IAAF screws head back on properly, restores masters age to 35
Leftover from Daegu worlds is news for masters road runners. WMA reports: “César Moreno Bravo, a Council Member of the IAAF, has just announced that by a very clear majority, the IAAF Congress voted in favour of recovering Rule 141, the age of master athletes, as it was before the Berlin Congress. All masters start at age 35 and not age 40. The presence in the audience of members of the IAAF sildenafil online Masters Committee proved to be very important to the vote. Stan Perkins, the president of the WMA, along with Brian Keaveney, the VP of Non-Stadia, applaud the decision and thank César Moreno Bravo and the Masters IAAF Committee for their support.” This was inevitable because of the confusion sown by the Berlin edict, which was denounced and ridiculed worldwide. The IAAF Masters Committee includes our own Rex Harvey, BTW.
17 Responses
In my opinion, 40 is the correct age for record purposes if for no other reason than many people are still ‘world class’ in their mid-thirties.
second the motion…40 makes more sense.
Agree with 40, and have 35-39 as sub-masters. Lots of athletes are not ready to embrace the “name” master at 35 and shy away from competing at masters events for that reason already.
How many truly (open) world class athletes compete in Masters athletics? Seems like the age should drop down even lower, perhaps as young as 25 in efforts to get more people involved. Isn’t participation the goal?
PARTICIPATION for those who are no longer ‘world class’ that is.
Cornell and chuckxc – please define “many” in relation to this issue? The true percentage is tiny in my view, but like you I (I bet) I could not offer any figures. What a shame that, as soon as the IAAF put this nonsense right after two damaging years, the first thing we get here are posts in favour of what has just been abandoned. Free speech, of course, but I hope that once and for all, you’ve lost the battle.
No battle here. In the end I could care less whether it’s 35 or 25, like Dan says. Guess I always associated the “Masters” term with middle-age and beyond. And no way anyone will convince me 35 is middle age.
Perhaps “Masters” is no longer an appropriate term for what we do. Perhaps it should be “Age Group” T&F or the National “Age Group” Championships, etc.
They have age-group championships. It’s called Junior Olympics, and I’m no bantam. Inequity was built into masters from the start, when women started at 35 and men at 40. WMA corrected this with both at 35. Why force people to wait to 40 compete for national or local masters titles?
I’m in favor of lowering it to post-college age. Otherwise where is the proper venue for someone 25 or 26 who isn’t “world class” but still wants to compete?
Masters swimming is 18+ so I don’t think we really need to worry about the word. We just need more publicity about who can participate. If there were a more seamless transition between college competition and masters competition I think it would help.
Tom, I’m not in a battle I’m just posting my opinion so please understand that.
Chuckxc, I agree with you!
Kim, the transition is termed ‘Open’ which is where many of us competed until ‘sub-masters 30-39’ and ultimately ‘masters 40+’. Each grouping has a nationals to compete in (subs with the masters and open with the elite if able)
“Open with the elite if able”. So there is USATF Nationals and USATF Masters Nationals. Someone who is 30 and not elite can compete in the USATF Nationals? Does that happen? Why do we lose so many track and field athletes after college? (Well given that some choose not to continue, but I hear from so many that do not know there is a venue for them to compete at.)
USA Outdoor & Indoor Nationals have very difficult elite standards to meet. USATF Club Nationals are easier for open athletes but there are still standards and the catch is that you must compete for a club.
The IAAF made the correct decision two years ago when they agreed with the persuasive arguments made by David Katz of USATF, that in LDR events, the Masters division should begin at 40. This recent reversal is a step in the wrong direction. Masters running historically began at 40 and above (why do you think 30-39 is referred to as sub-masters) and it should stay that way. The only reason the age was lowered to 35 for track and field events was so the meets could make more money, but in fact 35-39 year old participation at WMA or USATF championships is not nearly as high as 40-45 and the marks set by the 35-39 AG athletes are often inferior to those of the 40-45 AG athletes. Clearly, the 40+ year old athletes take Masters athletics much more seriously.
How many 35-39 AG US or World records were set at Masters T&F meets, none that I’m aware of. They were all set at open competitions by professional athletes.
Frankly, I have no problems with 35-39 year old athletes at Masters T&F Championships, but lowering the Masters age to 35 for Masters LDR championships creates major issues. There is significant prize money and multi-year contracts already in place for events like the Medtronic Twin Cities Marathon which is the USATF Masters Marathon Championship. These events were established with the understanding that Masters competition begins at 40. That is the correct age and that is where it needs to stay.
The WMA is basically a T&F organization. Their events are run in separate five-year age group races where as a road race is one single event.
In terms of road running the WMA is mainly interested governing its own WMA marathon championships that are held every two years. That is basically the extent of the WMA’s involvement in master road running. Yet they claim to be the masters governing body for the thousands of sanctioned road race around the world. The hugely popular sport of road running has evolved to be one of the largest public participation sports in the world for all ages. Few if any road race directors will be interested in unfairly lowering the masters age to include 35 year old athletes. Thirty-five year old athletes will always have the potential to set world records, win Olympic gold medals, or win the open category in national, regional, and local championships. The original purpose of levelling the playing field for older aged athletes would be lost with the age lowered to 35 for masters. The WMA’s own aggraded tables make this point obvious. Many of the overall winners of road races of all distances are in fact in the 35-year age bracket. How can down grading the masters age bring any fairness to road running and why does the WMA feel they need to over rule what is universally accepted as the fair age of masters? None of the major races around the world are going to comply with 35-year age masters so what is the point? They should have left it as it was!
The age change was simply WMA apparatchiks looking after their own self-interests and not at all concerned with what is best for the sport of road running. The road running community and road running athletes were not consulted or the justification explained. The WMA does not communicate with roadrunners. Few if any of the millions of roadrunners worldwide have any knowledge of the WMA. Age 35 Masters will remain meaningless track and field terminology as far as road running is concerned. Hence instead of building support for their organization they have effectively shut the roadrunners out.
Masters road running age has traditionally started at age 40 for decades and many road running events like the New York, Toronto, Berlin and London Marathons still honour that tradition with their annual 40+ masters awards. Does the WMA even care? The media sure does.
What exactly does the WMA do, to claim to govern masters road running? The WMA only recognizes performances from the marathon distance. What about 5K, 8K, 10K, 15k, Half marathon, 30K? The WMA has clearly snubbed it nose at masters road running community yet claim that they are still the governing body for tens of thousands of master road runners. SInce the WMA only recognizes the marathon who governs and recognizes the other masters road running distances. Clearly not the WMA.
The masters road running community is thriving without any help from the WMA. The WMA only seem to care about it handful of masters road runners and ignore hundreds of thousands of other master road runners.
Track & field masters individuals should not be governing road running. If the WMA was created to create competition opportunities for masters, they have failed miserably with road running. It is the IAAF that sanctions thousands of road races that cater to masters. My understanding is that the WMA only sanctions two or three road races. The WMA has yet to reach out, recognize and embrace thousands of masters road runners. If the WMA wants to build its masters road running membership they need to offer some value to masters road runners. I have been asking for a list of masters road running benefits for years and the only honest response I got was from the CMA in Canada that admitted that the CMA/WMA have little if anything to offer to masters road runners. The WMA has to ‘Put up or shut up” and stop pretending that it actually governs masters road running. Most master road runners have not even heard of the WMA, as the WMA does so little for road running. If anyone from the WMA can provide the Masters road running community with a list of WMA benefits, please post this list. All of my requests for a list of road running benefits from the WMA have so far been ignored. That is because there are no benefits to be had. Why does the WMA even pretend to care about road running? It all seems to be about egos rather that offering true value. The CMA has even lowered it master age to 30+ in order to increase its memberships. That is clearly against WMA rules. But then who really seems to care.
The vast majority of runners who compete as ‘masters’ are in road running. Performance does not fall off in the 35-40 range with Olympic titles being won by people in this age group. In many road races, the overall winners are in this age bracket. To start the Masters age at 35 makes a mockery of the Masters competition, when the same person can often collect the 1st prize and the 1st masters prize!
Ken,
The IAAF changed the entry age for Masters road runners to 35, but the USATF Masters LDR committee overwhelmingly voted last month at the annual meeting that in the US the entry age for Masters LDR would remain 40.
Leave a Reply