Masters outdoor world meets shifting to even-number years
A year after Lyon hosts 2015 worlds, the outdoor world meet will again be held — at a site that may be determined later in today’s General Assembly in Sacramento. Delegates voted by show of hands (with green cards) to move the outdoor meets to even-numbered years and the indoor meets to odd-numbered years starting in 2016. WMA President Stan Perkins put the reasoning bluntly: The IOC supports the World Masters Games, and the IAAF follows the IOC lead. Much money is at stake, since track and field is a marquee event at the Olympics. And with the World Masters Games “bumping up” against WMA meets every four years, someone had to blink.
American delegates voted as a bloc on dozens of issues at General Assembly.
Stan noted that the 2013 World Masters Games in Turin, Italy, will be held around the same time as the WMA world meet in Porto Alegre, Brazil. A change was thus proposed to WMA bylaws to change the years the outdoor meet is held. Only five minutes of discussion was needed to pass this change.
If this assembly has to choose a host for 2016 outdoor worlds, the apparent options are Poland and Perth. A vote may be held later this afternoon. Stay tuned.
Delegates also voted against a Finnish proposal to amend the false-start rule. It will remain as is, giving sprinters a chance to mistakenly false start before being DQ’d. WMA VP Serge Beckers said older sprinters who wobble and can’t stay steady should not be punished with a more restrictive false-start rule. Serge also says he sees no tactical use of false starts in major masters meets.
American Mary Rosado’s proposal to study holding separate WMA road race championships in concert with existing events (such as the New York City Marathon) was defeated. Former WMA veep Rex Harvey spoke against this, saying stand-alone WMA road championships have been a financial disaster and he worried about masters being overlooked. “I want to see our athletes at the pinnacle (of a race), not just add-ons,” Rex said.
A Spaniard’s proposal to lower steeplechase barrier from 36 inches to 30 inches for M50 and M55 runners was defeated by a 63-45 vote. The Spaniard had noted the height for M50 long hurdles of 33 inches was lower than the steeple barrier for the same age group. But council members pointed out that masters can get over steeple barriers by easier means (like vaulting with a hand on top). USA delegation voted 5-0 for the lower steeple barriers, with Carroll DeWeese noting the safety issues as well.
Prez Stan, noting that some affiliates hadn’t read his Constitution revision proposals, offered a motion to table the debate until 2013 worlds in Brazil. Delegates agreed. But several asked that the WMA website note suggestions for amendments. Stan said he would, and took offense at suggestion that feedback wouldn’t be noted on the website.
23 Responses
While they are debating lowering the steeple barrier for younger men – what about the older women. They are being asked to jump/vault the same height as the younger women. This is sexist. I have raised the issue of the height of the steeple barrier for the older women and been laughed at. Older women lose flexibility just as do the older men and women on average tend to be shorter than men. The hurdles are lowered for older women but older women in the steeple are out there risking life and limb on a 30 inch fixed barrier at age 65, 70 and older. I have been around track long enough to remember when women first started doing the steeple – and men considered it a big joke – and apparently some still think it is a joke. Six inches lower for older men – same height for women of all ages – this is not equality. And yes new barriers would have to be bought. Wow – imagine that -didn’t that happen at a number of venues when women started doing the steeple – and adjustable barriers had to be purchased so women would have a 30 inch barrier instead of the fixed 36 inch ones. Did the track and field world come to a grinding halt? Why is this not a topic for debate never mind lowering the barrier for men 50 and 55.
I’ve always found it odd that they lower the barrier and the distance of the race simultaneously (36″ and 3K to 30″ and 2K). Seems that like with the hurdles, they should utilize the 33″ height (which almost all barriers have the capability for) and gradually drop down the barrier and the distance. Just my 2 cents.
Your point is well taken, Mary, and it’s not equal. I’ve never seen a barrier capable of being lowered to a height less than 30″ so am curious how that might work.
A 30″ barrier is significantly easier to hurdle/step/vault than the 36″ height as it’s below waist level for most people (not that’s it’s ever easy!) so most people don’t actually have to jump to clear it. I wonder if someone can’t get over the 30″ height then perhaps they can’t get over any height?
Yes, having the same height for women of all ages isn’t equal. I guess I just wonder how it should be fixed.
I understand what you are saying Mellow Johnny – and frankly I could not hurdle anything so it is not about me doing the Steeple – especially at my age. I just find it curious that there is a lower barrier for older men (and I am not suggesting that it be higher) and lower regular hurdles for older women – lighter weights for older athletes – but no changes in the steeple barrier for older women. I am not suggesting a 24 inch barrier – but how about 27 inches – isn’t that the lowest it goes in the regular hurdles?
It is curious that the WMA Outdoor meets will be shifted to even number years because “the IOC supports the World Masters Games.” These are the same “world games” that award gold medals in badminton, table tennis, archery, orienteering, and softball, among other sports.
Because WMA T&F is run in five year age groups, there is an obvious advantage to entering a meet when you are 40,45,55,60, etc. as opposed to 44, 49, 54, 59, etc.
So what happens if WMA shifts its World indoor meets to odd number years starting in 2016?
If you were 40,45,55,60, etc. in 2008 it would be FIFTEEN YEARS before you hit a WMA Indoor meet on your 55,60, 65, etc. birthday.
2008 – 40,45,50,55, etc.
2010 – 42,47,52,57, etc.
2012 – 44,49,54,59, etc.
2014 – 46,51,56,61, etc.
2017 – 49,54,59,64, etc.
2019 – 51,56,61,66, etc.
2021 – 53,58,63,68, etc.
2023 – 55,60,65,70, etc.
Agreed, Mary. If they drop to a lower barrier height for men, it should happen for women as well. If 27″ is the hurdle height, then I agree that should be it for the lower barrier height. I don’t see it happening because that would require $$$ to change every barrier to accomodate that, but it makes sense to me.
I actually think that at a certain point, barrier heights should be equal for men and women and it should drop lower for both. Women have clearly demonstrated their more than capable of handling the steeple (ridiculous they didn’t always have the event for women) and so that, at say 80, women are at least as able (and probably moreso) to handle barriers than men so it should be 27″ for both.
Great point David. I am one of those guys who now have to wait 13 more years before I enter an age-group as one of the youngest. I am sure all this was considered by the delegates and they are doing the best they can to serve the greater good of our sport.
Didn’t the World Masters Games originally occur in even numbered years? I ran in 1998. Then somehow it changed to odd. If our games change what will prevent WMG from changing again back to even years?
They have barriers that adjust to 27″
http://www.sportskids.com/superstore/Track+Field/Steeplechase/Barriers/p/268204.html
Yep 13 years for me too.
2011 42
2024 55
Indoors I just have to wait three years.
Thanks, Matt B. Appreciate you passing that link along.
All the Gill barriers I’ve ever seen have only the 3 holes (36″, 33″, and 30″). Of course, maybe that’s why these are $1665 a pop 😛 !
27″ would be great to introduce young kids to the event. 33″ should be used for the M50-59 age group, in my opinion.
Yes, Vance (post no. 7), World Masters Games used to be in even years and now the odd years are in. As you ask, what would prevent World Masters Games from going back to even?
The question that interests me more is why the Sacramento Worlds drew so poorly. I believe the final number was 4804. Buffalo, in 1995, easily exceeded that number. The US gained 50 million people or so between Buffalo 1995 and Sacramento 2011, and still Sacramento was no match for Buffalo, an old industrial city with very few attractions (sorry, Buffaloites).
Adding insult to injury, Buffalo 1995 could not take men in the 35-39 group, as they had not yet been allowed in the Worlds (had to start at 40). Maybe someone has an answer as to why Sac Worlds drew so poorly. This, of course, has relevance for future site selection in North America.
My response to your question Peter – RECESSION
Peter has raised the question about less than stellar attendance at WMA-Sacramento (and it was a “false-start” on WMA part not to have Peter as meet announcer). WMA seems to be tone-deaf to the needs of athletes.
* The meet is too long when it runs 12 days. As noted elsewhere, even without a recession, this is a lot of time and expense to commit to, especially if you have events early and late with nothing in between. One suggestion is for WMA to consider splitting the meet as is done for the National Senior Games. The 35-59 age groups could compete the first six days. The 60+ age groups could complete the last six days.
* WMA wants an early entry deadline and your event fees but refuses to release a useable meet schedule before entry fees are due. It makes a big difference if the 400mH is before or after the Triple Jump, and an even bigger difference if they are contested at the same time! But WMA is not going to give you a refund for double booking.
* What’s up with having the WMA in CA with the US National Masters Meet 11 days later in OH? This hurts attendance at both meets.
* The last mainland WMA (then WAVA) meet in the United States (Buffalo -’95)was sixteen years ago. That’s a long time, even in dog years, to keep up interest in WMA. It would be interesting to see how many US athletes from ’95 were entered at Sacramento. [BTW, WAVA-Buffalo was run during their hottest days of the year (in the upper 90s), so you don’t always get relief from the heat by going north).
* Do you want to boost attendance? California is full of military bases with physically fit soldiers that might have liked a challenge other than the standard obstacle course. Wouldn’t you like to see a Navy Seal run the steeplechase? See:
http://www.ortmanmarchand.com/fs12.html
* Finally, here is a suggestion that applies to the Olympics, IAAF World Championships, and WMA. Stop shopping these meets from place to place. Athletics (T&F) is most associated with the ancient games of Greece (although Ireland’s Tailteann Games is much older – see “False Start” link above). Designate Athens as the planet’s home for all world track and field meets. They already have the facilities, they already have the history, and Greece could use the economic shot in the arm.
Maybe the number of competitors in Sacramento is relatively low, nevertheless it is a number that should be better managable than 9000 or so. I would be pleased to see this number as normal.
David gives some points about all our world championships. Causes for low numbers and at the same time causes for low level in some disciplines:
1 Costs for travel and accommodation. My first worlds was Gateshead 1999, I attended two others and three European championships. Six in twelve seasons is enough.
2 As David states: too long programm. It should be done in one week, period.
3 Unpleasant when more than one stadium is needed. Gateshead was great, many things at the same time. San Sebastian was nice with a second track next to the main track. But very often only one or two things were in action at the same time. Mathematically seen far from optimal. Now in Sacramento in the far away stadium there was a day with prelims 200 and nothing else. Things like that are not making one willing to attend such a competition.
4 Make the programm more compact by doing away all non track disciplines.
I personally like the fact the Olympics, World Champs, and WMAs move around and aren’t in one location all the time (Athens).
Personally, I didn’t attend WMAs for one reason: I’m not old enough (by 3 months). Seems a but ridiculous that I’ve competed the last 3 years at the U.S. Masters Outdoor Champs but now couldn’t participate at Worlds. Why not open it up to the 30-34 age group? Sure, it adds to the schedule but as many of you have indicated, the schedule can be condensed as it is.
Why not take the $$$ of us 30-34 as well?
Personally, I will be heading to Torino in 2013 instead of Porto Alegre. Everything I understand is they have the schedule out earlier, etc. making planning for it a bit simpler.
Agree with David and Weia that the WMA program is too long. What’s up with that, as they say. No athlete should be required to stay more than 5 days, in my opinion. Should be up to WMA to figure that one out (ages 35-59 for 5 days, 60-109 for 5 days would work well).
Agree with Weia’s implication that 9000 competitors is much too large. Noted that Buffalo had 5335 in 1995 and that Durban, a very undesirable location in my opinion, had 5788 in 1997. Sacramento, as noted, got 4804, but I guess that was more manageable. I don’t know, I wasn’t there.
Guess we will have to blame the recession, but as noted earlier, Sacramento enjoyed one huge advantage over those earlier meets: it had hundreds of men in the 35-39 group, while Buffalo and Durban had none, as in zero.
Oh, well, we will see what happens. Now, looking forward to Berea, the attendance will reportedly be 1030 athletes. Very poor, but there have actually been five sites in the “modern era” (1994 through 2011) with a worse turnout!!! From the bottom, they were as follows:
Honolulu (inadequate local population base, too expensive to get there).
Baton Rouge (excellent facility, but perception of too much heat and humidity).
Orlando (excellent facility; see Baton Rouge above).
Spokane (twice). Inadequate population base.
Oshkosh (excellent facility, but Oshkosh airport does not take commercial flights).
As indicated, all other sites in the modern era did better than Berea did this year. Even little Decatur, Illinois, for crying out loud, did a lot better than Berea.
But as David is perhaps suggesting, Berea needs to be excused for the poor turnout: two big meets too close together.
I personally like the fact the Olympics, World Champs, and WMAs move around and aren’t in one location all the time (Athens).
Personally, I didn’t attend WMAs for one reason: I’m not old enough (by 3 months). Seems a but ridiculous that I’ve competed the last 3 years at the U.S. Masters Outdoor Champs but now couldn’t participate at Worlds. Why not open it up to the 30-34 age group? Sure, it adds to the schedule but as many of you have indicated, the schedule can be condensed as it is.
Why not take the $$$ of us 30-34 as well?
Personally, I will be heading to Torino in 2013 instead of Porto Alegre. Everything I understand is they have the schedule out earlier, etc. making planning for it a bit simpler.
I’m actually surprised Berea is going to be that well attended, PT. I thought it might get less than 1000 and maybe even 900 given the timing being right on the heels of Worlds.
However, Ohio is centrally located for a lot of population bases, I’ve noticed several entries are from Ohio and surrounded states (based on team names: Team Ohio, etc.) and perhaps several people east of Mississippi decided to sit out Worlds with Berea being much closer to home.
Well, since you called out my initials, Mellow Johnny, I am allowed to respond again. As a high school teacher, you know about the following rankings (population) of some of the key states for this meet:
3 New York
5 Illinois
6 Pennsylvania
7 OHIO
8 Michigan
Thus, the population base for this meet is staggering; hundreds of people will not even have to fly. For those that do, the airport (Cleveland) looks to be only 3-4 miles from the site, almost unprecedented in masters history.
Finally, it is apparently an excellent venue. Viewed in that context, 1030 should not be surprising. Of course, as a masters historian, you know that in the “golden era” (1989 through 2000) 25% of the national outdoors had at least 1400 competitors. That is why I am not impressed with 1030.
Speaking of Berea, has anyone else noticed that the entry list is no longer available? I’m with MJ; I too thought there’d be less than 1000 competitors given the location (and I grew up 20 miles away) and being so soon after WMA.
My wife and I both grew up within 60 miles of Berea. We both happen to have family weddings that Saturday (July 30) which is really the only reason I entered. Since I’m going to be in town anyway, might as well run.
Jeff, they have now corrected the problem. Status of Entries is now down, but Entry List is up. In terms of location, at least as far as flights and population within 325 miles of the site (reasonable driving distance) it seems most excellent.
Perhaps you are referring to the expected humidity, Jeff, or maybe the lack of tourist attractions. Of course, in Honolulu (2005) we had a variety of attractions for the tourists and the turnout was absolutely abysmal (802, the lowest in the modern era).
Thanks, I see that now, although that link didn’t work yesterday either. Nice to have some semblance of heat/flight sheets out.
Humidity there is typically no worse than anywhere else in the midwest/east coast, but much more than I’m used to.
I was referring to tourist attractions. Of course, anybody who likes roller coasters should make a trip to Cedar Point in Sandusky after competing. They’ve got the best lineup of coasters anywhere. Love that Millenium Force. Last year I spent 13 hours there riding coasters w/ my cousins, then ran a 5k road race the next morning. I won’t make that mistake again. Race first, ride later.
Anther suggestion – for those who have a car. Drive to Port Clinton – past Sandusky – and take the ferry to Put-in-Bay and spend the day on the island.
You’re correct, Jeff. The link didn’t work yesterday. And today, I’ve refreshed it a few times and it only lists up through half of the M45 1500 entries and stops. Strange.
Leave a Reply