Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

    Well, not really "good", but here's what I mean: for the first time in a long while, there was no expectation of a WR in any event. Yes, the possibility in the women's 10k; okay, you had the short-course "World Bests" in the men's walks; always a chance in the relays; but overall, the expectation of world records was at an all-time low...and the competition took center stage as a result. Some of the greatest competition I've seen in 40 years of t&f. And it didn't matter whether the men's 5k went 12:55 or 12:45--it was a spectacular race, and no one gave a damn that they didn't come close to the WR. Same goes for most of the track AND the field events. People weren't looking at the WR marks on the infield, they were focused on who was throwing the farthest. I think it's a trend that should be encouraged: stop putting out the WR stripe in the throws at the Oly Games and WCs; stop posting the phony FloJo marks in television graphics. Focus on seasonal bests and the matchups between athletes. Who knows, maybe the lack of WRs in the long term is a good thing.

  • #2
    Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

    Much as I enjoy WR's, you are right about the competition thing. I'm not even into distance races, but the men's 5K thrilled me.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

      I'm with you, but unfortunately, the public at large still expects world records at these meets. And it's largely due to the way the media covers the sport.

      Here's Dwight Stones setting up the women's vault at the outset of ESPN2's coverage (paraphrasing): "...and with Feofanova, Isinbayeva and Dragila jumping so well, we could see the first 16ft vault at these championships!"

      Could we? Jeez...come on. And this sets the viewers up for failure right there. Track announcers, at least the ones here in the US, always do this. It's a shame that Dwight has to follow suit. Does he get to write his own material, or has he just stopped paying attention?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

        True, Dwight needn't have mentioned 16 ft, but a WR was realistic, and TV should mention that if it's possible. This is where TV commentating is difficult - drumming up instant interest for a non-t&f-junkie audience. (This year, of course, it was easier - having major-network coverage only on LAST DAY OF THE MEET, they could package it perfectly for US viewers.) Think I'll take a trip north for CBC Olympic coverage next year.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

          Re coverage we had wall-to-wall coverage on Eurosport with mutiple cameras on different events to choose from. My wife was in LA during the 1984 Olympics and was disappointed by the coverage. You knew where the US competitor was,sure, but the rest? During the Olympics here it just runs dawn til midnight even if you don't want to watch all the heats of the kayak events!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

            >Here's Dwight Stones setting up
            >the women's vault at the outset of ESPN2's
            >coverage (paraphrasing): "...and with
            >Feofanova, Isinbayeva and Dragila jumping so
            >well, we could see the first 16ft vault at these
            >championships!"

            Could we? Jeez...come on.
            >And this sets the viewers up for failure right
            >t there. Track announcers, at least the ones
            >here in the US, always do this. It's a shame
            >that Dwight has to follow suit. Does he get to
            >write his own material, or has he just stopped
            >paying attention?>>

            99% of the time I'd agree with you, but Dwight was spot-on with this one. In this case we're talking an event with the three greatest exponents ever, two of them hot-hot-hot and very close to a significant barrier. For ESPN not to mention it, and then to have it happen would have seen the board full of postings like "those morons didn't even realize the significance of the event and didn't set it up right. Don't they ever do their homework?"

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

              >Here's Dwight Stones setting up
              >the women's vault at the outset of ESPN2's
              >coverage (paraphrasing): "...and with
              >Feofanova, Isinbayeva and Dragila jumping so
              >well, we could see the first 16ft vault at these
              >championships!"

              >Could we? Jeez...come on.

              The part I would object to is not the WR hype, but the one about 'Dragila jumping so well'. Those guys must have been asleep all this season until the WCh...
              Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

                >99% of the time I'd agree with
                >you, but Dwight was spot-on with this one. In
                >this case we're talking an event with the three
                >greatest exponents ever, two of them hot-hot-hot
                >and very close to a significant barrier. For
                >ESPN not to mention it, and then to have it
                >happen would have seen the board full of
                >postings like "those morons didn't even realize
                >the significance of the event and didn't set it
                >up right. Don't they ever do their homework?"

                The point I'm really making is that US coverage tends to hype the wrong things (i.e. superlative marks) and not competition. The problem for them is that, well, too much of the competition is foreign, and, you know, us viewers are only interested in Yanks.

                This is what ruins the telecasts more than anything else. The WC was a stunning example: in practically every event, ZERO information was given about athetes who weren't either a.) American or b.) the favorite. This made the announcers look somewhat foolish when the victor was neither.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

                  >okay, you had the short-course "World Bests" in the men's walks

                  HUH? I seriously doubt there was any course length issues here.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

                    The women's HJ competition must have been a good one, but ESPN2 didn't really show much. They showed Cloete's winning jump and that was about it. So from my vantage point, that was a huge disappointment.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

                      Actually, the first thing that came to mind with the subject heading was that there were no WR's thanks to more effective drug testing. I think that the apparent effectiveness of WADA in putting a chill on the cheaters has been the biggest untold story of recent years. And hopefully, with the Lagat affair, however it comes out, it will be clear that even "A" List athletes are no longer immune, assuming rumors of "untouchables" were true. Call me Pollyanna, but perhaps the testers are, for now, really cleaning things up after all.

                      But, yes, all in all it was a great presentation of true competition.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

                        There was a WR bonus paid out, though, right? If memory serves me, the men's 20k walk saw a road world "best" by a scant 1 second.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

                          >There was a WR bonus paid out, though, right? If
                          >memory serves me, the men's 20k walk saw a road
                          >world "best" by a scant 1 second.

                          Both Mens RWs had World Bests set and were awarded the 100k bonus for their efforts.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: No New WRs at WC....And That's a Good Thing!

                            Championship racing/throwing/jumping emphasis for the athlete is to contend (if possible) for a high finish (medal). If the competition is at it's best, and the earlier rounds/heats have not exhausted the contestants, then something World Record'esque is possible. Just keep emphasizing the great competitions and maybe, just maybe something fast or far will happen!

                            From my own experience, when I attempted to run against the clock, it was never as fast as I had hoped, but when just compete, my PR's come in droves!

                            Great Championship performances!

                            ty

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X