I like the club idea, but how does the club system handle the disparity in
talent among the "sub-elite" athletes? You'll have to take into account the
on-the-bubble 100m guys running 10.3-10.5 and also the weekend warrior types
running 12.0+. The 10.3 guys won't get a lot of benefit running against the 12.0
guys. Their best competition will still come from collegiate meets. It seems the
club system, for competitions anyway, would end up catering to the sub-sub-elite
athletes.
s.devereaux
Ed & Dana Parrot wrote:
> > Agree 100%. The reason why clubs fail in this country is lack of
> competition
> > between the clubs. That's why their needs to be a structured
> > regional/national schedule. Their needs to be more emphasis on team
> > competition and less on individual competition in races. Take a look at
> > running in Europe. Clubs are big there because the clubs compete with each
> > other week after week. Competition breeds fast times and fast runners.
> >
>
> I agree that having this regional/national schedule would help somewhat.
> But there are actually plenty of opportunities out there for
> distance-oriented clubs and they still are not taking advantage of them.
> Only two associations were represented at the East Regional half marathon
> championship, despite it being centrally located and offering enough money
> and rooms to make it at worst a break-even for the athletes. Few clubs and
> associations participate in the East Regional Cross Country Championships in
> Boston unless they wanted a high-level meet anyway - they'd go whether it
> was a regional meet or not. The East Reional Track championships is
> somewhat more successful among sprinters and throwers, only because there
> are so few opportunities to get a good meet.
> If you are trying to appeal only to emerging elites, then a regional
> schedule is an excellent idea. But if you are trying to build clubs, you
> need a lot more than that. You need to make competitions pervasive at the
> local level and build interest in competition among all abilities close to
> home, as well as coming up with some infrastructure to help clubs along. If
> you do this, there will be more, better clubs and athletes and there will be
> enough depth to fill non-local events, even among post-collegaite athletes
> who except for the highest level often will stay closer to home if there is
> any competition there at all.
>
> >It has to start at the top, not the bottom. It does no good if say the
> Louisville area clubs
> > start a local competition schedule because there would be no where else to
> go after the local area champs.
>
> I must respectfully disagree with you 100%. I have had this same
> disagreement with Mr. Masback. It has to start at the bottom, the base
> (like any good training program), not at the top. When I'm talking about
> base, I mean people who actually are interested in competing as opposed to
> the masses of road races. We need to stimulate this interest so it builds
> its way up to te regional and local level. I don't believe that regional
> championships will have much effect on this at all.
>
> That said, I fully support Bill Roe and the others who are pushing the
> national club track championships. They are motivated to spend their effort
> here, and it certainly will have a positive effect. But it's one small pice
> of a complicated and substantial puzzle.
>
> - ed Parrot
--
"I have plenty of talent and vision. I just don't give a damn."
