I’m distressed by some reactions to my WMA conflict-of-interest rant. They boil down to: “Say what?” Or “Who cares?” The former call my screed “disjointed” and confusing. The latter wonder what the big deal is. OK, I’ll try again. But first I should make clear that I’m not against Masters Games. Except when they are overpriced, I’ve been generally supportive of these multisport extravaganzas.

In fact, here’s what I said last October about the Pan-Pac Masters Games:

“Hey, the more meets the merrier! As long as the entry fees are reasonable, I support any and all comers on the masters track calendar. Bottom line: The PanPac Masters Games represents another opportunity for us to compete, make friends and publicize our niche. That can’t be bad.”
Now back to the WMA bad boys.

My beefs are basically these:

1. Some WMA officers are scoffing at their own rules.

2. Some WMA officers are using their “insider” status to benefit themselves personally — and I do mean financially.

On the first issue, here’s what I’ve documented beyond any doubt:

The WMA bylaws — called “bye-laws” on the Web site — spell out in precise language what WMA officers can’t do. They can’t promote, organize, conduct or advertise “any international masters competition which has not been sanctioned by WMA.” Yet WMA President Torsten Carlius, Executive VP Tom Jordan, Euro rep Dieter Massin and Oceania rep Stan Perkins have all been guilty of this as far back as 1998.

These are people who should respect the traditions and history of the masters movement. But by openly flouting WMA rules, they are saying: “We’re above the law. We know better than the founders of WAVA.” They insist on strict adherence to debatable anti-doping regulations but feel other rules are theirs to bend — or ignore.

So why is this? What’s behind their masters mockery?

That brings us to my second and more crucial point — their use of “insider” status to enrich themselves.

Let’s be real — nobody expects WMA officeholding to be wealth-producing by itself. World Masters Athletics operates on a shoestring with revenues derived from the IAAF (a pittance), meet sanction fees and athlete entry fees.
But money can be made from masters! Tom Jordan and Barbara Kousky, co-principals of Northwest Event Management, have shown this by conducting track tours to the past half-dozen or so WAVA or WMA world championships. Of course, TJ and BK have a slight advantage over competing tour companies. TJ can scout hotels when he inspects meet sites — and snap up the prime properties (closest to the meet venues, best amenities, etc.)

By booking these advantageous locations, he helps ensure that his tour is tops. If he were just another Joe Tour Director, TJ would be fully in his rights to make money off the backs of masters. But he also is WMA executive vice president — and his profiting from “insider” access to meet venues is as egregious as insider trading on Wall Street.

It’s also a classic conflict-of-interest. When Jordan mulls matters before the WMA Council, is he voting in the best interests of the masters movement, or is he voting in the best interests of his Oregon-based business?

WMA officers Carlius, Perkins and Massin have found another potential profit center — linking up with the International Masters Games Association or the new Australian-California version.

Masters Games can be huge — attracting many more thousands of athletes than WMA meets. They also have sophisticated marketing arms, and sometimes hefty subsidies by local governments and tourism agencies. All you have to do is look at their Web sites (IMGA, Edmonton 2005) to see these are big-time operations. The money is big-time, too.

So when Carlius, Perkins, Massin and perhaps others on the WMA Council become governors or founders of international masters games, I gotta wonder what’s in it for us (the athletes) and them. I’ve yet to receive a cogent defense of such double-dipping from a WMA officer. (They can always post a comment on this Web log, for example.)

And I’m not alone in my revulsion. As I’ve noted, USATF Masters has this proposal on the table at Puerto Rico’s General Assembly:

Any Council Member who receives any recompense in any administration of any National and/or International Masters’ events shall so indicate the amount of recompense on the WMA website and shall not vote on any matter involving an event in which they are receiving any compensation Removal from the Council shall be automatic for failure to comply with this Bye-Law.

In other words — bye-bye, Torsten, Tom, Dieter and Stan.

So back to the original question: Why should masters athletes care whether WMA officers are placing themselves above the law and in the bank?

Because it’s our sport. Not theirs.