Wednesday, September 08, 2004
One step forward, one step back.
Anyone associated with US distance running could not have been disappointed by the showings this year at Athens. It seems just a few years ago, people were saying that the US would never win another medal in the marathon. The sport was dominated by Africans who organized the athletes, trained harder, and prioritized the event. I would have been among these voices. Some people would even go so far as to claim . . . the Africans have some mysterious biological advantage over the US. Greater lung capacity? Training in intense heat? I never went quite so far. But all this is so much rubbish after Athens.
It was a sight to remember to see the pace pick up, and watch only three men chase the leader (Vanderlei de Lima): Stefano Baldini, the eventual winner; Paul Tergat, the world record-holder; and unheralded US runner Meb Keflezighi.
Funny, you say, that name doesn't sound American. Correct: Keflezighi emigrated as a kid to the US. So one would think the argument would still hold: the US can't get it done unless an African emigrates here. I still disagree, and my only point of proof is Alan Culpepper. Culpepper, who entered the race in less than ideal condition, ran a smart race on a tough course in warm weather. He finished 12th, less than 45 seconds off Tergat. I think people in the know would have a hard time finding anyone who predicted a US born and bred runner would come so close to a legendary runner like Tergat on such a course.
To be fair, Tergat hasn't had a great year. But that doesn't cover the fact that two US runnes ran the first decent international marathon in many years. And all this back-and-forth seems to discount that Keflezighi is an American citizen. He lives and trains here. If people can drop the idiotic biological argument, they'd realize what a statement his marathon was.
When asked after the race, if the US finish was a surprise, Culpepper took relish in saying "No." Damn right, "No." The US wasn't hopelessly behind the rest of the world for any other reason than hard work. Culpepper knows that, and he knows how hard he worked to finish where he did.
This is not to say that all is suddenly right with US distance running. For an example of what is wrong with our approach to distance running, simply turn to the third US marathon entrant, Dan Browne. Browne, who qualified in both the 10K and marathon, decided to run both races. Keflezighi also qualified for each race; he declined running the 10K. How did Browne run? Hard to tell, as the camera never made it that far back the pack. You could see him come in, though. He stopped several times before jogging into the stadium. Seems that 10K (in which he finished 12th) weighed on his legs. So as positive a marathon as the US had, take a look runners, coaches, viewers-- the current symbol of US distance running selfishness, Dan Browne. When asked if he regretted doubling, Browne, of course, said "No." Rather than let someone else actually make an impact, he balanced himself on the shaky claim that he "earned it."
It's better to burn out than fade away, and Browne faded from the moment he qualified, the moment he "earned" anything.
Beyond the races, the US commenting could use an entire overhaul. (Although one must appreciate NBC for giving us pseudo-live coverage.) During the women's race, the commentators actually stopped speaking for a minute, "to pay homage to the hill" the runners were covering. Idiocy. During the men's marathon, one of the yapping idiots said, "With that wind in their faces, they had a nice breeze. Now that the course has shifted, the wind is at their backs, which is going to make things warm for the runners. We may see the pace slow." I don't think I need to waste web space explaining what a tailwind does for a runner. Suffice to simply state that the pace soon dropped.
Beyond that, the announcers seemed genuinely shocked, during the women's marathon, when Deena Kastor, who ran an even race, moved into third. "She took the conservative approach," one of the yapping idiots, who must have never attempted this approach, said. There was all this blather about running her own race and "hoping" the other runners would come back. Funny, "hope" hasn't been awarded the bronze before . . .
The announcers monumentally misrepresented the men's race. The coverage made it seem as if the bizarre attack on Lima caused him to lose the race. While what happened was inexcusable and shocking, they should have been reporting on how Baldini and Keflezighi were already seriously gaining on Lima. While they should lock that protestor up and force him to run a marathon every day around the prison yard, it was really only a matter of time before Lima would be caught. You wouldn't have known it from the coverage.
But to me, the worst point of the television coverage came at the very end of the men's race. Baldini and Keflezighi had passed Lima, and Baldini had made a move on Keflezighi, knowing he didn't want a sprint to the finish. With just a couple miles to go, the clock showed Keflezighi had picked up his pursuit of Baldini with a 4:29 mile. They never once commented on how hard Keflezighi was going. Moreover, they didn't even mention that Baldini was matching that pace. As hard as Keflezighi could go, Baldini simply would not be denied. What did they talk about? Basically, they lamented the attack on Lima, and they celebrated the fact that an American was in the top three. For all a random viewer could tell, the American had won. "That Italian up there, oh, he was just the fastest."
Mebrahtom KEFLEZIGHI (USA)- silver medalist, on winning silver:
"I came to do what I did. I had a strategy of being up front because there are a lot of good guys out there. I got there and I did it."
On his break:
"I felt good after one hour, 10 minutes, so I thought why not me, why not me?"
On the competition:
"I was delighted to get the silver. Finally my hard work paid off. It was my goal for the whole year. It was a great race".
Stefano BALDINI (ITA) - Gold medalist, on any difficulties faced out on the course:
"The problem is the weather, not the course. I like this kind of uphill and downhill course. It suits me."
On if he thinks he would have won even if LIMA hadn't been attacked:
"Yes. I believe I would have won anyway. I would have caught him 1km later, but I would have caught him up. When the incident happened, I was running at a rhythm 20 seconds faster than he was".
On if he objects to the thought that LIMA should receive a second gold medal:
"This is a problem for the organizing committee and not me. I ran my race".
It was a sight to remember to see the pace pick up, and watch only three men chase the leader (Vanderlei de Lima): Stefano Baldini, the eventual winner; Paul Tergat, the world record-holder; and unheralded US runner Meb Keflezighi.
Funny, you say, that name doesn't sound American. Correct: Keflezighi emigrated as a kid to the US. So one would think the argument would still hold: the US can't get it done unless an African emigrates here. I still disagree, and my only point of proof is Alan Culpepper. Culpepper, who entered the race in less than ideal condition, ran a smart race on a tough course in warm weather. He finished 12th, less than 45 seconds off Tergat. I think people in the know would have a hard time finding anyone who predicted a US born and bred runner would come so close to a legendary runner like Tergat on such a course.
To be fair, Tergat hasn't had a great year. But that doesn't cover the fact that two US runnes ran the first decent international marathon in many years. And all this back-and-forth seems to discount that Keflezighi is an American citizen. He lives and trains here. If people can drop the idiotic biological argument, they'd realize what a statement his marathon was.
When asked after the race, if the US finish was a surprise, Culpepper took relish in saying "No." Damn right, "No." The US wasn't hopelessly behind the rest of the world for any other reason than hard work. Culpepper knows that, and he knows how hard he worked to finish where he did.
This is not to say that all is suddenly right with US distance running. For an example of what is wrong with our approach to distance running, simply turn to the third US marathon entrant, Dan Browne. Browne, who qualified in both the 10K and marathon, decided to run both races. Keflezighi also qualified for each race; he declined running the 10K. How did Browne run? Hard to tell, as the camera never made it that far back the pack. You could see him come in, though. He stopped several times before jogging into the stadium. Seems that 10K (in which he finished 12th) weighed on his legs. So as positive a marathon as the US had, take a look runners, coaches, viewers-- the current symbol of US distance running selfishness, Dan Browne. When asked if he regretted doubling, Browne, of course, said "No." Rather than let someone else actually make an impact, he balanced himself on the shaky claim that he "earned it."
It's better to burn out than fade away, and Browne faded from the moment he qualified, the moment he "earned" anything.
Beyond the races, the US commenting could use an entire overhaul. (Although one must appreciate NBC for giving us pseudo-live coverage.) During the women's race, the commentators actually stopped speaking for a minute, "to pay homage to the hill" the runners were covering. Idiocy. During the men's marathon, one of the yapping idiots said, "With that wind in their faces, they had a nice breeze. Now that the course has shifted, the wind is at their backs, which is going to make things warm for the runners. We may see the pace slow." I don't think I need to waste web space explaining what a tailwind does for a runner. Suffice to simply state that the pace soon dropped.
Beyond that, the announcers seemed genuinely shocked, during the women's marathon, when Deena Kastor, who ran an even race, moved into third. "She took the conservative approach," one of the yapping idiots, who must have never attempted this approach, said. There was all this blather about running her own race and "hoping" the other runners would come back. Funny, "hope" hasn't been awarded the bronze before . . .
The announcers monumentally misrepresented the men's race. The coverage made it seem as if the bizarre attack on Lima caused him to lose the race. While what happened was inexcusable and shocking, they should have been reporting on how Baldini and Keflezighi were already seriously gaining on Lima. While they should lock that protestor up and force him to run a marathon every day around the prison yard, it was really only a matter of time before Lima would be caught. You wouldn't have known it from the coverage.
But to me, the worst point of the television coverage came at the very end of the men's race. Baldini and Keflezighi had passed Lima, and Baldini had made a move on Keflezighi, knowing he didn't want a sprint to the finish. With just a couple miles to go, the clock showed Keflezighi had picked up his pursuit of Baldini with a 4:29 mile. They never once commented on how hard Keflezighi was going. Moreover, they didn't even mention that Baldini was matching that pace. As hard as Keflezighi could go, Baldini simply would not be denied. What did they talk about? Basically, they lamented the attack on Lima, and they celebrated the fact that an American was in the top three. For all a random viewer could tell, the American had won. "That Italian up there, oh, he was just the fastest."
Mebrahtom KEFLEZIGHI (USA)- silver medalist, on winning silver:
"I came to do what I did. I had a strategy of being up front because there are a lot of good guys out there. I got there and I did it."
On his break:
"I felt good after one hour, 10 minutes, so I thought why not me, why not me?"
On the competition:
"I was delighted to get the silver. Finally my hard work paid off. It was my goal for the whole year. It was a great race".
Stefano BALDINI (ITA) - Gold medalist, on any difficulties faced out on the course:
"The problem is the weather, not the course. I like this kind of uphill and downhill course. It suits me."
On if he thinks he would have won even if LIMA hadn't been attacked:
"Yes. I believe I would have won anyway. I would have caught him 1km later, but I would have caught him up. When the incident happened, I was running at a rhythm 20 seconds faster than he was".
On if he objects to the thought that LIMA should receive a second gold medal:
"This is a problem for the organizing committee and not me. I ran my race".
