Krusty_Clown wrote: » Hmm... Which demographic has the most disposable income? Masters. How can we squeeze more money out of this demographic? Let's invent a league and give them points for every race they pay to enter. Perhaps I'm being skeptical, but look at the qualifying races. They're either one of the marathon majors or a Rock and Roll event (with a few other big commercial races thrown in). Perhaps if the list of qualifying races were from the list of AIMS or IAAF certified races, otherwise it just seems like an attempt to bolster numbers in the Rock and Roll race series (because the majors always sell out anyway (pardon the pun)).
Murph_D wrote: » Having to race two marathons in a year to ‘qualify’ is revealing all the same. Looks like they’re trying to piggyback on popularity (and masters bucketlistability) of Majors to cross-promote and sell entries to other big but less desirable races. It’s not clear how exclusive this World Championship race will be - open to the ‘top ranked runners’ in each category but doesn’t say how many. 10? 100? 1,000? And how much it will cost for the privilege of participating. Masters-only events tend to be undersubscribed so I doubt it will be difficult to qualify if you run the required two events. But good luck to them. There’s nothing wrong with the idea of a meaningful world masters marathon at least. (World Masters Athletics meet has a HM but no full.)
Murph_D wrote: » But good luck to them. There’s nothing wrong with the idea of a meaningful world masters marathon at least. (World Masters Athletics meet has a HM but no full.)
The Bin Man wrote: » Maybe, as time ticks along, we'll see the whole masters side of running develop further: sponsorship, decent prize money, and the trimmings...
Testosterscone wrote: » This group have also bought the Iron Man brand as well as the WMM and Rock and Roll looks they are trying to adopt the same "world championship" model Just wait till they start with the Tatoo's
Testosterscone wrote: » Have they gotten rid? There was a full back in 2016? Highly doubtful since these were the group that has been slowly whittling down the prize funds for elites in both WMM and th Rock and Roll series. The top masters will continue to compete as close to the top as possible and largely ignore these categories (Geb, Lagat, Castille) much like many do on a domestic level.
RayCun wrote: » Yeah, sounds like they're trying to have a marathon equivalent of Kona, and here's a bunch of races that you're supposed to do in hopes of qualifying for that. As Krusty said, the idea here is not athletic excellence, it's selling stuff to people old enough to have money.
The Bin Man wrote: » And what's wrong with trying to make more money?
The Bin Man wrote: » Not saying this group will match the million dollar payout they give to the younger guys: "Athletes score points for their finishing place in each race with the top male and female marathon runners at the end of each cycle receiving an equal share of the US$1 million." (Decent prize ?) I'm saying, this may well open the door for similar events with more trimmings - for masters... Yes, of course the top masters will continue to compete, but I think you'll find the top masters jumping in on this one. But only time will tell.
RayCun wrote: » Didn't someone from this forum, way back when, compete in some triathlon championship in England? Representing Ireland! Except you had to pay for everything yourself, and none of the top people were interested, so they basically went through the list until they found people who were willing to pay...
RayCun wrote: » Why should we get excited about someone's attempt to make more money?
Testosterscone wrote: » Actually since the Wanda group have taken over that pricing structure has been changed. They now offer winners 280,000 (previously 500,000) and 2nd and 3rd also receive prizes to the tune of 325,000 total down 175,000 from both the men's and women's side each. There is a charitable donation (280,000 so still short of the 350,000 saved) included to offset the perception of cutting prize money and make it look like they money is just being moved elsewhere but in reality this will just change number of charity entries allocation I would imagine to offset this They have also cut the elite purse and entries in many of the RnR races over the last few years. Prize money is only going one way with this company.
The Bin Man wrote: » Yeah, I read that on Letsrun a while back. Still, a million bucks is a pretty decent prize. It's a shame they are lowering the prize money but that's the world we live in. People will vote with their feet: if they don't like it, they'll enter other races. I suspect though, their feet will be in these races and they'll prove successful.
Testosterscone wrote: » The only problem with people voting with their feet is that top masters will enter top senior races which are also the marathon majors so the addition of the masters won't actually have much of an impact on the standard of masters running in these events outside giving a few more bragging rights similar to those ultra records (ala the 777 records people use to garner motivational speaking roles etc) or the IM Kona crowd
The Bin Man wrote: » Maybe you should write to the organisers or get some sort of movement going to speak up against the corporate machines ruining athletics.
The Bin Man wrote: » You might be right but I don't think so. I think we'll see much more competition at the sharper end of masters' races. Also, I think the kudos will appeal. And, if by winning the World Major Marathon Champs (or whatever it is called) a runner is able to benefit from trimmings (speaking roles, sponsorship etc) this a good thing, don't you think? Or do you have a problem with somebody benefiting from their hard work and success? I take on board your points: you seem to have some issues with the whole set up-that's fair enough. Maybe you should write to the organisers or get some sort of movement going to speak up against the corporate machines ruining athletics.
RayCun wrote: » Or maybe we could just ignore them? The more people repeat press releases about how this is a brilliant thing for masters athletes and will raise standards etc etc blah blah blah, the more successful they will be. The more people see it as just another way to part fools from their money, the less credibility it will have, and the more likely it is to go away.
The Bin Man wrote: » What's wrong with recogniing the top masters at the Majors?
The Bin Man wrote: » Sure, isn't there a thread on Boards every year explaining how to cheat your way into London (a Major) and deprive honest Brits of their rightful places? It seems to me that their is huge demand for the Majors, even to the extent that people are prepared to be duplicitous to gain entry. But yeah, if you have no interest in it then maybe you shouldn't post anymore on here and let the thread die...
Testosterscone wrote: » No problem with people benefitting from there hard work but when the majority of full time athletes in the sport are living below the poverty line I think money should be invested in the sport as opposed to diluted and diverted from the sport. While they have made a decent living for themselves how much has actually been contributed to the sport by the likes of the Gerry Duffy's, the Sinead Kane's, Mimi Andersons or the Rob Young's (this is no a cricitism of them but rather the current state of the sports) Similarly the number of poor coaches and Personal trainers offering running coaching packages and charging in a sport which only has one paid coach within the AAI set up. Everyone is taking their piece from this sport and we then complain for underperformances or lack of development. It's more important for people to get kudo s and work outside the sport than actually be a positive member of the running/track and field community. Haha your grand J I'll stick to supporting and developing the sport as I have always done and will leave those Grand Master Champions away in their quest for eternal glory
RayCun wrote: » Has anyone said there is something wrong with that? As far as I know, all the majors report on the runners in each category, and there are prizes for the top masters. Isn't that recognising the top masters? The thing that people are sceptical of is a new proposal, and the fact that you are trying to pretend they are the same thing shows how credible it is. Yeah, again, "people are interested in [this thing] so therefore they must be interested in [this other thing]" is weak soup. Are you trying to ramp up interest in this thing because you have decided you are going to be the winner of the first world championships in 2020?
Testosterscone wrote: » Have they gotten rid? There was a full back in 2016?
The Bin Man wrote: » Also, I'm too young to enter. .
OOnegative wrote: » Perfected time travel have you..........
The Bin Man wrote: » What's wrong with recognising the top masters at the Majors?
London and Tokyo are lotteries