Hawaii’s Jack Karbens: Pick 2009 nationals site ASAP
Jack Karbens, an accounting professor in Honolulu and longtime Hawaii Masters TC leader, is giving the USATF Masters T&F Executive Committee the business. Specifically: Get on with it — the choice of where to hold the vacant 2009 masters outdoor nationals. In a letter to masters leaders, he writes: “Please select a site for the (2009) championship by conference call at the end of October. Our designated leader has stated that sites which are planning to bid need to finalize arrangements with their site as soon as possible. We need to support our leader, Gary Snyder. He has had enough challenges due to withdrawal of plans to hold this meet in Florida.â€
Jack, an M65 multi-eventer and longtime masters athlete, continued:
There are sufficient leaders involved in the proposed conference call to represent fairly the variety of opinions about where to hold the meet. We have all had months to express our thoughts about the reasons for changing our minds about holding the meet in Florida and the criteria by which a new site should be selected.
The site for the 2009 outdoor championship could become an endless debate at the Reno annual meeting and lead to an even worse decision than a decision made asap by the planned conference call. Time is of the essence in finalizing plans for the 2009 meet. The 2010 meet is already scheduled.
The 2011 meet should be the focus of the meeting in Reno. Hopefully, at least three very complete bids have been processed and are ready for presentation in Reno for selection of the 2011 site.
The poll at masterstrack.com clearly supported a meet in the Midwest. The groundwork laid for a meet in Cleveland appears to solid. Rex Harvey and others in Cleveland have the experience to put together a first class meet and solve our problem.
There are people in far away places such as Hawaii who need to make travel plans well in advance. We have waited for several months at this point and are running out of time to take advantage of travel miles and the best fares on fewer available planes. The sooner a site is announced, the better the chances that the number of entrants will be maximized.
Hopefully, the USATF National Masters Outdoor Track and Field Championships will hold the first priority of masters track athletes for many years. Such a meet serves as the foundation on which USATF club, Association and Regional meets are based.
World meets, Senior Olympics, elite events, masters competing in open divisions, etc. are nice but do not best serve the needs of the critical mass of American masters track and field athletes ages 30 to 100 who pay dues to join USATF.
Aloha, Jack Karbens
According to a Forum post, “The MTF Executive Committee is meeting via conference call on October 29 and will select a location. It’s expected that the original meet dates of July 9-12 will remain.â€
Stay tuned.
16 Responses
MITCHEL FIELD WAS THE SITE OF THE 1986 OUTDOOR NATIONALS.CLOSE TO JFK AND LA GUARDIA AIRPORT, HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY SOLVES LODGING AND TRACK LOCATION PROBLEM. THEY ARE ACROSS THE STREET FROM EACH OTHER. JUST A THOUGHT
Kudos to Gary Snyder, Jim Flanik, Sandy Pashkin, George Mathews (former masters chair), and all the others for their efforts on behalf of the cause over the years. I’m definitely excited about the eventual disclosure of the 2009 site, whether the news will come out tomorrow (October 29) or later. But again and again I come back to the central point: “Why don’t the masters outdoor nationals draw?”
In 2000, after just over 3 decades of trying, we finally broke the 1500 barrier in terms of entrants (we had 1503 in 2000). Since then, we’ve had a lot of leadership from our reps, we’ve had Bob Weiner beating the PR drum, we’ve had Mark Cleary helping us out a great deal through his management of the exhibition masters events at the big meets, etc., and yet we’re still not getting anywhere.
In 2008 we had a shocking total (per National Masters News) of 977 competitors at Spokane (a nice meet, by the way). In other words, we dropped an astounding 35% from the year 2000 even as the country’s population increased dramatically, which would mean the number of people 30+ jumped by a big margin. In fact, my Google search tells me the U.S. population jumped from 281.4 million in 2000 to 305.5 million today (October 28, 2008).
I should note that there was no reason for Spokane’s pitiful attendance. Yes, gas prices were a problem, but our nationals represent our pride and joy. Just think what people in other sports (golf, tennis, etc.) will do to be a part of their big events. And I should point out that unlike what will be the case in 2009 (with Worlds, Senior Games, etc.), Spokane ran “unopposed” by big meets.
What does this mean? I think we need to take a long look at what we’re doing in terms of national championships and determine whether our approach is best. Others are thriving, why should we be struggling?
numbers are down from 2000 for a number of unresearched reasons:
Post 911
Location
Travel Costs
Location
Gas prices
Location
Promotion
Location
The attendance at our recent nationals is curious and troubling. Surely, we can attract more than 1000 people from a a nation of 300 million people. Millions competed in track in high school. I thought the baby-boom generation was superfit and wanted to live forever. Perhaps we should try the following (maybe we already have):
1. More publicity in newspapers and magazines.
2. More promotion of events and the sport
3. Sponsorship from large companies (Pfizer, Depends, Ben Gay). Probably a pipe dream in this economy.
4. Government sponsorship: they can bail out Wallstreet; why not prevent increased health care costs by promoting fitness in older adults. Several well-controlled studies showed that people with greater aerobic capacity and strength live longer and have better quality of lives. Other countries sponsor masters athletics.
5. Encourage our friends to join the sport. If only 50 percent of us could recruit 1 person to compete in the meet, we would set an attendance record.
6. Schedule a fun run as part of the Nationals. Perhaps, some of the fun runners might be attracted to our sport.
7. Schedule big meets near large population centers. Moving the meet to LA (Mt Sac) this year might attract more people. They have an active track and field community, plenty of inexpensive lodging, and reasonably good summertime weather.
I think more people would take up the sport if they knew how much fun it is. Unfortunately, it takes years of commitment just keep from injuring yourself.
I agree with Thomas Fahey -In our country, we should see a higher percentage of people competing both at the National & local level. Getting more people involved should be a priority for everyone in Masters Track.
There will be a Masters track meet with 4000+ competitors this summer, at a first class venue, and it won’t be the USATF Nationals, it wil be the National Senior Games finals. With masters track and field competitors in the 50+ age groups, this meet will dwarf the USATF Nationals, where ever it is held.
I believe that George Mathews, towards the end of his tenure as USATF Masters Chair, proposed that masters track and align with the NSGA instead of the USATF. From what I’ve seen of the last few years, I believe he was correct in his assesment.
Why does the Senior Games outdraw the USATF nationals by a 4-1 ratio (with only 50+ competing)? Maybe a full time staff that actively promotes sport (track and field included) is the reason. Even the Senior Games local meets easily outdraw the local USATF masters events. Also the competition at the Senior Games is equal to or better than found at the USATF meet. Go back and look at the 2007 results if you don’t believe me.
Having a full time staff dedicated to senior sports seems to be the answer. They will have over 12,000 people attend the Senior Games this summer in San Francisco. They have the power to get cities and chamber of commerces, to bid on hosting the summer games. They already have host cities for 2011 and 2013. Wouldn’t the USATF love having multiple cities bidding to host their meet.
As long as masters track is associated with the USATF, it will be a difficult proposition.
I for one, don’t really care where the USATF meet in held in 2009…I’m going to SF.
I compete in masters track and in masters swimming. I agree that the trends are troubling, but swimming, which has many more masters participants, doesn’t draw that many more to its nationals. (There are over 10,000 registered masters swimmers in Northern California alone! that probably exceeds the entire national registration for USA masters T&F).
Despite the huge number of participants, masters swimming does not attract proportionately more entrants to nationals. There are 2 nationals per year — the 25-yard pool event in the spring (average of anywhere from ~ 1,500 to 1,800 entrants); and, the 50-meter pool event in the summer (average of anywhere from ~ 1,000 to 1, 2000 entrants).
http://www.usms.org/comp/nationals.php
Track does have a major disadvantage compared to swimming. Swimmers compete in a nice, cool, 77 degree pool. No matter how oppressive the heat, the meet can occur. Track needs a relatively comfortable climate. Witness the disaster in NC a few years ago.
If USATF would pick a convenient location with less than subtropic temps and humidity, participation might pick up.
Previous post…”If USATF would pick a convenient location with less than subtropic temps and humidity, participation might pick up.” Agreed…that’s why Denver/Boulder, Colorado would be a great spot to hold a National Championships in Mid June. Low humidity, temps in the mid to high 80’s. Average to low airfare flying into a major hub and inexpensive airlines like Southwest and Frontier fly into Denver as well as Amtrak coming into Denver eastbound from San Francisco and westbound from Chicago and is inexpensive as well. I can hear all the runners out there grumbling that they have to run in altitude, but remember, it’s all about the comradery, not about winning or records right? The Denver Metro area would be a great place to have the meet logistically being even distance for everyone around the USA, weather and travel expense, not to mention a great spot for those that like to vaction after the meet. Who am I kidding…it’s probably going be held in Anchorage, AK…hehehe…
Times are changing, and maybe we need to change (and I mean change in a big way). Years ago, I (and many other masters) looked down on the Senior Games/Senior Olympics. I remember in the 1980s listening to Dawson Pratt (a top-notch masters sprinter at the time) talk about his trip to the New Jersey Senior Games (Matt Brown, another excellent masters sprinter of the time, also competed in the meet). “It was men against boys,” according to Dawson.
He and Matt completely outclassed the senior competitors. I got the feeling that Dawson thought it was a waste of time even going to the event.
Now we are in 2008, and for some reason I have a copy of the August 2007 National Masters News in my desk. On the front cover are Phil Raschker, Rita Hanscom, and Kay Glynn, all of whom competed at the 2007 Senior Games in Louisville. Hmmm…they sure look like the same Phil, Rita, and Kay I’ve announced so many times over the years as they turn in one brilliant performance after another. What happened?
Who won the M60 400 dash at Louisville? Roger Pierce? Isn’t he the same guy recently nominated for Masters Hall of Fame? Who won the M50 hammer? Who? “Big Jim Wetenhall?” Isn’t he the same guy I announced in the weight throw at Boston? The list goes on and on. And they were just a few of the almost 4,200 competitors at Louisville for Senior Games track and field.
Pretty soon we will know where our 2009 outdoors site will be. How about a proposition — if we can’t get even 1300 competitors at the 2009 outdoors (and that’s a very small number indeed considering it’s a national meet) we should immediately begin negotiations with the National Senior Games Association to become part of that organization. I credit former masters chair George Mathews with that suggestion.
If they won’t let us go down to age 30 (right now they begin at 50), or if they insist on maintaining their schedule of every other year (I would propose that the track and field portion of Sr Games be held annually) I would make the same “crazy suggestion” I made before in this forum. Go to the management of two well-run existing championships (Southeast US Masters at North Carolina State and Hayward Classic at University of Oregon) and expand those events to three days. Call one of the championships “US West” and the other “US East.” Both are nicely set up for steeplechase, weights, jumps, etc. Call those our “dual nationals” in the years when Senior Games are off. Don’t run the 10,000 on the track, skip all preliminaries above 200 meters, etc., to allow the meets to be completed in 3 days.
Crazy, right? Well, how crazy is it to hold 10 national outdoor championships (our last 10, 1999 through 2008) and fail to get even 1000 entrants 40% of the time (we failed in Orlando, 1999; Baton Rouge, 2001; Honolulu, 2005; and Spokane, 2008)?
Mr. Ortman, I agree with everything you’ve mentioned in the previous post accept for the very last part about folks over 50 being intimidated by just “watching” 30 and 35 year old runnners at a National Championships. They’re not competing with them… just watching. Sounds like sour grapes and a bad reason to be at a Nationals that one is “realizing they’re getting older” and now they don’t want to be reminded of it. That’s like me saying, “I don’t want to throw with anyone over fifty because It’s a reminder of how decrepid I’m going to get.” Sounds pretty insensitive and is. If that’s the case then 50+ athletes should only be allowed to compete in a Nationals meet at the Senior games and be barred from the USTAF Nationals as the Senior games bar 49 year old and under athletes . Since it seems like the USATF really doesn’t care much to improve the Nationals scene, 30-49 year old athletes athletes can compete there. Less crowd, quick meet and no one gets intimidated. Let’s hear from more of you folks out there about this!
For better or worse:
-Agreed that many of the NGSA state events are sub par, but just as many are equal to or better than parallel USATF masters meets.
-I’d guess that there are more NSGA state games, than USATF Association or Regional meets.
-while they are currently at a minimum of age 50 for track and field, maybe the National body would embrace lowering the minimum age to 40, as many of the Senior Games state meets have already done. Base on attendance at USATF meets, the 30-39 age groups should remain with “open” track meets.
-the biggest plus on the side of NGSA is that they do grass roots marketing. They have full time paid staff that promote their events, and encourage partnerships with local university’s and other health organizations, to get people over the age of 50 active in sports. An example where I live is Springfield University, which is the top health and movement science college in our area, actively associated with the Senior Games movement.
-At the three state games I’ve attended in my area, the officials for the most part are USATF officials-the same ones that I see at USATF local and national meets.
The sad part about the treatment of masters athletes by the USATF, is that they treat us like red headed step children. I’d bet that most of the active USATF board folks, the people actual running things at the local level are masters athletes. Most officials at the local level are masters aged. The USATF expects the blood and sweat of these individuals, but gives little back in return. Certainly no support for masters track.
I think if you could take the collective experience, knowledge, and hard work, of the current association members, that actually run things locally, and channel that same energy into an organization that actually cares about senior athletes, you’d have an organization we’d all be proud to be part of. We’d actually have cities bidding to host the national meet, a meet that could attract 5,000+ competitors.
Do we need to have a National meet every year? Why not super regional meets in the even years, in between national meets held during odd years.
Just seems to me that the USATF does not give a damn about masters track/field, and we’d be better off without them.
I agree that they need to hurry up and pick a location. They may switch dates as well (to a late June date!) and if they do, we want to have the combined event championships on our original July 11 weekend. We are waiting on them before we finalize the date.
FR: David E. Ortman (M55) Seattle, WA
In response to Ted Irvine’s interesting post above:
The National Senior Games T&F Attendance in San Francisco next year will be higher than the USAT&F championships for a number of reasons:
* Nearly every state now has a state Senior Games T&F meet and often local senior games T&F meets as well. Take a look at the USAT&F track meet schedule and there are many states without a single USAT&F meet offered. Therefore, many masters are only familiar with their own Senior Games and an opportunity to participate (by finishing in the top 3 or meeting some weak standards) in the National Senior Games.
2. The State Senior Games offer a hodge-podge of other sports – tennis, softball, basketball, ballroom dance, billiards, bowling, biking, table tennis, badminton, archery. As a result, masters can participate in wide variety of diffent things, not just shotput, discus or javelin. A Senior Games gold medal in basketball freethrows is just as big as the one for the 1500m, and a lot less effort.
* Some of the state Senior Games T&F meets are very well run and actually have FAT timing and officials who know the events. Others are little better than all-comers meets with hand-timing, no starting blocks, field event volunteers who don’t know if you measure from the heal mark or the toe mark in the pit, etc. As a result, a state games meet can have much less pressure and may be more enjoyable for participants.
* Masters may participate more in Senior Games because of the age limit barring anyone below 50. Even at our our USAT&F Championships it can be intimidating to watch the M/W30 or M/W35 competitors (although the numbers may be light). It makes you realize that even with age-grading, once you get over 50, you are just getting older and slower. Perhaps masters prefer to participate in the Senior Games because they are not reminded of the blazing speed produced by those in the 30s.
Just some thoughts.
I can tell you one reason the National Senior Games outdraws USATF Masters Nationals. I’ve already received an email about registering for the 2009 National Games and they ALREADY HAVE A SCHEDULE as far as what events on what day and a great website that contains about everything you need to know.
By contrast, the USATF site for INDOOR nationals doesn’t even have a tentative schedule and only bare bones information.
While I think our alignment with the Sr Games ought to be explored, there are a lot of issues besides age (beginning at 50) and the venue question. For instance, if we become part of the Sr games what happens to the vault, steeple, hurdles, etc? It won’t be as simple as just designating the Sr Games as the national champs on a biennial basis. There will have to be real negotiation. Who will be our reps? Of course, most things worthwhile are worth an effort. But we should be clear this will require significant work and diplomacy.
Never gave much thought to the issues above. I have just started competing again after 1981 (age 50) The San Francico Pride meet was run very well by Officials that knew what they were doing. I truly enjoyed coming back
Leave a Reply