Bravo, Reuben! I would additionally ask, how much of us, list members, have been reporting results to list? I guess it's great minority. Most of us let this work to others - it's much simpler to chat about ANYTHING around sports, not actually sports itself. Providing results needs some work and accuracy, chatting does not. Best wishes to all, >Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:18:40 -0800 (PST) >From: Reuben Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: t-and-f: Fwd: Re: results in newspapers >We've gone over this many times before. >Newspaper editors fill their pages with what they >believe people want to read. >Period. >Of course there are exceptions, but the vast majority >aren't pro-anything or aren't anti-anything. They're >not biased against T&F. They are simply trying to do >their job. Sports editors don't sit around thinking >how they can screw track and field today. They sit >around asking what they can do to better serve their >readers. >And it's easy to rip newspapers for not going big with >world junior XC, but most sports editors (including >mine, who has a long T&F background) had no idea >Ritz's third-place finish was significant when the >results came across their computers. >When Webb ran 3:59, it got huge play everywhere. >Editors across the U.S. instantly recognized that this >was big. Not the same with world junior XC, even if it >might have been a greater accomplishment in the big >picture. >Hey, how do you expect sports editors to react when >all they see at major televised meets is empty seats? >Roob Enn Endjärv, decathlon statistician Tallinn, Estonia [EMAIL PROTECTED] Look for decathlon information at www.decathlon2000.ee
