Petition opposes Clermont, Fla., as site of 2009 nationals
As you may have read in these comments, some sprinters have been circulating this online petition rapping Clermont, Florida, as the site of the 2009 masters nationals. Tellingly, it doesn’t ask for a new venue. But that’s how it might be read. It’s not just the central Florida heat, however. Petitioners argue that the site isn’t suitable for nationals. In any case, USATF won’t change the venue on the basis of a petition. Not if a contract is signed. Yet you still have a voice, as you did when Clermont was a candidate in late 2006. (See my blog post on the race.) The key is having a choice. And letting your association’s masters reps know your preference BEFORE they vote at the annual convention in late November/early December every year.
Here’s the argument the petition makes:
We the undersigned protest the selection of Clermont Florida as the site of the 2009 US masters track and field championships. The site is unfit for many reasons
1. No warm up area
2. No shade
3. Poor parking
4. Lack of local hotel space
5. No dormitory facilities
6. No permanent bathroom facilities
7. Difficult transportation from airport
8. Poor hot weather
9. Fire ants, mosquitos
10. Very limited spectator areas
Meanwhile, Clermont continues to host the WMA regionals, and the results for Day 3 are posted here. But some results are hinky, including these for the M60 long hurdles:
M60 300 Long Hurdles 30″
=========================================================================
Name Age Team Seed Finals
=========================================================================
1 Binion, Ozzie M60 UNITED STATES 49.60 1.00
2 Febles Cruz, Edwin M62 PUERTO RICO 2.00
3 Baker, Robert M63 UNITED STATES 3.00
4 Graff, Warren M63 UNITED STATES 48.77 4.00
5 Rauscher, Tomlinson M62 UNITED STATES 5.00
— Loranca, Luis A M62 MEXICO NT
— *Hough, Norman M61 SOUTH AFRICA NT
1.00? Say what?
Earlier, a results-watcher sent me this note:
Why does the Discus Throw mention the Hammer Ring? If it is just to give the athletes the location? Why don’t the LJ results say “South Pit” or whatever? Or much more inappropriate, did they have to throw the Discus from a ring that was too small?
And why in the M55 and M60 100m do they only list 8 people running the trial to qualify for the final. There should be results from the people who failed to make the final. If they have equal or less athletes than they have lanes for the final, why the hell did they run the trial?
Yesterday’s 100 finals must have been frustrating. They all had headwinds.
60 Responses
100 and 200 were vs stiff winds…A couple of us voiced this to Dennis Mitchell who is a trainer at the NTC and he went to the meet official and she said no dice…they had the capability to switch it but once again it was all about her officials, not the athletes..
We should perhaps restate the mission statement on the petition to definitely get rid of the Clermont deal (or no deal)…great place to train, horrible place to put on anything other than a weekly summer all-comers meet…please sign the petition and if anyone knows anyone at USATF please wake them up and share this request..
It would be better servered to hold the meet some place else because of the reasons that have been stated
It seems that the fears about having the USATF National Meet in Clermont Florida are coming true, as seen at the WMA regionals. No shade, poor warm up facilities, no local accomodations, no local transportation, limited spectator space.
This pretty much makes up my mind-I’ll head west to the National Senior Games in San Francisco. Just too bad the athletes under 50 do not have the same option.
Hi Everybody,
The comments and concerns regarding the 2009 USA Masters Outdoor Championships in Clermont FL are welcome and encouraged. The USATF Masters Track and Field Executive Committee met in Spokane at this years meet and discussed Clermont. As you know the Games Committee is responsible for the conduct of our championship meets and the Chair of the committee, Jim Flanik is in Clermont along with our WMA representative, Rex Harvey. They will report to MTF committee on the Clermont experience.
As always I’m available by email and cell.
Gary Snyder – Chair
Masters Track and Field
USATF
garysnyder@att.net
617-480-6506
Totally opposed..not user friendly place at all..too hot..too humid..change venue!!!!!!!!!!!! and place!!! Go Spokane or Seattle..or if at all possible the one andn only Hayward Field, Eugene, ORYGUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah Yeah..that’s the place we wanna be..most of all!!!
I just read the blog portion that had a powerpoint presentation that the NTC sent someone at USATF…impressive?
I took a few pictures of some things that were not included in the PP that sold someone on Clermont..I’ll put my own PP together showing the top 10 reasons to NOT have it at Clermont..coming to you soon…
John…I have emailed you several times ARE YOU RECEIVING THEM??? To date i have not heard from you.. You have my # as well…this was my last “option” to contact you.
Save your money and go to Lahti. Finland will put on a great meet and the competition should be great!
Those of us under 35 don’t have the option of either the Senior Games or the World meet in Finland so it’s all about Outdoor Nats for me.
I’m very discouraged by the reports from Clermont.
I’m happy so sign the petition but is it realistic to think we can actually have the site changed at this late juncture?
I know that the SoCal Association wanted to host it. That would mean 3 straight times on the West Coast which is good for me but those from the East may not. Although, better to compete in good conditions far away than miserable ones closer to home, right?
Everyone always goes straight to Hayward Field as the place to hold a meet and I agree that would be a great place because of the history, venue, and ability to put on a great meet but not all of us live on the west coast. Some of us can’t afford to travel out there every year so it’s nice to have it on the opposite coast so that everyone has to travel at some point. As for Clermont… we all have competed in track meets throughout our lives and have competed at some less than desireable places and as a high school track coach we compete at some terrible places. But you also know how to overcome those obstacles and still perform at your best or at least close to it. I’m not saying they couldn’t have picked a better place (I really don’t know because I haven’t been to Clermont before) but they chose this site and if you really want to compete with some of the best in the nation you will make the necessary travel arrangements and be prepared for the worst situation and make the best of it. Shade? Take umbrellas. Housing? Stay somewhere nearby and rent a car. No permenant bathrooms? Well at least they have bathrooms. Insects? What place doesn’t have insects. They (USATF) obviously feel they can run an adequate meet so stop complaining about something that hasn’t even happened yet and support those who are putting it on with some suggestions. They still have plenty of time to fix some things before the meet and who knows… the way it is might not be as bad as everyone thinks it will be.
Andrew, you’ve made a few good points, but . . ..
a) USATF puts quite a bit of trust in the folks that present bids for these meets, and quite often find that fundamental requirements for these meets are NOT ultimately met. Promises are made during the proposals that are never fulfilled.
b) You (and all leaders reading this) should view the “complaints” as areas of opportunity that can be improved upon. Complaints should be welcome and never discouraged. Gary has offered to listen (above), so let’s see if changes come about.
a) Masters Track & Field athletes are the best in the world at overcoming obstacles (study past championship problems at Baton Rouge, Orlando & Charlotte). This doesn’t give anyone the right to take the athletes for granted. This country’s Championship meet should be the showcase event for Masters T&F, and it should be the primary job of our leadership to make that happen. When fundamental requirements are overlooked, it’s time for new leadership to ensure that our Championships are NOT run like an all-comers meet.
So, Andrew, tolerate what you choose to tolerate. The “best in the nation” may or may not be there, depending on Clermont’s commitment to fix problems. The athletes are the reason for the event, they give up time & quite a bit of money to attend, and they have a voice. In this case, if Clermont and the USATF MTF leaders don’t fix the numerous problems, the athlete’s voice may be the silence that comes from an empty lane when very few register for this event.
Andrew your comments and solutions are rather juvenile. Comparing masters track and field to competing at the high school level is way off the point. No shade bring an umbrella, lack of housing rent a car these are not adequate solutions. The point most people are missing is that we should not be settling for less, we are consumers that are bringing by some estimates in the area of one million dollars to the local economy and should be treated as such.
One last major problem with Clermont that was not addressed, is there is no lighting, what will happen if there are delays for weather as in Charlotte there is no way to run the meet into the night, so if the organizers wanted to avoid the heat of the day by morning and evening schedules this would not be feasible. I think that we should take Mark Cleary’s offer seriously and rethink the west coast again.
Just got home from Claremont. Agree with the comments against this site.Also,they should have cut the grass around the track the day before the meet so that everyone’s shoes didn’t get soaked from the heavy dew on arrival at 6:30 AM for early events.
Be sure to check results for accuracy. Women’s 65 Discus is not correct for example. The NTC officials were in some cases “officious”. They may be used to dealing with a younger crowd of athletes and we needed to explain to them that certain accommodations have to be made for older athletes with regard to positions of triple jump boards etc. If we have the Nationals here, we need to be sure that a USATF official is the head official at each event and that they have a current rule book on hand. Also, I don’t think that having the awards stand and the clerk’s tent and the port-o-lets so close to the start of the 100m. was a good idea. They could have been set back from
the rail. It would have been quieter for the starts. On the motel situation, I agree with the comments already posted. I did find a little “mom & pop” motel close to the track, and it was clean and less expensive, but it did not have any extras. If you do not have transportation of your own at this venue you will be in bad shape.
Juvenile? I try to comment on a subject and offer support to the people who are going to run this meet and you call my comments juvenile? Why? Because I mentioned high school track and field? Would they have still been juvenile comments had I not mentioned high school track and field? Probably not because you just jump to conclusions about one piece of information you read like everyone else in this country. Instead of having a rational conversation you go straight to insults. Maybe the reason we’re not taken seriously as an organization is because we nit pick at everything instead of rolling with the punches sometimes. Guess what folks, we’re not (for the most part) elite athletes that are getting sponsers from multi-billion dollar companies that would filter money into USATF and the meet organizers pockets. So we really shouldn’t be expecting a red carpet rolled out for our arrival. We rely on the generousity of organizations and individuals to put on the best meets they possibly can for us in the hopes that they can make some money off the event and provide a quality meet we can run, jump, or throw at. We should be thankful that we have these opportunities as track athletes to still be able to compete unlike other sports where once high school or college ends they are done competing for the rest of their lives. This is the choice they(USATF) made. Lets make the best of it and embrace what we have rather than tear down anything we currently have because it could be worse, we could have nothing at all.
Let’s remember the popular slogan that “Safety is Job No. 1.” Before anything else, we must have a safe meet. That was not the case in Charlotte (2006), where the conditions (heat, humidity, intensity of the sun) were such that those who were out “in the elements” were in danger. In fact, we almost lost a runner in the M40 5000 on opening day (yes, he almost died).
With that as a background, and with the knowledge that lights are not available at Clermont, what should our position be? Remember that the “punishment index” (the assault that the athletes, officials, and spectators absorb from the conditions) goes far beyond the actual temperature. I posit that it consists of six things: (1) temperature, (2) humidity, (3) intensity of the sun, which seems to be much greater in semitropical areas such as Florida, Mexico, etc., (4) breeze, (5) shade, and (6) layout or configuration of the facility (bad at Charlotte, where the track “sat down” below street level).
Do we really want to contest the 5000 run, 5000 racewalk, 10000 run, and 10000 racewalk during the heat of the day in Clermont next year? Way back in 1966, I spent 2 weeks in Columbia, South Carolina, in August. I remember vividly how quickly it got hot; by 7 am it was scalding. Thus, in Clermont there is really no escaping the problem. Again, I think we need to go beyond a 1-dimensional approach to the suffering. Many places ring up higher temperatures than Clermont; we need to factor in the other variables.
Outhouses. As kids we used to go to the family farm for fun; they had an outhouse but also had indoor plumbing. As I understand it, Clermont has not even acquired indoor plumbing for its track facility. Not good.
I think we are stuck with Clermont for 2009 (believe it or not, the meet is just 10 months and 8 days away), but some improvements need to be made. More important, we should consider holding the longer races at separate sites earlier in the year.
Jeff and allan- I thought both of your posts made great points. And Peter, you know this sport as well as anyone and clearly, the punishment index you mention lays out those concerns well.
No lights is very concerning to me. So, either it’s early morning for the distance races or you suffer in the heat. And no, the water jump in the steeple doesn’t mean we’re comfortable out there.
I’m disappointed it’s still in the middle of the day and it could be absolutely oppressive in Clermont.
“we should consider holding the longer races at separate sites earlier in the year”
This may be the best idea I’ve heard yet and I’d be all for it.
However, word was sprinters started the petition so no sure how their needs would be met.
Mellow Johnny (and others): I am in favor of holding the 5000, 10000, 5000 racewalk, 10000 racewalk, 2000 steeplechase, and 3000 steeplechase at two sites: Raleigh, North Carolina (first weekend in May, they already have the meet — it’s called the Southeastern Masters) and Eugene, Oregon, during Hayward Classic. Winners at Raleigh, NC, would be crowned “National Champion -East” and winners at Hayward would be called “National Champion – West.” Now that is a really weird idea, but how weird (not to mention dangerous) is it to run long distance races under a blazing Florida sun in July?
I agree, PT. It is a weird idea but it’s a lot weirder to think of spending thousands of dollars to fly across the country to run in the middle of the day in Florida in July and suffer. Something that, for some reason, I’m currently considering.
Let’s say that PT’s idea of having the distance events elsewhere is one that could realistically happen (I hope it is).
Who would make that decision ultimately? The Games Committee I assume?
Hi Folks: I am just back from Clermont and will write a longer comment in a day or two – in the spirit of trying to be helpful and not just complain. Certainly there are many things to complain about in Clermont and personally I will not go there next summer (or any other summer)if a National Masters Track Meet is held there. There are many reasons but mainly the cost – housing and transportation at the meet – never mind flights. Without a car in Clermont – you are at the mercy of the meet having a shuttle. There are only 2 hotels within “walking” distance of the track – if do not mind walking a considerable distance. And – if you have an early event – in pitch black. The so-called Host Hotel – The Days Inn – is 12 (that is twelve) miles away – and NO public transportation. The road race walk – and half marathon were a considerable distance away – and a car or seat on the one and only shuttle bus was needed to get there.
Events were over by mid -day for the most part and NOTHING TO DO unless you want to sit in your hotel room and watch reruns of Law And Order.
I will write in a day or two about my views of the meet – from the perspective of one who ran the 800, 1500, and 5k run (not walk) – I cannot comment first hand on the jumps and throws except to pass on comments from friends who did those events.
There was shade – tents – not enough – but far better than Charlotte – and lots of cold water – no charge. But $5 to park – tacky – etc.
More later –
“personally I will not go there (Clermont) next summer (or any other summer)if a National Masters Track Meet is held there”
That’s all I needed to hear. Thanks for the info, Mary. You certainly didn’t just complain for the sake of complaining, you pointed out all the real issues with Clermont.
Something needs to be done or I can see a massive boycott of next year’s nationals and something like 400 competitors.
Not a comment – I was not there, just a question:
Who is mellow Johnny?
I have been reading the blogs for a a long time and would like to know who the
person is who writes so well.
Darn it, I have tried for years to better my English,
it gets worse.
Thanks,
Christel
A better solution than holding the distance events somewhere else at another time of the year is write that the facility must have lights for the event. They can bring in portable stadium lights–in fact Don Denoon the guy that presented the bid said they could do just that. The problem is Don is no longer in charge at the facility. There were lots of promises about several shade tents being brought in and the possibility of lights if we wanted them– I say we tell them that it’s manditory that we have lights–at least a few more athletes will show to the meet–
Hi Christel-
Thank you for the kind words. Funny thing is, I’m a math teacher! Anyway, if you go into the forum and send me a message there, I’ll gladly reply and fill you in.
Thanks again.
FRANK!!
I haven’t been at that Email address since Wednesday afternoon…I will check it tomorrow morning…
Simp
Thanks to Pete Taylor for coming up with a thoughtful solution to the longer events!!
Short list: no signs in Spanish (great majority of athletes were Spanish speaking); seeming difficulty in communicating with Spanish speaking athletes at some events/locations (eg, gate to enter track); no signs anywhere along the highway that there was an NCCWMA meet, note about packet pickup ending at 3 p.m. was in your packet; no signs with directions where to declare for event, to stay off track unless participating, etc.(English or Spanish); $5 parking (unreal!!!!!); the Saturday get-together party ($20 for a burger or chicken and rice plate)will have a Florida theme and the bar will stay open late (this was printed in the instruction pages); athletes participating without national singlet; told interim times would be given (again, in instruction pages), but they were not; race clock on track outside lane 8; XC results not available until after 10:30 a.m. (not sure if they were ever posted, but they were not there on Friday) – at 50 cents per page if want copy; could not hear PA in some locations, which meant missed awards, instructions, etc.
As for the heat, it’s part and parcel of the location. It would seem obvious that EMT and ambulance would be on site (e.g., XC venue) as we have in our USATF Georgia track champs and XC meet (even though in April and November respectively).
Thanks again, Pete, and others who were constructively critical.
Guess I’ll be competing at open meets to run some good times, next year. I will not go to Florida in the middle of nowhere ! I thank you all for the heads-up.
No one gives a damn about Masters athletes folks ! It’s so obvious.
Sal Allah
Johnny how mellow can you be? Have patience with me..
I tried Forum and then..WHAT,
I am at less than 101 computer, just ask Ken Stones.
First I thought my oldest son Nils is pulling my leg, He is a HS Math teacher in CA, and a middle distance runner, but he has mercy with me!
Tomorrow, I have a friend coming to teach me more about computers, I doubt I can learn that much in one session.
So, you have my e-mail
Christelhsv@hotmail.com. No, you don’t have to start an e-mail, I was really just curious, who
Y^J is…
If you want to stay anonymous- at least with me, it’s ok.
Christel
Southern California was the other bid. For those who were not at Covention two years ago, California’s bid was de railed by Mo Haneef who was at that time VP of Masters for the Southern California Association. The Bid team consisted of The President of the Southern California Association Dave Snyder, The VP of Open Division Skip Stolley ( Designated meet Director)the Association VP Rich Robert, the Commissioner of Officials Bob Marcus and Mark Cleary Southern California Masters Track & Field Chair. Mo had a problem with the fact that So Cal Track Club had made the Bid for the meet without running the Bid through the Association. Mr. Haneef didn’t understand that most Outdoor National Bids are not put forward by the local Association, but rather by either Sports commissions or Track Clubs ect. The specific reason that the Bid was not run through the Association was because Mo was asking for a budget before approving the Bid. It could not be produced early enough to get approval from him before the Bid was due at Convention– so because we wanted to Bid for the Nationals in 2009 to be at Mt. Sac & Cal Poly Pomona ( a facility less than a mile from Mt. Sac) we proceeded with So Cal Track Club as the Bidder. Just to let you know this Bid had the full support of all the officers in the Association except Mr. Haneef. Unfortunately, when he stood up at the end of our presentation and started saying that the Bid had not been run through him at the Association level the voting delegates who vote on the Bid became very confused and were afraid to vote for our Bid. He made it look like the right hand didn’t know what the left hand was doing.It is unforntunate for the athletes that one man with a personal agenda could do so much damage to a very qualified Bid, but it happened. The long and short of it is that he is gone now( no longer holds a board position) and no longer standing in the way of Masters in the Southern California Association.I have offered Southern California as a back up plan and we may bid at this years convention for 2011 if we are not selected as plan B next year. I am not pushing for being plan B because I understand that Floida already has the Bid–but if they cannot full fill their obligation to host the 2009 Nationals– I think we can have a very successful Championships in Southern California. I would encourage athletes that would like to see the Nationals come to Southern California go the this years convention in Reno and be a voting delegate or at the very least contact your association President and make your voice heard.
Why does the USATF have to have Nationals the first week of August. It doesn’t matter where we have it, its going to be hot with record temps. It was 97 in Spokane, 97 in Orono, 90 degrees and 100% humidity in Charlotte. Two of the three sites were held in the farthest north sites in the country. Still the first week of August is miserable everywhere.
How about getting away from this first week of August or anytime in July and have it in May or June. If it is at a southern site, have it in late May, Northern states, have it in mid to late June.
Mesa Arizona (Mesa Community College) would be a great venue in late May to have Nationals.
Also by having Nationals earlier, some of us can have real vacations with our families in the summer.
And how about if we cancel that annual BBQ on Saturday nights at Nationals and compete at night under the lights when it is cooler.
Thanks for all the information guys. One less sprinter in the Nationals if held in Florida….love the heat just not he other nine items….Sully in Arizona
Hey Tim-
I’ve asked the same question before regarding timing of outdoor nationals. The general response has been that many facilities are tied up with college and high school meets so the summer is time when those facilities are available.
Personally, I too would prefer that the outdoor national meet coincided with the “track season” as most of us know it.
The argument against changing the dates of the Masters nationals has seemingly revolved around the point in Mellow Johhny e-mail above: facility availability and also the notion that so many Masters competitors are educators.
Regarding facilities, most college track team seasons are over by the beginning of June. Only a handful of athletes still competing in NCAA championship events are still training. The spring college semester at almost all schools is over by the end of May. Most graduation ceremonies, which might take place at a large venue, are also usually completed by mid June.
To me it seems that the mid to late June time could work at most college sites. College sites seem to be better venues because of potential less expensive dorm space, and that many of these sites also have lighted track venue’s, which could allow split sessions (8am-12 noon & 6pm-10pm.).
The other argument we hear is about the multitudes of educators and officials that attend, and that their attendance would be jeopardized by moving the dates. Has anyone every ever taken a survey to determine the percentage of educators, versus non educators? I remember filling out surveys at the Illinois Nationals, as well as the Charlotte Nationals. Has anyone determined how many educators attend each national meet? By mid June the majority of schools in the USA are closed for the summer. Couldn’t the educators in the northern half of the country, who might have a week of school remaining at best, take a day or two of their personal days? I’m not an educator, but I have to save at least 2-3 vacation days myself if I want to attend the National meet, no matter what time of the summer it is held.
We lucked out with the weather in Decataur in 2004, paid for it in Charlotte in 2006, and had hotter than expected weather in Orono in 2007. I’d guess that if the meets in those locations had been held in mid-late June, the weather would have been summer like, but not oppressive.
At least Orono and LSU had warm up areas where one could stay cool. Clermont’s track is located in the bottom of a canyon. There’s no shade and NO warm up area. One can’t even park anywhere near the facility. I don’t think they realized what they were getting into; upon bidding for the meet.
Can anyone share with me the process by which Clermont was chosen for next year’s meet. It appears from some of the postings above that there is a selection process in existence which determines the facility/venue for a Masters Championship Meet. I am assuming there is a selection committee. If so, has the selection committee set minimum standards for facilities in which championship events are to be held? During the process of selection, if prospective bidders do not meet the mininum standards, they should not even be considered. If they do meet the minimum standards including safety, restrooms, transportation, warm-up areas, abiltiy to accomodate all events, I am sure this list can be expanded; then the selection committee can go on to consider budget and other criteria prior to making their final selection. Of course this is just my opinion. I participate in the Clermont meet. So I am curious to know what minimum standard was used to select the Clermont facility as the venue for the National Masters Championship for next year?
What does “having the Bid” mean? Has money changed hands? Who would be harmed by moving the meet?
Clermont joins the list of Outdoor Nationals sites (Baton Rouge & Orlando) that we choose not to attend because of extreme heat and humidity. After reading these posts, I know we made the right decision.
Mt. Sac is a wonderful venue and can easily accomodate the Outdoor Nationals. If the So Cal Track Club can pull it together I believe the meet should be held at Mt. Sac.
Regarding the comment about another Outdoor Nationals being held on the west coast, we all have to travel to the east coast yearly to participate in the Indoor Nationals. Mt. Sac would even that out.
I can’t get over the “no permanent restrooms” thing. Pretty shocking!
First off, I’m grateful and respectful of anybody who puts in the time and effort to bid to host our championships. I can’t beleive it’s an ego trip for anybody, or that the motive is anything but for the benefit of the sport. It seems there is little if any profit in the effort and a whole lot of headaches and potential for criticism.
So who gets hurt if the venue is changed? Well the folks that have already put hours of their time into it probably do.
That said, Clermont is a no-go for me. Being in the Inland Northwest, it would have to be a really special venue for me to invest precious time and money to compete there. As a mid-distance guy, excessive heat and humidity are big negatives that need to be outweighed by something special in the location or presentation. I’m not sensing that from Clermont, for many of the reasons mentioned already.
I might consider going if the meet were in SoCal. Then again, I finished so far out of the medals in Spokane, it could be argued any airline ticket would be a waste of money right now.
Would it be fair to the folks in Clermont to pull the rug out from under them at this point?
I’d be interested to hear some responses from Clermont officials to some of the feedback ofered here.
The word is that Clermont has not signed the contract for next year as yet. I doubt that they have spend any time or energy thinking about the 2009 meet since the 2008 WMA regional meet is just over. Given the negative reaction of many of us who attended the regional meet this past week, I would hope that the Clermont folks would think twice about signing a contract to put on the meet next summer. Many things surprised me about the meet – there was little to no local support – I saw no evidence of sponsorship by any entity other than the national training center – where the meet was held. Was all the funding to come from entry fees? Is that why there was a single bus for the so-called shuttle? Does that explain the parking fee? Who was underwriting the NCCWMA meet? And if there was no local support for an international meet – why would there be financial support from the surrounding communities for a national meet? Does that explain why there was a single finish line clock – that was on the track ONE DAY – and then moved to the road venue? There are NO LIGHTS – so evening events are not possible – it costs money to rent lights -perhaps $20 to park each day rather than $5? Work needs to be done to make the throw areas legal. I am not a thrower but one told me that on one throw site- the field was sloping downhill away from the throw – so no record could be set. Maybe they can get a fatter garden hose so it does not take an hour to fill the steeplechase water jump and delay the race. As for indoor plumbing – there was a very limited amount at the track – and if everyone tried to use those – the line would be around the track and up the steep hill – no showers or changing area – all of this has already been said.
A nice place for an all-comers meet but not exactly where you want to s spend 3-4 days with your family unless they stay in Orlando and visit Mouseland while you are competing 45 miles up the road.
Oh – the lap counting in the 5k run was excellent – and an official called off the running time as the clock was at the road walk. But it took a long time to get results – and not having a finish line clock is “not nice” at what is supposed to be a high quality international meet. And you have to see the location of the track facility to understand why some folks were rather “underwhelmed”. Look at the photos folks –
Move it to the west coast. Everyone seems to argue that the nationals is being held on the west coast more than on the east coast, but no one seems to mind that the indoors is usually on the east coast. One reason why the indoors is on the east coast is the availability of good quality facilities, this seems to be the case regarding Clermont. Masters deserves a quality meet at a quality facility for the nationals not this minor league facility. I believe Clermont should work a deal with Mark Cleary to assit in working the meet a split the profits. That way Clermont will get something out of it with people attending the meet and so cal would still be in the running for hosting a meet in the near future as well as get something for their troubles. Sorry Clermont but we deserve better!
Ran at the WMA in Clermont. Nice track. Everything else not so nice. I think every venue has some shortcomings but this one has more than its share. Improvements are possible, but it probably wasn’t a good choice in the first place. Did others bid?
May or June for nationals? Forget that. Anyone living in the north barely has the snow off the track by then. I’d like at least a couple of months of training outside of my basement before going to a national outdoor meet. Weather in Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, etc., is great in the summer. Central location would be good for most. Wonder if anyone around there can host in the future.
Everyone has covered the negative aspects of the NCCWMA meet in Florida. I won’t bore everyone by agreeing point by point. I have participated in National meets in Eugene, Orono, Baton Rouge, and Decatur. Florida was by far the worst. Baton Rouge and Orono were hot and humid; but as Frank stated, athletes had an indoor area to warm-up in. Also, there was A/C nearby.
I agree that whining is not productive. Constructive criticism and common sense, however, should be expressed. We all know the definition of insanity, “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”. Why is it then that we host our National meets in locations KNOWN to have horribly even dangerously hot and humid weather in late July or early August. How could anyone live through the experience in Raleigh and not have MAJOR reservations about hosting a meet in Florida?
I understand the argument against always hosting the meet on the same coast. However, do we hear that same argument against Boston indoors? Personally, I would go to Eugene every year with no complaint. The environment is without compare, but it is the weather that sells the venue. I know some say it isn’t “fair” for those living on the east coast. I see it as equitable – the indoor meet is always on the east coast; the outdoor meet could be on the west coast. Athletes like myself living in the central US fly for both, but only half as far. In short, if any athlete went to both meets, they would roughly fly similar distances no matter where they lived.
I also like the other idea of moving the meet up earier in the summer. Trying to run at Indoor Nationals in March, college meets/Penn/Drake in May and then Outdoor Nationals in August makes for a long season.
I’m not naive enough to think that we can make every athlete happy. Also, I’m sure that money has got to play a major role in venue selection. We, as athletes, have simply got to have more say in where our meets are held. Otherwise, the only solution is an “every man/woman for themselves” approach where each individual chooses to skip venues that are held in “stupid” locations. That will just lead to declining numbers and the splintering of our group. We need cooperation in a matter like this to keep us united. I see the petition as a step in that direction.
“Why is it…that we host our National meets in locations KNOWN to have horribly even dangerously hot and humid weather in late July or early August.”
That’s the million dollar question right there.
A comment and a question:
1) As long as the indoor meet continues to be on the East Coast (I heard it was in Boise once) then I’ll never go. Because I see the outdoor meet as being a bigger one, I don’t necessarily feel it should always be on the west coast but when it is on the East Coast, should be in a location like Orono with better overall conditions and accomodations.
2) I keep hearing the point from the Midwest and East Coast northerners that the National Meet can’t be moved up due to weather. However, I ran in college in Minnesota and we toughed it out in the cold through the winter and tons of colleges simply have to start track with snow on the ground. I don’t see masters as any different and some of the toughest people I’ve ever met are masters track athletes so don’t say they/we can’t handle it. Is there something else I’m missing?
I’ll try to answer a few of the comments:
a) Ms. Bergen – I don’t see the phrase “having the Bid” in this blog. The references to Bid deal with the obvious proposal of a site for a meet, and all the Bids are presented at the annual convention and selected by the voters present.
b) There aren’t that many bidders for these meets. There have been years when ONLY ONE bidder came forward, and many more years when there were just two.
c) Your Association Masters Chair votes at the convention (as do a handful of others). Make sure your Association Masters Chair listens to you and goes to bat for you. While some of these folks are the best, others don’t know the pole vault from the steeple. It’s typically an appointed position, so discuss the position with your Association officers. Get involved, make a difference.
d) I’m going to look into the budgets and lessons learned from previous championships meets, and make these available. Perhaps, armed with this info, others will seek to bid for these meets to offer alternative locations.
The sad truth is that the title of Association Masters Chair is often not respected even by the organization for which they work. I am the USATF Masters Chair for the State of Iowa. However, I do not receive ANY compensation/stipends/expenses whatsoever from the USATF. I don’t mind volunteering my time to help promote Masters track and field. What seems unreasonable to me is that, as you say, I get to vote at the National Conventions, however, I can’t even get one night’s stay paid for by my association due to a lack of funding by the USATF. Obviously, I can’t justify paying for my flight and hotel in support of a job that I volunteer for. It’s hard enough for most of us to get away for the Nationals meet(s), let alone dropping another $600-800 for the convention.
My rant is truly not seeking pity. I absolutely enjoy having a part in promoting our sport. I just wanted the bloggers to know just how “prestigious” the title of Masters Chair really is and how that may play a role in this problem. I would love to take a more active role in resolving this host venue problem, but in some cases money becomes a major issue. I understand that many Masters are well established in their careers, and money is not an issue for them. I believe it is more a matter of respect from USATF. For example, I loved being able to put on the USA uniform for the NCCWMA meet in Florida. It gave me a real sense of pride, as I’m sure it did my teammates. But should we all have to pay the same for our uniforms as Joe Blow track fan off the street? That is a whole other can of worms…
so what you’re saying is:
Sh-t flows downstream but gets you first and the athletes last…gotcha!
Since we all need to plan and budget our resources to get to big events, it is imperative that a decision be made ASAP. No signed contract yet; does the offer have a time limit on it? That shows lack of interest/commitment on the part of the would be hosts. The serious problems reported by Regional WMA athletes are enough to exclude Clermont from my 09 calendar. I vote for So. Cal., Hayward or Spokane again, with rapid confirmation, please.
Does anyone read post no. 49 (is that a modern record, by the way — 49 posts?)? The 2009 Nationals at Clermont are 10 months from this Tuesday (they start on Thursday, August 9). Wow, that’s close. Just went to the USATF Web site to check out the housing for the 2009 meet (our reporters have indicated that close-in housing is a bit scarce). What? Not a single hotel is listed. In fact, there’s really no information presented at all (and yet the meet was apparently awarded to Clermont way back in 2006).
Yes, All-American standards for our athletes are important, and it would be nice to know how I would rank if I ran a 22:22.22 in the 5000 on the track next spring, but what is really important are OUR NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. We have two of them in 2009, one in Landover, Maryland, beginning on March 20, and the other in Clermont beginning July 9, as noted. The USATF Web site has, for quite a few months, listed the hotels for the indoors, their price, distance from the track, etc. But nothing for Clermont.
IMHO, we (all masters athletes) need to make the identification (and eventual acquisition) of appropriate sites our first priority. In the modern era (1992-2008), only 11 states have hosted our outdoor nationals, and they would be as follows:
Oregon (Eugene 3 times).
Washington (Spokane 3 times).
Maine (Orono 3 times).
Florida (Orlando once).
Louisiana (Baton Rouge once).
Utah (Provo once).
California (San Jose once).
Illinois (Decatur once).
Hawaii (Honolulu once).
North Carolina (Charlotte once).
Michigan (East Lansing once).
How about Massachusetts, Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, etc., etc.? Couldn’t they join the parade at least one time? And I wouldn’t mind seeing our most populous state (California) come back for an encore, as I would not mind seeing Michigan take another try. BTW, the three “failures” in the modern era (as defined by an inability to draw more than 900 competitors) were Louisiana, Florida, and Hawaii. There’s a lesson in there somewhere.
Wow, I made a huge error. As everyone knows, next year’s Clermont meet starts on July 9 (10 months from Tuesday), not August 9 as I said just above in my second sentence (I corrected it later).
I’m new at this so have no idea but is this the most negative the talk has been leading up to an Outdoor Nationals yet?
And it also started 11 months in advance. Of course, a lot of that was due to the experience at the WMA regional meet.
You’re a young buck, Mellow Johnny, and I guess you could count me as one of the unofficial historians of the masters track movement in the US. This would rank in the top two for negative comments leading up to an outdoor nationals (hard to be precise, as we didn’t have masterstrack.com in the old days).
The other meet with a huge amount of negative publicity before it even got started was Orlando 1999. After that meet, people complained bitterly about the lack of shade, the heat, the charge of $8 for spectator admission (as I recall), exorbitant costs for bottled water, being treated like juveniles by Disney (can’t do this, can’t do that), the terrible announcing, etc.
In addition, the meet had the third-lowest attendance of the modern era. Some say it should have been a night meet rather than being run during the heat of the day. Does any of this sound familiar, Mellow Johnny?
After Orlando 1999, Charlotte 2006 (the most dangerous meet we have ever held in terms of conditions, heat casualties, etc.), and Clermont WMA Regionals in Aug 2008, people are “at the ready” to point out the shortcomings in these southern venues.
The larger question, Mellow Johnny, is why we are in this situation. The Senior Games for 2013 will be held in Cleveland, Ohio. You don’t think there is any issue of a change in heart for Cleveland, do you? No, the opposite is true; they are celebrating (and note the meet is 5 years out). We (masters T&F) have brilliant athletes, many of whom would be great models for advertising, we spend money for meals, hotels, and rental cars (not to mention clothing), and we clean up after ourselves. Why does almost no one want us? That is the question, Mellow Johnny.
I would guess that the fact that no one seems to want us is because of the bidding system of the USATF. The falllacy of the bid system, is that we have something vaulable to bid on. In looking at the press release of the NSG, they boast of 35,000 athletes attending (and none under the age of 50), and generating $40M in ecomonic impact. We are lucky to draw 2,500 to one of our championships. Balance the potential of a promoter making a profit (or to keep from losing money)on the USATF Master’s meet, while dealing with the requirements of the USATF, and it’s easy to see why we don’t have bidders coming out of the woodwork.
Three sites seem to have made it work, and have bid on multiple championships (Orono, Spokane, Eugene). At the same time no other site else has come back to bid again.
I think it’s time to do away with the bid system, and have a meet committee that negotiates with a university, or a sports/track organization, to rent facilities for the meet, preferably a site with lights to have split sessions. The budget would come from the entries, and also from the general monies allocated to Master’s track. The committee would also negotiate the renting of dorm space for the athletes, allow the host concession rights, and also local advertising revenue. The host will be guaranteed revenues from the rental of the track, a percentage of dorm space, and all concessions, which should amount to $50K+. The athletes get an excellent facility, with close by housing, and if managed correctly, the USATF could also generate a profit.
The site could be rotated around the country (East Coast/Midwest/Pacific Northwest/California, or held at the same site for a two or three period. If it was a win-win situation for both the athletes, and the host site, we’d probably see even more facilities become interested in hosting the meet.
The bid system as it currently stands discourages quality bids, leaving the athletes with less than qualified sites such as Clermont.
As always, thanks for the informative and timely reply, PT. You’re right, that all sounds very familiar. It’s a shame that the two meets with the most pre-meet negativity were both in Florida but that does tell us something, does it not?
Nothing against Florida or Floridians, but it seems clear The Sunshine State may just not be the place to host Outdoor Nats in the middle of summer. Makes only a little more sense than trying to host it in March in northern Minnesota when the problems would be on the opposite end of the spectrum.
Ken Effler–did you send your suggestion to Gary Snyder?
Peter–I would very much enjoy meeting you! You’re ability to pronounce my name correctly first time out, was gratifying. And, whether you know it or not, your announcing is of such high quality that going down the backstretch of the hurdles, your call allows me to concentrate on my hurdles while being somewhat aware of what’s going on several lanes away (example at Charlotte: Binion is off fast on the outside, here comes Wilson and Druckery…)Thank you!
Ken Effler is the man. Why? Because he comes up with good ideas, that’s why. To change an old expression a bit, “If it’s broke, you gotta fix it.”
Sure love the excellent points.
a) M Wensel – To clarify, it is your association that doesn’t respect the Masters Chair position, not the USATF national office. My association (South Texas) pays for reasonable travel expenses and the convention registration to allow us to attend.
b) K Effler – I’d love to see the details of your idea ironed out and the gaps filled in so it could be implemented and the “rosy” picture you paint comes to frutition. Unfortunately, until people are willing to get involved and make it happen, it’s just talk. So . . . can/will you do it?
The main point I was trying to raise is that the bidding system that USATF Masters utilizes rarely results in getting many qualified bids. 2009 looks to be an iffy situation, and while 2010 in Sacramento looks to be a good bet, will we be lucky in subsequent years? From what I’ve read in the past, we are lucky to get 1 qualified bid in any given year.
With the lack of qualified bids the logical step is to change the system. While as a group we are not economically large enough to get bidders excited, we do generate enough revenues, that if partnered with the right school or organization, it could be beneficial for both sides.
Instead of waiting for bidders to come to us, it’s probably time for the USATF Masters to go out and sell itself to a potential partner. It will take a change in mind set that I’m not sure the USATF is willing to make. If the USATF Masters were open to discussing the idea, I’d love to be involved in the discussion, and would volunteer my time to help raise the level of Masters track in the US.
I just read the entired discussion on this topic. The last post is what made the most sense to me: Instead of waiting for bidders to come to us, it’s probably time for the USATF Masters to go out and sell itself to a potential partner. It will take a change in mind set that I’m not sure the USATF is willing to make. If the USATF Masters were open to discussing the idea, I’d love to be involved in the discussion, and would volunteer my time to help raise the level of Masters track in the US.
I participated in the Nike World Masters Games and even though the competition wasn’t that great, I think if it was teh Nike Masters T&F Champs, it would work. I remember all the publicity around the event and that’s what we need for our sport now. How do we sell masters track and field to Nike? We need a recognizable masters voice like Carl Lewis, Willie Gault, Jeff Hartwig, Gail Devers, Tom Pukstys, etc…
Joy Upshaw-Margerum is the site selection person for Masters. She would be the one in charge of looking into potential bidders for our Masters Indoor & Outdoor Nationals.
Leave a Reply