Athletics Weekly | New IAAF ratification rules will result in scrapping of most historical records - Athletics Weekly

New IAAF ratification rules will result in scrapping of most historical records

This topic contains 115 replies, has 29 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of dpickup dpickup 2 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 16 posts - 101 through 116 (of 116 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #71353
    Profile photo of dpickup
    dpickup
    Participant

    Whoever looks at WRs or does not look at WRs, the ‘fact’ is that records have always had their place. And always, however roughly in the past, those observing and recording the records have tried to do an accurate and exact job of capturing the performance.

    If the world Body for athletics was perhaps less accurate and exact in capturing performances in the past, including in the 1980s-1990s, when it comes to the drugs aspect, so be it – the past! What other tricks are the druggies up to now to evade detection?

    Meanwhile 4 recent WRs, all women, particularly pleased me:
    400r 40 82 USA 10 08 12
    1500 3 50 07 Dibaba ETH 17 07 15
    100h 12 20 Harrison USA 22 07 16
    10000 29 17 45 Ayana ETH 12 08 16

    Why? They each made an inroad into the ‘dodgy 80s/90s’ era’s WRs.

    #71356
    Profile photo of justrunfast
    justrunfast
    Participant

    @larkim

    When watching on TV or reading about it in the press (which is where most non-hardcore fans will learn about the sport) what most fans would want to see is good quality competition. Which is why the m100m final was eagerly anticpated this year in London (no-one in their right minds thought the WR was in any danger).

    People were interested because it was Bolt’s last race, like you didn’t know this stop missing out key information.

    • This reply was modified 2 months, 2 weeks ago by Profile photo of justrunfast justrunfast.
    #71358
    Profile photo of justrunfast
    justrunfast
    Participant

    @larkim

    And I also don’t thin we can ever realistically expect interest in athletics to extend much beyond the Olympics and the World Champs. And t’was ever thus.

    You know this isn’t true and if this is the case tell the IAAF this why are they coming up with all these new proposals.

    #71365
    Profile photo of levitasverum
    LevitasVerum
    Participant

    There’s something magical about being “there” when a new record was set, be it a county, championship, national, continental or world record.

    Athletics is the elite sport. Pure and simple.

    A new category of world record is required to help “shut up” the haters and doubters within and outside our sport who continually whine about doping without taking any responsibility for funding a system of robust anti doping controls at all levels from junior to Elite.

    #71366
    Profile photo of larkim
    larkim
    Participant

    @larkim

    When watching on TV or reading about it in the press (which is where most non-hardcore fans will learn about the sport) what most fans would want to see is good quality competition. Which is why the m100m final was eagerly anticpated this year in London (no-one in their right minds thought the WR was in any danger).

    People were interested because it was Bolt’s last race, like you didn’t know this stop missing out key information.

    @larkim

    And I also don’t thin we can ever realistically expect interest in athletics to extend much beyond the Olympics and the World Champs. And t’was ever thus.

    You know this isn’t true and if this is the case tell the IAAF this why are they coming up with all these new proposals.

    I wrote what I wrote. Don’t presume to tell me what I do or don’t know to be true, please.

    IAAF has a vested interest in driving UP interest in athletics, no matter what state it is currently in. And IAAF didn’t come up with the idea of the WR reset, that was the Eurpoean federation.

    As for the interest in Bolt – you make my point for me. People weren’t tuning in for WR interest, they were tuning in because of interest in the race. “Would Bolt win in his final race” “Would Gatlin win as a drug cheat” etc etc. Not “Will he break the record”.

    Even if WRs were indisputably “clean”, it would be truly rare championship or season where many WRs were under threat – a WR is by definition the best performance ever, and if punters are looking for that every time there is a major games they will always be sadly disappointed.

    WRs are a distraction from the fundamental issues of how to ensure that both the individuals competing and the spectacle itself are worthy of air-time or attendance in person. Yes, the “doped” results are a huge irritation for those who follow the sport, but given the huge cynicism around any outstanding performance (even, in some cases such as Farah, where their performances are quite some way off all time best times) the point surely is that all involved in the sport TODAY need to be sorting out transparency and doping compliance TODAY, and not worrying about whether some butch East German was doped to the eyeballs making it “unfair” on today’s competitors.

    #71370
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    The sport doesn’t need to re-write the record books. That will have little or no effect on who turns up to watch, in my opinion.

    Domestically we need one or two more athletes to get the adrenaline going. We are relying on too few big names to put bums on seats. Laura Muir and Dasher generate plenty of interest, but we desperately need a middle distance man, a thrower, a jumper etc who can excite the crowd. Especially now Mo has gone.

    OK we have plenty of decent domestic sprinters, male and female, but that is too narrow. GB needs headliners in a few more events.

    #71371
    Profile photo of levitasverum
    LevitasVerum
    Participant

    A reset of world records, (to help future proof against the real and imagined druggies), will give current and future athletes (i.e. the real stars of the show) a realistic opportunity to earn significant performance related bonuses. State sponsored doping programmes has robbed past, current and future athletes. We should do something to remove this glaring injustice, IMHO.

    #71372
    Profile photo of larkim
    larkim
    Participant

    I’m not suggesting there is no merit at all in resetting the records. But I’ve not seen / heard any “fair” way of doing it.

    Reset as of 1st Jan 2018, and you end up with “WR” performances that are, by most objective views, sub-par.

    Reset as of any arbitrary day in the past and you condemn all of those records, including ones which are (at least on balance) viewed as clean, and devalue the sport accordingly.

    Resetting each one individually after some sort of hearing / investigation / judgement by the IAAF – a massive can of worms which would end up mired in legal challenge and outcomes based on supposition rather than evidence.

    On balance, I think leave as is. Move on, and concentrate on other ways of making the sport engaging and compelling.

    #71373
    Profile photo of dpickup
    dpickup
    Participant

    Levitasverum
    You suggest ‘There’s something magical about being “there” when a new record was set’. I’d add that I feel there is something ‘magical’ when a new record has been set, even if one isn’t even present at the record setting itself.

    I do confirm though that competition too is ‘magical’ even when no records are set.

    Sadly both WRs and competitions have been drug-infiltrated.

    However to rejig the current WR list is not the answer. We have to live with a perhaps / a likely tainted list. Gradually the ‘likely taints’ are being surpassed.

    At the Championship level at least some cleaning has occurred with many druggies ousted from podium places. A pity that the athletes moved up as a result didn’t enjoy the right podium glory on THE day.

    Larkim
    I agree, reset is a no goer.

    #71376
    Profile photo of levitasverum
    LevitasVerum
    Participant

    Larkim,
    Doing nothing is unfair, to all past, current and future athletes. In fact it is a cancer killing the credibility of our sport.

    Sadly when removing a cancer, one has to be ready to take action which will cause the least harm rather than none at all.

    IMHO there is a clear demarcation line which would cause harm to the least number of people:
    Has an authenticated sample been preserved for future testing; yes or no?

    If yes, the world record stands.
    If no, the world record falls because it can never be proven to be clean.

    dpickup
    This is do-able. It will send out a clear message to the real druggies, their supporters and the fanbase. And more importantly, it gives current athletes a massive incentive to work towards achieving realistic and resilient World Records.

    F1 changes regulations every couple of years and the teams just get on with it. We should do the same in Athletics :yes:

    #71377
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    Larkim,
    Doing nothing is unfair, to all past, current and future athletes. In fact it is a cancer killing the credibility of our sport.

    Sadly when removing a cancer, one has to be ready to take action which will cause the least harm rather than none at all.

    IMHO there is a clear demarcation line which would cause harm to the least number of people:
    Has an authenticated sample been preserved for future testing; yes or no?

    If yes, the world record stands.
    If no, the world record falls because it can never be proven to be clean.

    dpickup
    This is do-able. It will send out a clear message to the real druggies, their supporters and the fanbase. And more importantly, it gives current athletes a massive incentive to work towards achieving realistic and resilient World Records.

    F1 changes regulations every couple of years and the teams just get on with it. We should do the same in Athletics :yes:

    Some interesting points, and I’m nearly swayed by the ‘authenticated sample’ argument.

    But I still don’t buy into the reasoning that by re-setting some world records the interest levels in athletics will be boosted. I just fail to see that it would make any difference.
    Therefore we could penalise some genuine record holders for no good reason.

    #71378
    Profile photo of levitasverum
    LevitasVerum
    Participant

    SteveK,
    IMHO people really want to believe again in what they are paying good money to see when they go to an athletics meet. They need to know that should they be one of the lucky few to witness the achievement of a world record, that “magical” once in a lifetime experience will be future-proofed against the cheats who have almost killed our sport.

    #71390
    Profile photo of justrunfast
    justrunfast
    Participant

    As for the interest in Bolt – you make my point for me. People weren’t tuning in for WR interest, they were tuning in because of interest in the race. “Would Bolt win in his final race” “Would Gatlin win as a drug cheat” etc etc. Not “Will he break the record”.

    So you think the same amount of people will turn up now Bolt has gone? Like I said people are thinking from the inside out, even Seb Coe has said how much of a loss he will be to the sport. People were in disbelief how badly the attendance was at the british trials, you really don’t think it would be any better if say for example three world record holders were competing? Why are we sitting on this forum and acting like world record holders don’t improve attendances? It’s literally how meets promote ALL the time. “Three World Leaders and world record holder competing at XXXX”

    The world champs and olympics cover over the absolute potholes in our sport and we all know this why does it keep getting mentioned?

    #71401
    Profile photo of ursus
    Ursus
    Participant

    Interest is generated by good competition between well matched athletes with some degree of unpredictability just as much as it might be by a dominant individual achieving world record performances.

    Disagree. The armchair fans and TV companies want the spectacular. Afficiandos less so, but for the majority it’s the big performances that capture the imagination.

    Are Coe and Ovett best remembered for swapping records or their medals?

    Beamon. It was the distance. End of.

    Bolt drew the crowds because he redefined his events. All the rest of the fluff would have been irrelevant had he not done that.

    Would the average viewer remember who won the 2017 womens’s VLM? I can’t, but I can remember the 2003 winner and their time.

    Etc

    That said you either leave as is or you go for a total reset across all events at a future date. I’d like to do the latter, but there’s clearly still huge amounts of cheating, so I reluctantly favour the status quo.

    #71406
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    Its not just the prospect of spectacular performances that fills the stadia though, is it.
    Any record, world or national, is a bonus.

    The reason most people go (IMO) is to cheer on their favourites, whether because they know them or because they are ‘flag wavers’ (like me).

    I didn’t go to all the Championships abroad I visited just to see great performances or records. I went to cheer on GB mainly, and that is why I would still go today. I still enjoyed the athletics whether or not a GB athlete won, and was in awe of some of the great International performers. But that wasn’t what motivated me.

    Visit a foreign country, enjoy some lovely weather, see the sites, cheer on your ‘team’, have a few beers with some mates. Who has to have a world record?

    #71408
    Profile photo of dpickup
    dpickup
    Participant

    On the one hand what draws people to football?

    On the other hand very few watch rifle shooting for instance I guess

    Where between those two does track & field fir? And why?

    Some events in track & field have perhaps never, for the general public, had a super-star eg Zelezny is popular in CZE, and the close fans know how super he was, and god, the men’s spears go so so far and so so high …

    Is 4 x 100 relay ever not interesting?

    Ovett v Coe worked because they did beat records and they didn’t meet often so when they did …

    Seeing Bob Beamon jump 8.95 really won’t look any different to seeing John Smith jump 7.95.

    Can that be said for all the jumps and all the throws?

    Jesse Owens was a highlight in Berlin because he was black, not Aryan Hitler white and included a LJ win over a good white German

    British Mo is followed because he repeatedly beats all those from the two countries that ‘have always’ won his events

    Bolt is followed because he is seen as unbeatable (& was for so many years) – and is naturally warm & extrovert with the public

    Jessica Ennis mixed a polite, warm manner with a steel determination, and people somehow picked up on that divide in her and admired it

    Super-stars, by definition, only appear ooccasionally

    We, whether informed-fans or the general public, can pick to choose from personalities, close clashes, the Championships, records, and each Season’s surprises. A good commentator on the Media can help too eg I rate Cram for instance, but how to the general public react to him?

Viewing 16 posts - 101 through 116 (of 116 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Product Reviews View All
Don't Miss
Videos
AW Offers