Tony Young of Redmond, Washington, recently set an American M40 outdoor record in the 1500 — a mark that also exceeds the listed world WMA record as well. But unless he improves on it at the Eugene masters nationals, it won’t be listed on the WMA seasonal bests list. All this is possible in light of the following statement regarding world outdoor performance lists for the 2003 season:

WMA Records czar Brian Oxley of Canada has issued this statement:
Compiling the indoor rankings has proved an interesting but enormously time-consuming task for Ross Dunton. It speaks to his total dedication to our sport, that he has been able to pull together so many countries and take the listings so deep. Frankly, I don’t know how he has found the time.
This brings to me to the main point of this message, and I urge all affiliates, national statisticians and interested individuals to take note.
Ross was kind enough to allow individual results, particularly from the U.S., to find their way into the Indoor list. That cannot happen with the oudoor list which Ross is beginning to compile. There are relatively few indoor meets in the world; more than I expected to discover, but still not many. There are, presumably, as many national meets as there are affiliates – a hugely greater number.
Therefore, I repeat the original message with which we began this first, experimental year of official WMA rankings. The Outdoor list will include only the results from National and international meets. Those results must be e-mailed to Ross either as a Hy-tek zipped, full meet back-up, or in a mergeable format on which Ross will advise you as necessary.
To all individuals interested in performance lists, I now say that your individual performance will appear in the official WMA list if you enter your national meet, and if your national affiliate, statistician or meet director then e-mails the results in a useable format. At present we do not intend a bottom cut-off, but should the files become too large, we may have to limit the length of the list. If you do not enter your national meet, or your national organisation withholds the results (Australia has already provided national meet results) then at least you will be able to look at the emerging list and see where you would have been placed internationally had you done so.
One final point. Please direct any comments on this announcement directly to me. This is a WMA project and the decision is final, at least for this first experimental year. I don’t doubt that when we gather in Puerto Rico, coming up fast, there will be opportunity to consider alternatives for the future. However for the time being, our objective is to bring national results together in a more accessible way. So far we’re only getting our feet wet, and so far it’s only Ross’ feet. Thanks again from all of us, Ross.
Brian Oxley
Chairman, WMA Records Committee.
My view:
Why are seasonal lists kept by IAAF and others?
1. To let athletes know how the competition is doing over the course of the season.
2. To give fans and the media a good idea of who’s best in the various events.
3. To publicize and recognize the best performances in the current season.
4. To aid future statisticians and fans look up a season’s best marks and athletes.
WMA’s rankings program achieves almost none of these goals.
In confessing that the WMA 2003 outdoor performance lists will be “experimental” and limited to national and international championships, Oxley is confirming that the first official effort to compile seasonal rankings will be nearly worthless.
Athletes wanting to know how their competition is doing BEFORE their country’s national championships will be forced to spend a ton of time scanning results sites. The world WMA meet — which comes before the USA masters nationals — will produce great marks. But waiting till after Puerto Rico to produce a seasonal list defeats a prime purpose of such a compilation.
A suggestion: If the point of this WMA exercise is to “bring national results together in a more accessible way,” why not just post the results to WMA’s Web site — rather than force athletes and fans to visit a private site?
WMA’s own Web site — ironically and sadly — has no subsection labeled RESULTS. One would expect to see results from the wonderful Eurovets indoor meet in San Sebastian, Spain, and the historic USATF indoor nationals in Boston.
But nooooo. WMA doesn’t link to or archive these results.
Yet WMA DOES link to results from the 2002 World Masters Games — a non-WMA event. For International Masters Games Association results, look to WMA. For WMA affiliated results, look to . . . someone other than WMA? Insane.
Delegates to the Puerto Rico General Assembly should be prepared to ask some hard questions of the WMA Council. Masters athletes — including Tony Young — deserve better than what WMA is offering.