Athletics Canada's Apparent Albatross

November 1, 2009

There is a stirring of athletes and involved personalities, gently rustling the jib of the Canadian cross-country scene. This is happening right now at a well-known Canadian running forum. The parties appear to be organizing, in their attempts to sway Athletics Canada (AC) brass to hand over management of the national cross-country team to them, at least for one year. The proposal? Well it is in the works as they say, swirling in virtual dialogue.

The athletes, coaches and interested parties appear to be developing their mission schematics in ad-hoc discussions; the ideology is mired in the early stages of development. This public discussion may cause AC to simply dig in their heels. They hold the purse strings and the policy to boot; it’s called being in the position of power.

It is the athlete’s place it seems to fight their organizing body of sport, they who decide to or decide not to send an athlete or a team to international competition. Canadian athletes have attempted in the past to approach AC with a protest of sorts; they were firmly rebuffed. Subsequently wars of words continue to simmer on about such items as qualification standards, budgets, mandatory training camps, wording of legalese, grassroots development and required attendance to specific events.

AC indicate on their website that their purpose is “the pursuit of leadership, development and competition that ensures world-level performance in athletics. The association believes in physical health and fitness, individual excellence and personal growth, individual development beyond sport, as well as inclusiveness and integrity”.

It appears that although performance levels have improved in Canada recently, there is not enough of that world level caliber coming to fruition just yet; otherwise AC would be sending more athletes to international competition. At least that is how the wording appears.

To quote one particular oldster from this discussion:

“I think AC's sharpest critics (of which I am one, it's no secret) acknowledged a few pages ago (in this thread) that no group that actually wants to remain relevant can actually hope to usurp AC’s control over any program covered by its administrative mandate. What some of us were envisioning at one point is that it might be convinced to concede some of this control over the X-C program, since it doesn't appear all that interested in it, apart from setting stricter standards and exhorting Canadian athletes to "be faster" (when, as a supposedly expert body in the sport, it should know that quality is a function of over all depth, not the isolated efforts of a handful of individuals who are probably already training really hard; but that's another story). Since it probably never will cede this kind of control, some of us began envisioning a way to help fund this team FOR AC, on the model of the WC marathon project.”

In reply, one well-respected international athlete who serves a volunteer position with AC countered the above and other slung arrows with the following:

“It's really easy to sit on the message boards and cry that the taxpayer paid administrators simply have a "basic instinct for institutional survival." Those are some pretty harsh words directed at many of the leaders in AC who, prior to being paid by the taxpayer, have done the same hundreds and thousands of hours of free volunteer work that coaches such as yourself do. On top of the paid staff such as Martin, Alex, and Scott, there are countless others who volunteer in the committee structure or on the board of directors who, in addition, continue to volunteer in our sport outside of the board/committee rooms. So you'll have to excuse the "tone" of those who also have a passion and love for the sport take to your complaints, when you start accusing them of having narrow visions, technocratic arrogance, and disdain for democracy.”

On performance

Canada’s athletics future, in terms of performance, looks a little rosier today than it has in a decade or more. The athletes coming up now are no less or more talented than those in the past, the difference is in the commitment to training and volume - what is old, is new again.

Throughout the US there is an upswing in performance at regional and national cross-country and on the track and roads, including the marathon. The low-mileage and high anaerobic intensity of the 1990s is falling away to aerobic development first – again. For example a NCAA Division 1 athlete from California told me that the first two weeks of school was spent running 10 to 15 miles every morning in the desert, with a second run in the afternoon: “20 miles-per-day, everyday to develop the aerobic system first.” This may be a small indication of better training practice, and results are indeed coming around. Canada’s trends often follows suit on the heels of our southern neighbours.

Reid Coolsaet has run 10, 000m in 27:56’92, Simon Bairu’s streak of National cross-country titles are a good showing. Even marathon performances are a little deeper; there certainly is a larger and younger group at this near-international level, headed by Dylan Wykes’ 2:15’16 marathon result from Rotterdam.

The Canadian athletes who are debating AC’s engagement are looking for a world stage to perform on, in order to expose this rising performance level to higher competition – to raise the bar, as it were. According to AC they need to witness this higher level before sending athletes forth. We can all assume if the athletes become capable of mixing it up on the world stage, AC would be remiss in not sending them to the highest level of competition. Will it happen?

The proverbial chicken and egg question comes up yet again. What comes first the performance or the exposure to a higher level of competition?

Steve Moneghetti, arguably Australia’s greatest marathon runner, was twice appointed to the Australian team to run the marathon. The first time he was selected was for the 1986 Edinburgh Commonwealth Games where he won a bronze medal. The second time was to run in the Seoul, Olympic Marathon. He had not even run a marathon before Edinburgh. Athletics Australia gave Moneghetti the green light based on his performance over shorter distances. The second time he was appointed he didn’t do so well having one of those inexplicable bad days we all run into eventually. Later that season he went on to break the world half-marathon record for the second time in Tokyo, Japan; so, he demonstrated he was capable regardless. Good decision by Athletics Australia.

A couple years ago I compared Switzerland’s Viktor Rothlin’s performances to Athletics Canada’s Osaka World Track and Field Championships selection criteria and although he went on to win bronze in Osaka, he would not have qualified for that marathon had he been Canadian. In fact, neither would Jon Brown, a man who had finished seconds from bronze in the previous two Olympic marathons and still holds the UK 10, 000m record today (27:18’14).

So is it the money?

Approximately sixty percent of participants in road races are over the age of 45. They are the boomer generation. Depending on whose boomer theory you subscribe to they are born in 1964 or 1966 and earlier. Canada’s David K. Foot, PhD and author of Boom Bust and Echo goes by the latter (Canada’s boom was slightly different than Europe’s and the US).

Although you will find 10, 000 people on the downtown streets of the cities of Ottawa, Vancouver, Victoria or Toronto engaging in those city’s respective marathons and 50, 000 participating in the Vancouver Sun Run 10k, what is fascinating is not only how many people pay to run, but how much money the average destination marathon runner spends to toil in their hobby.

Jerry Agrusa, PhD. Professor of Travel Industry Management at Hawaii Pacific University conducted some math wizardry and found that 28,635 runners, walkers, and family and friends who came specifically for the 2006 Honolulu Marathon accounted for $101,590,000 in visitor spending and generated $4.6 million in state taxes, an increase in visitor spending as well as taxes generated for both the city of Honolulu and the state of Hawaii, this, from one marathon. There is no doubt that the boomer generation is also the consumer generation.

According to Ahotu Marathon dot com in any given year there are at least 46 marathons in Canada. There are many more road races of various distances. By smartly attracting the boomer hordes to register, the shoe companies, travel agencies and supplement suppliers have found a rich market to tap. Why hasn’t Athletics Canada?

The dubious effort of knocking on AC’s door with a proposal to alleviate them of the apparent albatross - in having to handle elite cross-country runners pining to go to international competition on the public’s dime - may just be a wasted effort, as while the performances are now coming up, athletes in theory will earn pass to the world stage, one would think.

Let’s do some arbitrary math:

Let’s sample a rough estimate of paid registrations from a handful of well-known Canadian road races. Vancouver Sun Run, Victoria Times Colonist 10k, the Toronto Marathons (there are two), Ottawa Marathon, Vancouver International Marathon, Marathon des Deux Rives, and the Royal Victoria Marathon together total approximately 130, 000 entrants. If AC asks for $1 from every sanctioned road race registration in the country, this would bolster the coffers enough, I assume, to send a full compliment of athletes to the IAAF World Cross-Country Championships plus a little may be left over for grassroots development.

Grassroots development is paramount to the continued success of any sport. In my opinion, it should be incumbent upon AC to make sure junior development is funded and qualified athletes are given every opportunity to perform at the best possible level. They are the future of running and better performances should yield greater opportunity.

I’d pay an extra $1 on each of my race entries to help send athletes to IAAF World Cross-Country Championships or any other international competition and to help fund junior development.

Maybe, just maybe, the vocal few who aim to organize collectively for the benefit of this country’s racing future will approach AC with a well thought out plan and to that, AC should listen.

Contact Chris: chriskelsall@flocasts.org

Post a Comment

#10	Anonymous Coward November 5 at 9:22am I think the poster below is just trying to stir the pot, or is just incapable of interpreting the criteria. reply
#9	Anonymous Coward November 4 at 6:08pm You are creating the abiguity. No where does it say that the B standard is the repeat performance. There is no paticular order you have to make standards in, just make them in the qualifying period. Don't blame AC for an athletes failure to fully read the rules book...or if there is any question after reading, seek an answer from AC. Nate, DID NOT READ the criteria or the rules book. reply
#8	Anonymous Coward November 4 at 5:40pm The ambiguity came from the word "repeated", which has a very specific meaning in the context of the selection criteria. The implication from the wording is that he needed to hit an A-standard 1500m performance once and that the mile time would suffice only for satisfying the repeat performance criterion. reply
#7	Jones Abraham November 4 at 5:08pm lets see what nate had to say after heusden Nate Brannen 1500 Heusden Get the Flash Player to see this player. reply
#6	Anonymous Coward November 4 at 3:54pm You are incorrect. Heusden was always on his schedule. And, he likely didn't tweak the hamstring too bad as he went on to race in London (mile) a few days later. Cetainly, if the hamstring was not well he should have pulled out of London. In the selection criteria it states that selection is according to the rules in the National Team Selection Rule Book. It is the responsibility of every athlete and coach to read the rule book. You should do the same. In said rule book it states: Where allowed by the Selection Criteria and relevant Games and/or international approval organizer, for the 1500m event, converted mile performances to 1500m, based on IAAF Scoring Tables equivalencies, will be accepted for the purpose of achieving repeated “A” or “B”standards. Converted standard performances are acceptable regardless of any electronic performance which may be recorded at the 1500m mark. reply
#5	Anonymous Coward November 4 at 1:42pm I believe Nate did add an race to his schedule (Heusden) in an attempt to hit a 1500 time. Ironically enough, it was here that he tweaked a hamstring, and was nursing that leading up/at the world champs. FACT is he added a race in an effort to hit a standard. Was it explicitly stated in the criteria that mile conversions were acceptable? Nate seems like a smart guy, I doubt he'd miss that in the criteria. reply
#4	Anonymous Coward November 4 at 9:20am Canadian running D1 said: “AC will never care about Jr. development. All they will ever care about is there appearance on the world stage....and what they don't understand is that begins with Jr. development, they will never care about the athletes. Take what happened to Nat Brennan before the world championships this summer. His Mile time he ran at the Pre Classic ranked him in the top 5 in the world going into the world champs...but because he had not run the "AC" 15 standard he was still not selected to run the 15 at worlds. Forcing Nat to stay over seas trying to find/chase a fast 15. instead of being back home and gearing up for a 15 at worlds which he clearly belonged in. Simple put AC doesn't care! Give our top level athletes exposure on the world stage and you will get results...but clearly they don't understand this.” Get you facts straight. Nate commented on NUMEROUS occasions that he was not changing his racing plans, and he did not attempt to CHASE the standard. His plans ALWAYS included staying in Europe to race during the summer....that's where the PROFESSIONALS compete in the summer! And, if you read AC's selection criteria, mile conversions WERE ALLOWED. reply
#3	Uh No November 4 at 9:01am Nate ran in the heats and the semi-final. He didn't make the final. That's not the same thing as not running. reply
#2	Shookie November 4 at 9:01am whoooooooooo cares? reply
#1	Canadian Running D1 November 4 at 8:28am AC will never care about Jr. development. All they will ever care about is there appearance on the world stage....and what they don't understand is that begins with Jr. development, they will never care about the athletes. Take what happened to Nat Brennan before the world championships this summer. His Mile time he ran at the Pre Classic ranked him in the top 5 in the world going into the world champs...but because he had not run the "AC" 15 standard he was still not selected to run the 15 at worlds. Forcing Nat to stay over seas trying to find/chase a fast 15. instead of being back home and gearing up for a 15 at worlds which he clearly belonged in. Simple put AC doesn't care! Give our top level athletes exposure on the world stage and you will get results...but clearly they don't understand this. reply