German star calls for ‘shorter, better, smaller’ worlds
Germany’s Guido Müller, a former IAAF Masters Athlete of the Year who holds seven world age-group records in the sprints and hurdles, claims gold nearly every time he runs at world masters championships. But that isn’t enough. He wants the WMA world meets downsized through qualifying standards. His comments appear in the latest issue of the German masters magazine Senior Athletics. Guido is quoted as saying: “I was delighted at this World Championships in Riccione until I learned that about 9,000 participants reported.” He bemoaned the transit problems between stadia and the financial burdens on entrants — many staying for all 12 days of the meet. He said good athletes stayed away while wealthier (but lousier) performers showed up.
Here is a rough Google translation of a post on Annette Koop’s site:
Guido Müller wants reform of the international championships: Shorter, better, smaller!
Guido Müller, Germany’s hitherto only “Masters IAAF athlete of the year”, is now in an article for the current issue of the magazine “Senior Athletics” (abbreviation: “SeLa”), a reform of the international athletics championships of the seniors. After the experience of the World Cup in Riccione advocates Müller for shorter, more athletic and especially smaller international championships.
Germany Topmasters look in the December issue of “SeLA ‘first back:” I am delighted at this World Championships in Riccione, until I learned that about 9000 (!) Participants reported. Gave my anticipation of strong skepticism whether such a mass event. ”
The Vaterstettener designate the weaknesses of the last Masters-WM, where despite all use the Italian organizers to massive problems had come, for example, during transport between the stadiums and the togetherness of the Masters athletes was due to the large number of participants, and the distance between the stadiums on the wayside. Mueller also criticized the financial burdens of the athletes were too high: “The total duration of the event has grown to 12 days ausgeufert.”
As the Senior Athletes usually all travel expenses for travel, hotel, food and take-off fees paid itself, whose budget was exhausted. “Good athletes must meet the European and World Championships to stay away, while the better-off financially, but significantly worse performance competitors participation possible.”
Muller angrily: “Even the students with poor performance will sign up for very many disciplines, so as the days of their presence States. Given these little prospect, to reach the final, they must also not divide their forces so that their participation in a more entertainment value than that they represent a real race, with all the necessary prior training. participants This is not embarrassed to technically difficult disciplines, such as the pole vault, hurdles and obstacles to participate, and this unästhetische presentation, the attention of the photographers on to attract, then patronizing the Senior Sports generally ridiculous. participants This is the level and therefore the prestige of the World Championships pressed down. ”
Muller calls for clear changes: qualification standards should be “inefficient casual athletes’ from participating hold. He also wants shorter championships with fewer competitions. Avoid should be on “Werfer-Fünfkampf the Cross runs, walking and the marathon.” There were plenty of marathons around the world, even with their own Senior rankings.
For Guido Müller, his contribution as a beginning of a necessary discussion understand is the thing clear: “If the Ausufern of competitions and no longer need to address participants to persist, we run the risk that one for the international Senior Championships probably not appropriate or even no longer organizer.”
This isn’t a new issue. It’s been debated in many contexts for years, and I even noted the German indoor nationals having performance standards.
But a world masters meet with 9,000 entrants certainly was pushing the envelope, as Weia Reinboud noted more than a month ago, prompting a poll on the issue. As of today, folks who expressed an opinion on this blog favor qualifying standards at worlds 56 percent to 35 percent (with the rest undecided).
My opinion: While a change to an elitist worlds might make a few happy, it would basically trash the opened-arms-to-all ethic of the masters movement from the start. I also think the problem is overblown. Sure, some mediocre athletes show up. But the price of qualifying standards is too steep, since it might forever discourage many athletes from even aspiring to worlds. I had my shot in 1999 (when I didn’t make it out of the 200 and 110 hurdles heats and took 12th in the high jump). But I’d still like a shot at 2009. Would I make the standard?
Would you?
20 Responses
Ken, I agree fully with your opinion on this. The point a number of us made in the earlier discussion after Riccione was that numbers were an issue, but the poor organisation, scattered venues etc, there made the position infinitely worse than it need have been. The debate should not be about “how big?” (or how small or elitist) but about how to organise it properly.
And to answer your final question, given what we hear about your current rate of recovery, I reckon you’ll run just fine in Lahti.
The inclusive nature of Master’s track is good and worth preserving but it would be nice if there was a competition where simply qualifying meant something. I often have co-workers(I’m a teacher) ask me about nationals or worlds and as soon as I tell that “pretty much anyone can go” I can sense their respect for these competions dropping, as it should. Most of us run in lots of meets between January and September. It would be nice if just one of them actually had standards and all the best people were inspired to show up. Maybe once a year…. every two years?
I do like the idea of the championships being open to all, I feel that in the popular events there should be standards and then possibly splint the field into A and B groups based on time. This would eliminate the need to run up to four rounds in some of the sprints at the more popular age groups
M?ɬºller ver?ɬ§rgert: ” Gerade die Teilnehmer mit schlechten Leistungen melden sich f?ɬºr besonders viele Disziplinen, um so die Tage ihrer Anwesenheit auszunutzen. Da diese nur wenig Aussicht haben, den Endkampf zu erreichen, m?ɬºssen sie auch ihre Kr?ɬ§fte nicht einteilen, so da?É?? ihre Teilnahme f?ɬºr sie mehr einen Unterhaltungswert hat als da?É?? sie sich einem echten Wettkampf stellen mit all dem daf?ɬºr notwendigen vorausgehenden Training. Diese Teilnehmer genieren sich nicht, an technisch schwierigen Disziplinen, wie Stabhochsprung, Hindernis- und H?ɬºrdenlauf teilzunehmen und durch diese un?ɬ§sthetische Pr?ɬ§sentation die Aufmerksamkeit der Fotografen auf sich zu ziehen, die dann herablassend den Seniorensport allgemein l?ɬ§cherlich machen. Durch diese Teilnehmer wird das Niveau und damit das Ansehen der Weltmeisterschaften nach unten gedr?ɬºckt.”
M?ɬºller is right. This Ersatz-Woodstock event is made laughable by some of the participants. Some standards would increase the seriousness of this event and make it more managable. My compromise suggestion: enter one event without any standard, but if you want to compete in more than one event, you have to meet the standards.
I agree with Guido, Rod, and Milan. Most non-track people assume that a trip to the nationals or worlds means that one has met some qualifying standard beyond simply having a birth certificate and a bank account. When someone tries a new event (or six) for the first time at a championship meet, not only is it uncomfortable to watch (and, in some events, dangerous), but it interferes with the contenders?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ ability to engage in a real competition. Even the National Senior Games has attempted to deal with the problem, by establishing qualifying standards (and by eliminating some events such as the hurdles). Milan?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s proposal is the best solution: everyone can enter one event, but anyone wanting to enter more events must meet standards.
BTW. The Google translation of M?ɬºller’s comments are almost counter productive, as they make M?ɬºller’s comments comical. There are several German born master athletes in the USA; if we trully want to comment on M?ɬºller’s statement (and not just make fun of it), M?ɬºller’s comments should be properly translated.
I think it should be open to anyone. In my racewalk events in Riccione the best ones definitely showed up. This was most probably the best collection of master racewalk competitors in one gathering. My teammate Alberto Medina got an impressive 6th place in M45 age group in the 20K Racewalk in San Sebastian 2005 with a time of 1:51. In Riccione I walked a 1:50 20K in the M45 and that only got me a 9th place!! The competition was outstanding. The best showed up..the compettion should be open to all and not all the best ones will show up all the time anyway. That is how it always will be. Having a large turnout drives money into the meet and the local economy too.. which is good since I haven’t seen any impressive line of great name sponsors dying to or being overeager to support this great undertaking of a masters meet so far. Where is the big name sponsors when you need them?
So for now large turnouts is good because it is about money..large turnouts means more entry fees..and like I’ve already said..I can only speak for the Rayzwockrs, but believe me baby..the best ones showed up in Riccione that normally show up, and again some will not show up all the time. And some of the best don’t show up at Masters meets so far, because they are chasing bigger fish like Olympic trials etc…
I doubt that having to qualify will have a significant impact on the number of entrants in terms of adding race heats, etc. I competed in three world championship meets, and all but a few of entrants in my events were well qualified for a world-level competition. I think it is also a fair observation to say that the cost of attending a WMA meet is not determined as much by the number of days as is the expense to get to one. Competitors outside of Europe spent as much or more on airfare as they did on lodging and food. A well-organized meet should include affordable lodging, usually from nearby universities, for example.
We should have minimum standards. The standard shouldn’t be unreasonable but should be stringent enough to eliminate people who have not trained seriously for the events.
It would also be nice to find several sponsors who could help pay the expenses for talented masters with limited funds. I know several people who could have won medals in Italy but didn’t go because they couldn’t afford it. The airfare to Finland will be pricey, and I doubt the hotel rooms will be as inexpensive as they were in Italy.
This topic comes up almost annually – standards for nationals, standards for worlds, and then – inevitably some one raises the “fact” that there are qualifying standards for the National Senior Games – so why not for nationals and worlds.
All I can say is that using some method (aside from ability to pay) to reduce the numbers of clearly unqualified competitors does not really get to the heart of the issue that has been raised. Yes there were far too many people in Riccione for the LOC to manage. Whose fault was that? Was that the fault of the competitors who came in last in whatever event? No – that was the doing of the LOC, a gang that had a hard time shooting straight when it came to selection of venues (too far apart, too difficult to reach without shuttles) an inability to run shuttle buses in sufficient numbers and in a timely fashion, and who did silly things like have the marathon finish in the main stadium during the relays and bringing in large numbers of people without sufficient bathroom facilities. If there had been 6000 competitors- there still would have been 3 venues, too few shuttle buses and poor service.
I would suggest that those who complain about an apparent large number of unqualified competitors (how ever that is determined – too slow, too unskilled – and above all probably too old) – look at the countries from which the majority of these apparently undesirable people came. I have not done a study of this but my bet is that they came mainly from either the host country or its close neighbors. Very few athletes who are not pretty serious about their sport are going to spend a significant sum of money to travel a great distance to spend 12 days looking like a fool. It is my observation from having participated in 8 outdoor WMA meets that many of the back of the pack competitors come from the host country. They come and run the x-c, the marathon, and the longer distance races on the track. Probably there are some in the race walks. No doubt there are many in the other track events and the field events. The host country is hold the meet, it is a world meet, it is exciting, it is close to home and not too expensive to go, and probably a once in a lifetime experience. Who is going to tell these folks – go away? And frankly the LOC needs the money – that is a fact. These meets are very expensive to run no one is getting rich running one of these meets. The mindset of those running the WMA is the more the merrier.
If one feels that the WMA meet should be smaller and more elite – then hold it in some remote part of the world where it costs a very large fortune to travel, where there are few local athletes, and let the few who manage to make their way there have a great old time. The north or south pole comes to mind -probably a little cold for some- but certainly that venue would cut down on the numbers.
First figure out the nature of the problem – too many unskilled? too many too slow, too many too old, or just too many of the locals who show up – because it is in their backyard? or is it the numbers for the marathon and x-c – and race walks – and maybe you want to throw them out? or was it the lack of organization by the LOC? until you identify the nature of the problems – you will not be able to solve the apparent problem. But if it is that you really want to have an elite meet just for a select number of elite masters athletes – with very rigorous qualifying standards so only the best of the best turn up- start raising money and do it yourself.
I know that Monty Hacker (WMA Executive VP) is worried by the fact that the WMA gets too few bidders to hold its world championships. In principle this could lead to having to select among unsuitable candidates. The one thing which will best encourage more cities to bid (if it’s properly exploited) is the large number of athletes who attend. All those hotel nights, restaurant meals and car rentals are what encourage a city like Riccione to take on the meet. Seen from that angle, standards could be a dangerous thing.
Quick Silver
Hong Kong
While the Senior Olympics in the US have qualification requirements and are generally well organized, having three qualified competitors from each state in each event and age group (men and women) still makes for a lot of competitors (more than 25,000). If instead of states in the US, you have countries around the world, the number grows by a factor of three. Nevertheless, qualification for the US Senior Olympics during the preceding year does not guarantee superior competition, because some seniors can’t survive injury-free until the next year !
Perhaps, the only way to fairly manage a restriction of attendees is to have the national organizations screen their athletes. This might mean that the WMA Championships would have to be held after all the participating countries had held their national championship meets.
It is comforting that the number of rounds grows only logarithmically with the number of entrants. Increasing the number of entrants by a factor of two an any event at most causes only one extra round for the athletes.
While some meets have huge attendance, the meet in Puerto Rico in 2003 had only a bit over 1000, so the proximity to large population centers is a big determinant for the number of attendees.
Perhaps each country should be given a limited on the number of athletes they can send.
Aside from the host country, I think that Germany had one of the largest contingents in Italy.
I understand that Guido was injured in 2005, but I don’t know why he wasn’t able to get to Puerto Rico in 2003. Typically, most athletes don’t compete in the WMA Championships every two years for various reasons.
It is a big deal to get everything in order for these meets, not just the travel, but sending in all the credentials, etc. So the committment has to be made almost a year ahead. I had high hopes in 1999. The year before I had run only one 300 H race, my first hurdles race ever, and came away with the 2nd best time in the world after having taken the first hurdle too long and coming down flatfooted at a dead stop on the other side. Unfortunately, I got injured in the spring of 1999 and on the way to Gateshead was still trying to recover. So, I was happy to make the finals and watch Guido from behind when he set another of his great records. The point is, after putting so much into planning and training to get to the WMA Championship, you don’t just say “I’m injured” and stay home. You go with hope in your heart and do your best !
rck
I just like to quote Ed Baskauskas 🙂
“Milan?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s proposal is the best solution: everyone can enter one event, but anyone wanting to enter more events must meet standards.”
Milan
I’m with you too Ed Baskauskas and Milan, but as Quick Silver pointed out, this is an event driven by potential $,$$$.$$ The more participants, the more bargaining $.
Linda 🙂
Actually my plan would not cut down on the number of participants as much as on the number of events each participant is competing in. Some people compete in 5-10 events.
With my plan the entire competition would be shorter.
Milan offered a very reasonable compromise that should be adopted.
Personally, I limit myself to 1 – 2 events and then relax and enjoy watching the meet.
I experienced the qualification process in Riccione for the first time in my master’s career. I feel that people that meet a qualifying standard should have been excused from the qualifying round. The process of traveling to the venue twice in the same day was a drain, even though all competitors had to face the same problem.
An even greater challenge was the race against the loss of sunlight each day. Some of the leaders in the weight throw (M60) lost their marks as we halted the preliminary round in darkness and resumed the competition the next day. The reason for the loss of daylight was the large number of competitors in other events and other age groups. The idea of using a venue with lights would be a step forward. I remember throwing under the lights in high school, and I suspect I could still perform in that environment. Only one venue appeared to have a throwing area was covered by the existing lights.
I think it is fair to allow anyone to enter the event and experience the World Championships, especially the large number of local competitors. If the top 8 entries (or whatever number is appropriate) could have avoided competing in the qualifying round, the competition would have run more smoothly (preliminary and qualifying)
In the M60 discus we had over 20 throwers in the preliminary round. I don’t think this impacted the medalists, but for competitors that would have considered making the finals a major accomplishment, it probably reduced the likelihood that they would make the finals.
Unlike others, I did not have a problem with the venues in Riccione with the exception of distance from spectators. It would have been interesting to throw the weights in a venue where spectators could watch. In most of the venues, spectators were far away from the throwing rings.
It is a World Championship. There should be qualifying standards. Just give a generous qualifying period like 3 years (instead of the typical 18-20 months), because we are not professional athletes and we often have to take a year or two off from competing for personal, health, or professional reasons.
We need to do something or nobody will be able to organize a meeting of this size. Every year we are complaining about the organizers. I am surprised that anybody is still willing to run the World Championship. I am surprised that there is so much resistence to improve the quality of this meeting. Maybe it is the age of the competitors. As the old saying goes: It?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s hard to teach an old master new tricks.
thanks !! very helpful post!
Leave a Reply