were people there wanting to be active athlete delegates who were not elected. In fact, some years there aren’t as many people wanting to be active athlete delegates as there are slots for them.
I went the first time precisely because I wanted to see something changed — at that time in the US there was an exception to the international implements in the weight throw, which I thought was silly. Within a year of taking up the cause we got that rule change, without the kind of belly aching that I frequently see on this site. Those of us who wanted change simply took responsibility to get involved, started a petition, lobbied the committee chairs, went to the Convention and got our proposal approved without dissent (even though at first it was seen as controversial).
At the time I was a nobody who’d been to 3 indoor championships (largely because I lived in Boston at the time) and one outdoor championships. I didn’t even really know or understand the structure very well, much less the “power brokers.”
The lesson? Getting involved works.
Jerry: thanks for reminding me about that – and I agree – more active athletes need to be involved. Certainly it is much better to try to be part of the solution than to be belly aching from the sidelines.
Leave a Reply