too much of a premium on final DL meet?

[gh]

Scoring at the DL meets is 4-2-1. Then it doubles in Z and B to 8-4-2.

(not that anybody but the athletes who are in line to win seem to care much: talk about an idea that has gained zero traction with the public.... but I digress)

Does making the final meet worth so much help or hurt overall? I'm thinking the latter, at least when I look at the mDT. Harting didn't enter, but I can see why: he has almost no chance of winning. Even if he wins, if Kanter gets 2nd or 3rd, K wins the overall.

Harting (like many German throwers) apparently has no interest in the DL, and competed only once (winning in Birmingham). Should somebody who was in only 1 of the 6 leadins really have a mathematical chance to win? Kanter was a good soldier, with a two wins a 2nd and a 3rd, yet he could still lose the overall t0 Harting.

That doesn't make sense to me if you're trying to build a SERIES with some overall value.

???

[j-a-m]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

Does making the final meet worth so much help or hurt overall?

It adds to the confusion. DL is confusing as it is, with events only placing place at every other meet, and no clear criteria who gets invited.

In order to get casual fans to care, it would be helpful to make the scoring (among other things) easier to follow, and that includes awarding the same points at every meet.

[Marlow]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

I miss the old WAF meet. That made great sense to me and gave us one last meet every season where most of the movers and shakers were compelled to attend. The problem is that most of them were worn out by the time they got there and performances suffered. I would love for the IAAF to figure how to make that a viable enterprise. Certainly it's a better idea than the Athletics World Cup, which was virtually worthless.

[Ned Ryerson]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

I miss the old WAF meet. That made great sense to me and gave us one last meet every season where most of the movers and shakers were compelled to attend.

By what mechanism were they compelled to attend?

[kuha]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

I miss the old WAF meet. That made great sense to me and gave us one last meet every season where most of the movers and shakers were compelled to attend.

Not me. That meet always felt like a "fake championship" to me, and pretty useless.

[gh]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

I think I only ever went to one WAF (or it was probably GPF at that point) and it really was a pro forma snoozefest. They mighta well have just gone directly to the paymaster's office and stood in line. That might have been more exciting if Brian Oldfield were about.

[sprintdoc]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

Concur on the scoring issues, while we want last meet to count more is the actual numerical value fair in the big picture. The men's 800 was a good example of the failure of the points in my opinion as well.

I would also say they need to provide money beyond the winner. Give the top 3 at least money so the best athletes will show to compete even when someone has already sewn up first.

I am also not a fan of how Zurich in particular has been downgraded by the DL. Sure it gets half the DL finals but in comparison to Zurich pre-DL it just seems a little more watered down at least on the track. Post-Olympic meets are always lower in quality as some athletes have shut it down or burned out or simply going through the motions. Fan support at many of the meets post-Olympics has been rock solid which is good so maybe its only the die-hard fans of the sport who feel cheated.

[Marlow]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

I miss the old WAF meet. That made great sense to me and gave us one last meet every season where most of the movers and shakers were compelled to attend.

By what mechanism were they compelled to attend?

Was it not the highest point getters from the DL, and the prize money doubled?

[toyracer]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

My thoughts:

1. Points from first to last for all events. For races like the 100m, 200m etc points would be from first to eighth. Formula can be played with for the horizontal jumps, distance events etc (usually have more entries), or a eighth place cut off can be agreed on. I also don't think that the points should be doubled at the final event.

2. End of year money earned by at least the top three, not just the overall winner.

3. More emphasis on the wild card earned by the winner, allow multiple wild cards per country.

I feel that all of the above would give more incentive for participation in end of year events. The more athletes that have points, the more that will have a chance of winning or placing in the top three overall, the more that will want to participate. And, while I know that meet promoters are free to invite who they wish, there should be a clause that any athlete with a mathematical chance of winning a title should be invited for the final event.

[Mighty Favog]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

Such a clause already exists.

[Ned Ryerson]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

I miss the old WAF meet. That made great sense to me and gave us one last meet every season where most of the movers and shakers were compelled to attend.

By what mechanism were they compelled to attend?

Was it not the highest point getters from the DL, and the prize money doubled?

The WAF and the DL never coexisted. The last WAF was in 2009.

[18.99s]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

I wish they'd award points down to 5th or lower, like most points-scoring track meets do. Something like 8-6-4-3-2-1. That would give more points parity going into the final. Then bump up the points for the DL final, but not quite double, e.g. 12-9-7-5-3-2.

And the DL finalists should be picked automatically based on the highest "regular season" point totals (if that's not already done).

[j-a-m]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

I wish they'd award points down to 5th or lower, like most points-scoring track meets do. Something like 8-6-4-3-2-1.

I generally agree with that, because it better reflects consistency over a season. The issue, though, once again is that these are invitational meets and entry is not based on merit.

[Marlow]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

The WAF and the DL never coexisted. The last WAF was in 2009.

There was indeed a series, perhaps just referred to as GP1. And there was that verkakte points system that ranked athletes and only the top point-getters got first shot at a lane and the prize structure was higher. MANY of the highest ranked elites showed up, but as I said, they were burnt out by the time they got there.

[gh]

Re: too much of a premium on final DL meet?

This is repetitive of the Brussels 400 thread, but that's a perfect case in point.

Kevin Borlée comes into Brussels in 4th place, with only 2 points. But wins the overall with 3rds in Monaco and Lausanne and a win in Brussels. That's supposed to engage would-be fans of the sport?