Bogus record list bamboozles even National Masters News e-blast
Last weekend, a gent emailed me with the wonderful news of a W40 American record in the 1500: Kris Paaso, 40, running 4:29.54 at the Stanford University Invitational, beating the listed American record of 4:32.73 by Joan Nesbit in 2002. Then yesterday’s e-News from National Masters News revealed an even better claim: Sonja Friend-Uhl, 41, “took to the line in Vanderbilt University’s Black and Gold Meet” in Nashville and “finished strong to win the race outright in 4:27.00.” Wow! Two ARs in one weekend! Uh. Not so fast. As I wrote the Kris Paaso fan last Sunday: “It pains me to share this, but some listed USATF American masters records are as bogus as the day is long. Check this out.” I can excuse folks for being misled by USATF masters records. But there’s no excuse for the way Albuquerque nationals records are being treated.
A close observer of the USATF indoor masters records wrote me about some Albuquerque records being listed as pending and others not:
Yes, that is what casual research got me, and it opens up a whole new can of worms. Why accept the 200 mark of Bill Collins as a pending American record but not the 200s of Joy, Barbara, and Antwon? And how many years in a row does Stacey have to break Trish Porter’s high jump record (so far she has done it two in a row) before she gets credit? And what about Latrica Dendy? As you know, Latrica holds the W35 American marks in the 400 and 400 hurdles outdoors, both set at Lahti. Do she, Joy, Barbara, etc. have to prove that they are old enough to set more records? I don’t get it.
List below shows marks at Albuquerque nationals and then listed American indoor records:
Joy Upshaw W50 200 26.24 26.52
Barbara Jordan W75 200 36.80 39.16
Antwon Dussett M35 200 21.67 22.02
Stacey Nieder W40 hj 1.68 1.66
Latrica Dendy W35 400 56.46 56.66
I wonder why they didn’t make the new list. After all, Bill Collins made the new list, Milan Jamrich made it, etc.My masters mole also wrote:
Flo Meiler’s 13.55 in W75 hurdles did not reach pending status.
The jury is still out (will be out 4 weeks on Saturday) on the (correct times of the ) 60 dash trials and finals for both men and women. This is unprecedented in my experience.
Can this train wreck get any worse?
17 Responses
What’s this, Ken, trouble with records? Rather than go into detail about what this “mole” reported to you, and staying away completely from the personalities involved, I can make one comment:
We need to join the rest of the world. If someone goes to our nationals and breaks the national record, that should become the new national record. To have the two sets of marks (results from nationals, records at http://www.usatf.org) differ from each other is very bad, in my humble opinion.
To take just one example from the list above: In 2010, Stacey Nieder flew from Alaska to Boston and broke the American W40 record for the high jump by leaping 1.67 meters (“old” record 1.66 meters by Olympian Trish Porter).
Stacey’s mark, which is listed in the results for 2010 Boston nationals with a + next to it to indicate it was a record, never even reached “pending” status as an American record, much less approval.
This year, Stacey flew from Alaska to Albuquerque, and this time jumped 1.68 meters. In the results from Albuquerque her mark is shown as 1.68mR to indicate that it is a record. If it is a record, why is it not listed as “pending” on the current list at usatf.org, as your “close observer” points out?
Perhaps someone will opine that something was amiss both years with Stacey’s jumps (I have certainly never heard of anything). But should not Stacey, and the rest of the world, be told what that is? And if something was wrong, why are her marks shown as records in the meet results?
As far as the marks of Joy Upshaw (W50) and Antwon Dussett (M35), they both absolutely smoked their 200 dashes at Albuquerque. If their times were not 26.24 and 21.67, respectively, what were their times? And if they were something different from 26.24 and 21.67, why are 26.24 and 21.67 shown in the official results of the meet?
I’m completely confused! I just checked the World Records which say they were updated March, 25 2011.
From this year’s Indoor Nationals in Albuquerque I see Joy’s long jump record & Oneithea, Mary & Betty’s weight throw records. And track records for Bill, Michael Sullivan, and indoor pentathlon for Christopher Bates, and a men’s indoor M70-79 4x400M record, but no sign of the W50-59 4×4 World Record run by Tweety Wolf, Kathy Haubrich, Cheryl Bellaire and I, where we ran 4:36.11, beating the shown record of 4:43.27 by 7.16 secs. During the Championships, I asked Carroll DeWeese who was manning the “records” table if we needed to do anything regarding records, and I was told that it would all be taken care of. I guess I need to contact Sandy and see what the missing link is!
Thank you, Julie, for pointing out that the world records have now been updated as well (and they don’t use “pending” as we do for American marks — you’re either in or you are out).
It’s a shame that your 4 x 400 relay mark of 4:36.11 did not get recognized. Let me check the results from Albuquerque…OK, you were definitely first, and you definitely ran that time. Maybe later this year your mark will be recognized.
As far as the 200, I see that Bill Collins can now be introduced as the world indoor recordholder for the M60 200. Joy Upshaw (W50) and Barbara Jordan (W75) also broke the world indoor marks in the 200 at Albuquerque, but neither one made the world list. Maybe some day they will be recognized.
Still waitin’ on those 60m records. Malfunctioning clock you say? How can the clock malfunction and then function correctly in less than a second in the same race, refering to 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place times that are not being questioned? Let’s get those results and records posted pronto!
LET ME KNOW IF 60M HURDLE TIMES ARE ACC, IF THEY ARE NOT IT MAY NOT MEAN MUCH TO MOST BUT IF IT MAKE ME ONE ON THE INDOOR LIST IT HELPS IM TRYING TO PICK UP SPONCERS,IT WOULD MEAN A LOT,TO ME THO NOT IMPORTANT TO ANYONE,IT WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW THE ACC TIME I RAN 8.65 IN ILL THE NATIONALS WAS WON IN 8.64,PLEASE LET ME KNOW. THANK YOU
#4 Texas Tornado I have been thinking the same thing since the controversy began. I was last in my 60m for w45 with a time I doubt could be slower. Seriously!!
This is an old song. And we continue to sing it, year after year after year…
What will it take to break this pattern?
“If someone goes to our nationals and breaks the national record, that should become the new national record.”
Pete Taylor has the last word. Post every dang record that was set, and end this! Or else bring in some new personnel in order to “break this pattern” that Susan mentions.
I’m just trying to be logical, Texas T., about this whole thing (am sure I have ruffled some feathers in the process and thus must be guarded. I won’t say anything more about this after posting now on Thursday morning, March 31).
One of the attractions of the nationals in the old days was that if you set a record there it counted. Not so any longer, apparently.
To draw an analogy with basketball, I believe there is a tournament currently going on in which Butler University (Indianapolis) is still alive. If in the next game the last team that Butler beat comes out to play Butler’s opponent and Butler is nowhere to be found, there would be a lot of explaining to do.
We have a parallel case in the 200 at Albuquerque. At least four people, Antwon Dussett (M35), Bill Collins (M60), Joy Upshaw (W50), and Barbara Jordan (W75) broke a record in their races, but only one (Bill Collins) advanced (got the record recognized).
I don’t know the answer, but I think a “covering statement” is needed, just as we have in the 60 dash (all the times are “under review”).
Thus, I think the results of the 200 (at http://www.usatf.org) should have a notice that says “All 200-m results are currently under review.” That would solve things.
Before I attempted the new american record in high jump in Albuquerque, I went to the official and said: “This would be a new american record, please make sure everything is kosher”. He said Ok and got an additional official. They measured, adjusted, measured and adjusted. I don’t know what else can I do. I am not interested in holding a record I do not deserve, but I also like to be credited for a legitimate record. I think most of the people feel the same way. I wish that the Nationals would be organized the way that the new records could be automatically accepted. Thing can go technically wrong, but there should be backup systems even if it increases the entry fee. It is predictable that records will be broken in this meeting, make everything legit.
To milan jamrick its a litte differnt in the jumps and throws the measurment is checked 2 times and as long as the record documents are filled out it is good you must make shore these papers are filled out by the usatf officials,
Hello, I don’t want to get into this problem. Not on my shift but would make comment on US vs. World record. You know US records are pending until they are approved by USATF annual meeting in December. Since Sandy was in Albuquerque and witnessed 1st hand she can approve and enter world records.
Comment on championship sites. I think we need to do a much better job preparing candidates. None of the candidates in Virgina Beach convinced me they could run a Masters Championship. Maine has done it, could have done it again with certain corrections.
Probably need to have a team from National office with games committee go in and run these meets if we continue to want to travel around to different new places. Also contract timing crew.
Athletes are responsible for paper work outside the National championships. I lost 19.93 record for weight when the original flight sheets got destroyed by university even though all the signitures were done properly. Cry, cry me.
Don’t kill the messenger.
I won the M55 Triple Jump in Albuquerque and broke the American record (or so I thought). David Quick, who finished 2nd, is credited with the pending record. The same officials signed off on both marks and even used the same steel tape…
I believe that generally the Masters published records are accurate. But with the complexity involved in records reporting — all those age categories and so many events to report — that some errors and omissions are likely to creep in. Here’s a reference to an existing error involving yours truly: In the WMA outdoor 300-meter hurdles official records, I am listed as the M90 WR holder with a time of 51.31. Now, it is patently impossible for a 90-year old to move that fast. 51.31 would break the record for M75. The fact is, I did not run the 300-meter event as reported. It was 200-meters, not 300. (The record keepers must have forgotten that for those old, old guys like me, the hurdle distance had been recently reduced from 300 to 200-meters.)
It has been rumored that Yekaterina Podkopayeva is in training to run 4:59 in the 1500 at age 60 next year to take a good 13 seconds off the current WR.
Yekaterina is the Women’s masters WR holder with her amazing 3:59 at age 42.
I’m lying – I don’t know anything about a rumor, I just sometimes wonder where these runners are and what they are up to.
To respond to George’s point about records (no. 12, above). What we had in the 200 at Albuquerque were four people who broke the record (Antwon Dussett, Bill Collins, Joy Upshaw, and Barbara Jordan). These four seem to have gotten disparate treatment, which I will illustrate using the example of meals/dessert.
Bill Collins got dinner (designation as pending American record) and dessert (world record).
Antwon Dussett was eligible for dinner (pending American) but did not get his meal (no mention of him in the new records list). He was not eligible for dessert because he did not break the world mark.
Joy Upshaw and Barbara Jordan were eligible for dinner (pending American) and dessert (world), but both got nothing. One certainly wonders why they had to starve.
These dissimilar outcomes are very noteworthy and seems to cry out for an explanation.
In terms of quality of performance by the LOC and officials, I agree with George that these new sites seem to need a lot of help and direction from knowledgeable sources.
Thank you for your post, Donald (it was the most recent before the post I am making this morning, but it got moved up into slot 13). Congratulations on being one of three people in the meet to break the American record for the triple jump.
The other two were the redoubtable David Quick, who finished second in your age group, and the superb all-arounder Audrey Lary. Both David and Audrey were given pending status (shown at http://www.usatf.org), which means they should be shoo-ins to have their records accepted at the annual meeting of USATF in December.
As things stand now, your mark will not even be considered at the annual meeting, as you were not granted pending status. Oh, well, at least you can tell your friends you won the event.
“Athlete info” for the Albuquerque meet (posted on http://www.usatf.org) says the following:
“For appropriate and timely processing of record applications, athletes obtaining a new age division record should be prepared to submit a copy of their birth certificate or passport (driver’s license or similar is not acceptable), if not already submitted to USATF with your entry.” I consider those last 9 words to be pivotal.
I then looked at entry information for the meet, which defines “verification of age” as “a copy of your birth certificate or passport.”
I then looked at “Status of Entries” for the Albuquerque meet, which shows you as “accepted,” meaning that everything had been submitted that you needed to submit, including proof of age.
As I said, Donald, at least you can tell your friends you finished first. Not only that, but you beat the guy who set the new American record. But I know you want more than that, and you deserve more.
I would e-mail the masters records chair and ask what more you have to do to get this record accepted.
Leave a Reply