> Of course, the reality is that my statements are almost certainly too > late. I had hoped that the USATF had come to it senses, but I can see that > it had not. I doubt seriously that they could withdraw the awards and > solicit applications from appropriate locations.
I will keep beating this dead horse until people get it - The "USATF" that made the decision consists of a couple of elected officials and a bunch of volunteers. They solicited input from the athletes. On the women's side they got (I think) 14 bids, 4 of which were close to having everything they were asking for. None of those 4 bids were among the half a dozen places in the country where the weather is 80-90% likely to be perfect. As someone posted, the athletes actually had some strong sentiment NOT to do what you are suggesting and to find a course and date that mirrors the Olympics. Prize money was clearly a top priority. The athletes also support the concept of the winner of the trials going. If by "come to its senses" you mean ignore the wishes of the athletes, you will find yourself in a minority position, not to mention one that would be difficult to defend relative to the Amateur Sports Act if push came to shove. I think USATF would have welcomed a bid from California that met the requirements of the athletes, but none was forthcoming. Nor do I recall any of the critics volunteering to organize the kind of "USATF-sponsored" race that might be fast enough - certainly those of us involved already do not have the time nor inclination to do it when we had some bids that were perfectly acceptable to most people. In fairness to Richard, I want to note that he has volunteered to help Pacific/USATF with LDR-related things, so my comments don't completely pertain to him. I can accept that "USATF" will be a target no matter what decisions are made. I myself have lit into Craig, the national office, and others in the past when there was foot-dragging or the appearance of dishonesty. After a week in Mobile, I can say that I believe the law and legislation process within USATF is not adequate for a professional organization. But here we have a case of an open process soliciting the input of many people. Those who don't like it should GET INVOLVED! That's what democracy is. This is not the U.S. Congress where it takes money and years of influence to accomplish anything. The LDR side of USATF would love to have more volunteers and would welcome them with open arms. If someone comes in willing to actually do stuff rather than just complain, they will get somewhere. How about some volunteers to tackle what I suspect is the real issue with our distance performances - poor habits, guidance, and attitude among possble distance runners between the ages of 7 and 20? - Ed Parrot
