Oh, Joy! My First Internet Troll

I received a comment this morning from Anonymous:

I feel bad I have to give traffic to this website.. I wont [sic] be coming back. It sucks that the internet has the power to give complete idiots a voice. You are clueless if you are talking about the nation as a whole.How about this? If one of our American boys, including Webb, (he is a MD athlete), medal at worlds you shut your website down and never return. P.S. Look at how many HS boys broke 9 min in the 2 mile this past year. Andrew

It's ironic that "Andrew" is complaining about "the internet [having] the power to give complete idiots a voice" since he is the spokesman and poster child for their group. "Andrew" likes to disagree – and I certainly don't mind disagreements on this website – but "Andrew" states no position of his own, other than offering up some nonsense about high school runners breaking 9 minutes in the 2 mile. Not only that, but he hides behind a veil of anonymity, not leaving his e-mail message so that I can have a chance to reply directly to his vitriol. That's how internet trolls roll, though. They are not interested in debating, they're only interested in being haters.

Let me give you some advice, "Andrew." Read a book about logic. Take a debate class. Learn some manners. See a psychotherapist. Do something, please, and do it before it's too late! You see, right now you've got nothing to offer society other than your hate. That's not enough. I'm glad you won't be coming back. Not only do you have unresolved issues from your childhood that I'd rather not have to deal with, but – frankly – you're not smart enough, and too cowardly, to debate with me.

P.S. Unfortunately for the rest of my readers, I am disabling the anonymous posting function of my blog. Life's too short to have to deal with trolls. I'm doing it for Andrew's sake. Maybe if we don't enable him by giving him an outlet for his cowardice and stupidity, he will finally seek the help he so desperately needs.

Take the FLP Poll! Would You Do "Whatever It Takes" To Win?

MSNBC.com contributor Mike Celizic has weighed in to the Pistorius debate with this cynical attempt at wit:

What if, the IAAF is saying, [Pistorius'] prosthetics give him an advantage that able-bodied runners don’t have? What if, in other words, the people with legs and feet are the ones who are disabled? What then? Do athletes start chopping their legs off in order to get the Pistorius pistons and win more races? (And you know that if the prosthetics are declared legal and really do give an advantage, there will be lines around the block waiting for amputations (emphasis mine-FLP). That’s how it is with athletes.)

I couldn't imagine purposefully crippling myself for life just to try and gain athletic advantage. Of course, steroids can do the same thing, but many people have no problem taking those. I'd never take steroids, either. Is it just me, or is Celizic right? Would you really consider having your legs chopped off just to gain athletic advantage?

NCAA Proposal: America Rejects the Metric System

NCAA is proposing some amendments to the 2007 Rules Book that would reject the metric system in favor of the imperial system of measurement during collegiate track meets. to summarize the proposals, the 1500m Run would revert to the gold ol' Mile Run, and the field events would all have to be measured, displayed and announced as imperial units. Measuring in metric units would still be allowed for ratification of possible NCAA, American and/or world records. Why? Apparently Americans have rejected the metric system. I for one, never tried to embrace it in the first place. (Just give me a good old quarter-mile track to run on so I can run a few 220's!)

The rabid proponents of metrication (metricationists?) on the activist website Go Metric are appalled at such backwards thinking. The track and field fanatics over at the T&F News message boards are engaged in a furious debate. The purists are considering a boycott of NCAA meets while the pragmatists (including E. Garry Hill, Editor of T&F News) see the wisdom of trying to resuscitate a sport that seems to be dying a slow death as a spectator sport in this country.

Here is the text from the NCAA proposals:

Item 12 – Amend Rules 4.4.4 and 10.3 as follows: Replace all occurrences of the 1500 Meters with the Mile Run.

Rationale: The mile run is an event that we, in the United States, understand. The general public understands the four minute barrier. They understand the quality of that performance and have over time used four minutes as a bench-mark performance. The general public has not and will never be able to make the correlation between the 1,500 meters and the mile run.

This is an event that allows us to promote our track meets. Once again, the general public has NO understanding of how fast many young men are running and the competitiveness of the event. There is ready-made history for this event, much like the 100-yard dash, that we should tap into as we try to attract more fans. It will also allow for the general public to understand how fast our women are running.

Item 20 – Replace Rule 6.1.16b through 16.1.16d as follows:
b. Imperial is the preferred system of measurement. Distances will be recorded to the nearest lesser quarter-inch.
c. Metric will not be displayed or announced at meets.
d. World records, American records and NCAA records will be recorded in metric and imperial. However, the imperial measurement must be displayed and announced instead of or in addition to metric.

Rationale: Metric has hampered the opportunity to properly communicate the sport of track and field to the media, spectators, parents and athletes. America has rejected the metric system. Metric may be a better, more specific way to measure, but it is not understood by most Americans. It does not work to indicate both forms of measurements. Metric is still being shown exclusively at meets on indicator boards, video boards, announced in papers without imperial interpretation. This has alienated the sport from American mainstream. A person trying to watch, understand or follow this sport should not require an interpreter or translation dictionary.

USATF Selection Process "Strongly Favored by the Athletes"

I recently corresponded with Jill Geer, USATF Director of Communications, regarding the USATF's current selection process. Here is the exchange:

Hi, Jill.

I hope all is well. Sanya Richards should trounce TEAM USA in the women's 400m dash at the Golden Gala in Rome. Once she does, questions will arise again about the seemingly imperfect selection process that the USATF currently has. If she wins, it could be easily argued that we aren't sending our best women's 400m team to Osaka. It could also be argued just as easily that she should have made the team when she was required to do so. Care to comment on this dilemma?

Regards,

Jimmie R. Markham
Finish Line Pundit

Here is her reply:

Jimmie:

Any selection system is imperfect, but our system is strongly favored by the athletes, since under this system, they select themselves to the team – not somebody sitting in an office ordaining a team. They understand the system and know what they need to do to make the team, instead of being subject to someone else’s judgement call or personal preferences. It is the only purely objective selection system.

Unfortunately, one consequence of this system is that sometimes you do have the stunning development such as Sanya not making the team or Dan O’Brien no-heighting in the pole vault in ’92 – situations where Team USA almost certainly loses a modal. However, the self-selection system also results in unlikely athletes making the team and then going on to win medals. For instance, in 2004, I doubt that Lauryn Williams would be on anybody’s ‘chosen’ list to make the team, but she won the Olympic silver medal and went on to become a World Champion at 100 meters. I remember Calvin Davis miraculously making the 1996 Olympic Team in the men’s 400 hurdles, taking third at the Olympic Trials. He ended up winning a bronze medal at the Games. There are countless examples like this.

It is very unfortunate that Sanya did not make the team in the 400 – to say everyone was shocked is an understatement. But it happened, and our selection system says the top 3 make the team. It’s not perfect, but it’s the best system we have, and the one that the athletes themselves want.

Also, I should point out that our system also is meant to mimic the rigors of the World Championship and Olympic models, with athletes running rounds. This helps self-select a team that is uniquely suited to Championship running. (This is an issue different from the Sanya issue but is relevant to how and why our system is what it is.) There is a difference between a runner who excels in one-off races and those who excel in the Championship model of rounds. Examples of the latter are Rich Kenah (’97 World Outdoor bronze medalist in the 800) and Lauryn Williams. Of course, many athletes excel at both.

Jill M. Geer
USATF Director of Communications

Her arguments make perfect sense to me. Besides, if we did have a subjective selection process, who would we trust to make those decisions? If I were a world-class athlete, I'd rather let my performances make those decisions for me than some committee over which I may or may not have any influence. And who could put up with all of the second guessing if the selections that were made resulted in poor showings at championship meets? Those types of irrelevent debates wouldn't be any good for the image of track & field.

Convoluted Selection Process

I love scanning through the "Today's Headlines" section of the Track & Field News home page. It's so low-tech that it's quaint. Still, it is Track & Field News, so it's guaranteed to contain only the most relevant news on the internet. While scanning the headlines just now, I noticed a particularly interesting headline: Jonathan Johnson Still Hoping For Osaka 800 Berth.

Since Johnson finished 4th at the Nationals (only the top 3 in each event go to the world championships), I was curious to find out how he planned on pulling off such a feat.

Of course! The issue of the A/B standard rears its ugly head again. Duane Solomon, who finished third in the race, hasn't met the "A" standard of 1:45.40 required in the men's 800m run by the IAAF for an athlete to qualify for Osaka. If Solomon doesn't reach that standard, but Johnson does, then Solomon stays home and Johnson goes.

I can understand the point of having minimum qualifying standards at national championships, the world championships and the Olympic Games. Elite events such as these with no standards would attract all kinds of athletes who wouldn't be competitive. It's really just a matter of administrative efficiency and marketing. Why have endless qualifying rounds just to sort out the athletes who are virtually pre-determined to be in the finals anyway? Having all of those heats would do nothing but tire all of the athletes, including the elite ones, causing the finals to be anti-climactic. Anti-climactic finals don't do anything for the ratings.

But, if athletes like Johnson can circumvent the selection process, what's the point of have qualifying meets like the national championships in the first place? We either need to do away with the national championships altogether and select the best three athletes in each event based on their times/marks in other meets, or else we need to select only the winners of those meets and not allow any circumventions of the process.

There's something to be said for doing it either way. What is your opinion?

Team USA Selection Process

David Woods, a journalist for the Indy Star, has posted an op-ed about the Darwinian selection process for Team USA. Because Sanya Richards, whom Woods considers to be the "world's best athlete" finished 4th in the women's 400m dash at the U.S. nationals and didn't make the team in that (her best) event, he opines that, "as this sport becomes increasingly competitive internationally, Team USA is ill-served with an all-or-nothing selection process." Does Woods have a point?

For one thing, Richards certainly didn't look like the world's best athlete on Saturday when she faded to a 50.68 finish, over one second behind Dee Dee Trotter's impressive – and world-leading – time of 49.64 seconds. Yes, she has been fighting an illness all spring and no, she's not in top shape right now. What about Trotter, Natasha Hastings (49.84) and Mary Wineberg (50.24) who all finished ahead of Richards Saturday? Should one of their performances be disregarded because of Richards' stellar past and uncertain rest of the season? That certainly wouldn't make sense. Of course, completely disregarding Richards' previous string of 18 consecutive outdoor victories in the 400m doesn't make sense, either.

So what is the best way to overcome this dilemma? Unfortunately for Richards, there seems to be no answer, at least for this season. She will have to just focus on the 200m dash, for which she did qualify for worlds in Osaka. Next season, though, the USATF should take note. By holding the trials from June 27th to July 6th, the athletes are going to have to hold their peaks for at least 40 days. That's tough to do. The athletics events in Beijing begin on August 15th, 40 days after the last trials event is held. Even if you account for travel time and time to allow the athletes to overcome jet-lag, 40 days is way too long for the athletes to maintain their peaks.

This year, the athletes will have had to maintain their peaks for at least 61 days when they compete in Osaka. That's practically impossible. All future trials should be held within 3-4 weeks of the world-championship or Olympic event. That way, a one-shot selection process would make much more sense because no excuses could be made for an athlete not being in shape.

A Jingoistic Rant

You might have noticed that the meet assistants at the 2007 USA Outdoor Track & Field Championships kept shoving Japanese flags in the winners' hands along with an American flag so that they could take their victory laps waving both flags. What kind of statement does that make?

First of all, let me make it clear to any Japanese readers I might have that I have absolutely nothing against Japan or its people. I have nothing but fondness, respect and admiration for Japan and its people and I look forward to watching the upcoming world championships meet in Osaka. But the IAAF World Championships and the Olympic Games are both international (inter= between" and national=of or relating to or belonging to a nation or country) events. In these events athletes who represent their nations compete against other athletes who represent their nations. I ask you, would the Athletes of the Japanese national championships be asked to wave the American flag if the World Championships were to be held in the USA? Of course not. But a spirit of politically-correct globalism seems to have overtaken much of American culture, including, apparently, the USATF National Championships.

What is the purpose of a national flag? According to Wikipedia, "a national flag is a flag that symbolises a country. The flag is flown by the government, but usually can be flown by citizens of that country as well." Notice it doesn't say "citizens of other countries" but "citizens of that country."

Just after an emotional Alan Webb won the men's 1500m run, two meet assistants surrounded him and one of them draped the American flag around his shoulders. One of them also tried to hand him the Japanese flag, but he ignored her. Even though he kept changing directions to try and avoid her, she was persistent and kept calling to him ("Hey! Alan! Alan! You have to...") and kept trying to make him take the flag while a male meet assistant blocked his way. The producers, perhaps realizing they might be showing a potentially compromising scene live, quickly cut away to a replay of the race. During his interview, Webb could be seen holding the Japanese flag, so those assistants did finally get their way. Afterwards, however, he seems to have taken a measure of revenge by irreverently holding the wooden Japanese flagstick between his teeth as he mugged for the camera.

Why the insistence by the event organizers that the athletes wave the flag of another nation? I can't imagine what kind of statement the meet organizers were trying to make. It was obvious that Webb did not want to take the flag. They were wrong to hand out the Japanese flags at the USA National Championships in the first place. They were especially wrong in forcing athletes who were obviously not comfortable doing so to wave another nation's flag. I think Alan Webb would agree with me. Here's the video of the race and the post-race shenanigans by the meet assistants.

Here's some more videos of NBC's coverage of the meet.

Miss Manners Hacks USATF Website?

Obviously Miss Manners has hacked the USATF's National Championships website. What other reason could explain the link I found to an absolutely useless page titled Professionalism? When I saw that link while perusing the Athlete Information page, I clicked on it, expecting to find a codified 232-page manual along the lines of the IAAF Competition Rules, one that covers competition rules, doping, eligibility, and the like. Instead, I found a skimpy, persnickety, useless exercise in overstating the obvious.

It offers a handful of school-marmy tips intended to, "help raise the bar of professional demeanor, attitude, and interaction before, during, and after events." There's no mention of doping, tampering with lab tests, making false starts, or running outside of one's assigned lane like one would expect to find in an overview of professionalism; rather, Miss Manners exhorts athletes to "wear [bibs] in the best place to preserve your uniform's sponsor marks and team name, " and to "thank the sponsors who enable the event to take place." If you haven't read it yet, go ahead and click here. It's mind-boggling.

By far, the most patronizing edict can be found in the "compete like a professional" section. In it, the athletes are berated for having the audacity to worry about their times or marks (isn't that a fundamental aspect of being a track and field athlete?):

"The statistics/results of the competition will be available after the event. It is inappropriate for you to worry about your time at the finish line or your marks from each round in the field. Distance athletes: it looks particularly bad when you stop your watch at the finish--blocking your bib with the sponsor's name on it and the name of your team or country."

Of course! Checking one's Timex for a possible new world record is rude and impertinent! We're selling long-distance service, poultry products and chocolate bars here. How dare an athlete who has just performed a heroic act of extending the limits of human potential insult the sponsor by checking his or her time!

Are you as worried as I am, knowing that "the future of our sport" depends on our athletes' "being [models] for professional manners?" I'm not sure what might have given me this impression, but I thought that the future of our sport depended, not upon the athletes' blocking the sponsors name on their bibs during post-race interviews, but upon greedy athletes not causing the great sport of track and field any further embarrassment, humiliation or irreparable harm by being suspended for doping violations. I stand corrected.

Retirement From Track Can Cause Loss of Faith?

Interesting discussion over on the Track & Field News Message Board (thanks for sharing, EPelle) about an article in the UK's Daily Mail. The article features British Olympian Jonathan Edwards, who – although he has been retired for 4 years– is still the world-record holder in the triple jump. At one point in his career, Edwards – like Eric Liddell from Chariots of Fire fame – refused to compete on Sundays. Now that he has stopped competing, he has entered into a mid-life spiritual crisis:

"I don’t claim to fully understand what I’m feeling, other than to acknowledge that something I never doubted – God – I have huge doubts about now," he revealed.

"This is a hugely complex and deeply personal issue," he said. "I think a basic sense of morality is shared by people of all faiths and none. It would be stupid for me to sit here and say that losing my faith didn’t have anything to do with my retirement. Perhaps I had been shielded from doubt because I had such a highly focused life as an athlete. Then, I asked a few questions that I hadn’t asked before."

I don't envy Edwards' position. The questions he is asking now are the most difficult and important he's ever had to ask, certainly more important than whether or not to compete in a track meet. As difficult as it may be to believe when one is in the middle of a Dark Night of the Soul, sincere questions of doubt are probably much more genuine and conducive to spiritual growth than is a smug certainty that doesn't ask any questions.

BENGAY® Can Kill You?!?

A 17 year old high school cross-country runner from New York died of an apparent overdose of Methyl salicylate, the active ingredient found in many pain-relieving sports balms such as BENGAY® and ICY HOT®. These balms are routinely used by millions of athletes to treat sore muscles and joints. According to the NY Times, "methyl salicylate poisoning is unusual, and deaths from high levels of the chemical are rare." The NY Times article also mentioned that:

'Johnson & Johnson, the makers of BENGAY®, expressed sympathy for the family in a statement.

The company reminded consumers about “the importance of reading the label on this and all over-the-counter medicines to ensure safe and proper use.”'

It appears that this tragedy could have been avoided. Be sure and read those warning labels, folks. Your life could depend on it.

Tom Jordan Blows a Big Chance at History

I should have dug a little deeper before I posted a few minutes ago. Dave Clingan posted a comment over on Masterstrack.com blog revealing that Tom Jordan has made his decision to NOT invite Jim Sorensen to race in the Prefontaine Classic Bowerman Mile. He's reasoning is that inviting Sorensen:

"...doesn't fit in with the Bowerman Mile. We've assembled a full field of sub-3:50 milers, and there really isn't anyone else in the 4-minute category. No HS athletes trying to break 4, for example. Jim would be by himself, running 50-60 meters behind the pack. Not only would that make it very tough to break 4, but it wouldn't be a good show. In my opinion, Jim needs to organize a mile race in the next few weeks that is specifically aimed at his breaking 4-minutes. That will be his best shot."

I don't buy Jordan's reasoning. The ExxonMobil Bislett Games Dream Mile on June 15th will have a field of 18 runners, five more than the start list at Pre. Jordan hasn't "assembled a full field" as he claims.

I put together a chart showing all of the times (in seconds) of the past 10 Bowerman Miles. A 3:59.9 finish (in bold), which is what Sorensen hopes to accomplish, would have finished as high as 8th place and never would have finished last in comparison to actual historical times. Not only that, but there have been as many as 17 contestants in the past. None of Jordan's reasons for declining to invite Sorensen seem to hold any water:

Let's hope that the entire field can rise to the occasion and not prove Jordan wrong. If the history of the Bowerman mile is any indication, quite a few runners will run in the 3:58 to 4:10 range. If that's the case, as it probably will be, then he'll need to explain why he doesn't seem to support the masters track and field community, which – I might add – is a HUGE part of the track and field fan base in the United States. Jordan just might be shooting himself – and U.S. track and field – in the foot.

An African Advantage in Athletics?

Ken Stone from Masters Track writes with a challenge: "OK, here's a subject that should generate interest: Are sprinters descended from West Africa naturally superior to all others? Are distance runners with roots in East Africa naturally superior to all others?"

Thanks for the question Ken. This is a sensitive and controversial topic. Author Jon Entine, in his book Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We're Afraid to Talk About It (PublicAffairs, 2001), writes that, "anyone who attempts to breach this taboo to study or even discuss what might be behind the growing performance gap between black and white athletes must be prepared to run a gauntlet of public scorn, survival not guaranteed."

Even so, the proof would seem to be overwhelmingly in the affirmative. This article from 2002, discussing the positive impact of black athletes in the sport of bobsledding states that "athletes of West African ancestry... hold 494 of the 500 top, all-time, 100-meter times." A quick look at the top list on Peter Larsson's fabulous statistics database shows that this fact still holds true in 2007.

Jon Entine states in this article that "every men's world record at every commonly-run track distance belongs to a runner of African descent." Take a look at the chart (in the section titled The Rise of the African Athlete) to see for yourself. All but a handful of world records are held by athletes of West or East African descent. (Note: the article was written in the late 1990s. Six of the records on the chart have since been broken, 4 by East Africans, 1 by a West African, and 1 by an Chinese Asian.) Proof like that, again, would seem to be incontrovertible.

Not everyone agrees, including sociologist Harry Edwards of University of California/Berkeley:

"What really is being said in a kind of underhanded way... is that blacks are closer to beasts and animals in terms of their genetic and physical and anatomical make up than they are to the rest of humanity. And that's where the indignity comes in."

Indignity, or incontrovertible proof? I've presented both sides. I'll leave it to you to make your own decision. If you want to dig a little deeper into this subject, including taking a look into the science, here's a good place to start.

Doping in Track and Field Should Be Legal

Fred writes with this challenge:

"This one is multi-faceted: choose one, two or all three:

1. Pick an element of the sport you'd rather not write about, and write about it (political, cultural, long-term effects on the athletes' health, positive effects of doping, etc).

2. Write a T/F op-ed that is convincing but antithetical to your own beliefs.

3. Explain the relative lack of interest in T/F (and in other more European sports, like soccer and rugby) in the U.S.

Must be a long weekend. I'm feeling a bit contrarian today."

Okay, you rascal, I'm going to something that goes against my better judgement. I'm going to try writing that fictional op-ed you suggested.

[DISCLAIMER] THIS IS A WORK OF FICTION. THE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS POST MOST DEFINITELY DO NOT EXPRESS THE OPINIONS OF FINISH LINE PUNDIT.[/DISCLAIMER]

Doping in Track and Field Should Be Legal. There, I said it. Either that, or a long list of current devices and aids that artificially improve a track and field athlete's performance should also be banned: starting blocks, synthetic track surfaces, fiberglass poles, pits, heart-rate monitors, electrolyte replacements drinks, running tights, Goretex, orthotics, legs, the list goes on and on.

Wait a minute. Did you say legs?

The IAAF's Competition Rules 2006-2007 repeatedly mention the concept of "unfair advantage to the athlete."

Doping is the use by or distribution to an athlete of certain substances which could have the effect of improving artificially the athlete's physical and/or mental condition and so augmenting his athletic performance.
In short, doping is normally aimed at (at least) six aspects that a competitor needs to surpass the limits of human capability. They are improvement in speed, strength, endurance, mental attitude, coordination and the relief of pain.
A "dope" or 'doping substance" thus is any drug or drug preparation which is used with the intention of modifying advantageously such human capability to perform.

A "Bullet" or a "Skeets"?

When you read about Justin Gatlin's tryout with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, you might recall "Bullet" Bob Hayes, the world-record holder and Olympic gold medalist in the 100m dash who went on to have a fine career as a receiver for the Dallas Cowboys. Or you might remember Renaldo "Skeets" Nehemiah, the phenomenal hurdler who was the first man to run the 110m hurdles in under 13 seconds and then went on to do a bunch of nothing with the San Francisco 49ers before returning to track and breaking 4 more records.

Does Gatlin have a shot? With a 4.1 time in the 40 yard dash,
Gatlin would be the fastest man on the gridiron. Not only that, but Houston Texans coach Gary Kubiak has said that Gatlin "did catch the ball pretty good" in his tryout with the Texans last year. But the NFL has an image problem they're trying to overcome. Chances are, NFL commish Roger Goodell is going to sprint away from Gatlin. Goodell already has enough problems from which he would like to run away.