It is fair.
It is an entirely different event. An entirely different race. An entirely different
group of sponsors and management.They have been granted the right to do as they please.
They can treat their athletes anyway they like. It does not bother me anymore than
golfers making more than me or having more opportunity. Not at all, golfers pull in
more sponsors and money regardless of how much easier it may be or whatever other
reason you could find to proclaim inequity.
There is nothing special about getting to the Olympic trials. There are no Olympic
material people who cannot rip off a 2:22 at will. It may as well be 2:17 if truth be
told.
I do not feel discriminated against. A real athlete knows where he or she stands.
Being invited to a certain race has nothing to do with my position in the sport, the
respect I gain from my competitors or the esteem and good feelings I have about my
efforts.
If I think the Men's LDR committee made the standards to tight(which I don't) my
problem would be with them(LDR), not the women's LDR committee.
Additionally, I would be embarrassed if someone started a crusade to let us hacks in
the race. May as well give me a tin can and a cardboard sign "Disabled, cannot work,
please help."
Mike Platt
In a message dated 10/31/2003 2:06:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
>
>
> I'm glad you are as happy with your running career as you are. I feel
> 100% the same about my own (and I won no money, only various prizes like a
> nice bike). I LOVED traveling to big races and competing - and just running
> with the guys. It was immensely satisfying all by itself.
> BUT you failed to answer my question about fairness at least as to what
> you would say if women were the victims of the disparity instead of men. If
> you were going to the Trials and winning money, and women who were better
> than you (i.e.proportionally closer to the world and Amerixcan records) were
> not similary rewarded, can you seriously say you would defend such
> discrimination as fair? Geoff
>
>
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: t-and-f: LaSalle Bank Chicago Marathon Olympic Payout
> >Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:44:37 -0500
> >
> >Why would I complain one bit?
> >
> >I have made hundreds of friends and earned thousands of dollars doing
> >something I would have done for free.
> >
> >The first time I was ever south of the NY/PA border was because of
> >running(I was in my 20's).
> >The first time I ever flew in a jet was because of running. I have had
> >dinner and drank beer with people I used to watch on television.
> >I got to go to Europe and race.
> >All of this for free.
> >
> >So a handful of women have a bit easier of a time qualifier, big deal, good
> >for them. Get it while you can.
> >
> >I thank the stars I found this sport, a few bucks more or less makes no
> >difference.
> >
> >Additionally I don't think it is discrimination. It is two entirely
> >separate events. It not like they are giving spots away at the US Mens
> >Olympic Marathon trials to women instead of men.
> >
> >Mike Platt
> >
> >In a message dated 10/30/2003 2:24:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike's response to my call for a more equitable treatment of male and
> > > female Trials marathon aspirants is similar to responses posted by Ed
> >Parrot
> > > and Erik Bush. All three fit into the category of what I consider the
> > > victims of discrimination (i.e.their times are comparable to the
> >2:40-2:48s
> > > posted by women who make the Trials - and won substantial prize money at
> > > Chicago), yet all three defend the discrimination. Well, I, too, fit
> >into
> > > that time frame, but 25-35 years ago, so now it's just an academic topic
> >to
> > > me. But the injustice still pisses me off.
> > > None of the three responders really answered the fundamental question:
> > > Fairness. Let me put it this way. What if men got into the Trials - and
> >won
> > > $2,500-3,500 bonuses at Chicago - for running 2:24-2:32 and women had to
> >run
> > > 2:35-2:38 to qualify for Trials/bonuses? Women would be up in arms,
> >right?
> > > And wouldn't these guys support them. Yet those standards I've just
> > > suggested as unfair to women are probably fairer, proportionally, than
> >the
> > > current standards disparity is to men.
> > > Geoff
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Geoff Pietsch"), [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >Subject: Re: t-and-f: LaSalle Bank Chicago Marathon Olympic Payout
> > > >Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 22:59:37 -0500
> > > >
> > > >I have been a 2:20's-2:30 marathoner for many years.
> > > >It does not bother me to see women get to go to the trials, or make
> >money.
> > > >
> > > >Complaining about equality or stripping prize money opportunity from
> >the
> > > >women will never make me a faster runner.
> > > >
> > > >Mike Platt
> > > >
> > > >In a message dated 10/29/2003 8:34:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > >
> > > > > It's tough enough for a mid-to-high 2:20s - and even low 2:30s -
> >male
> > > >to
> > > > > see similarly talented women (those between 2:40 and 2:48) make the
> > > >Trials,
> > > > > when they have to stay home, but it seems like rubbing salt in the
> > > >wounds to
> > > > > also see them get thousands of dollars for those
> > > > > proportionately slower or
> > > > > similar times.
> > > > > Geoff
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Never get a busy signal because you are always connected
> > > with high-speed
> > > Internet access. Click here to comparison-shop providers.
> > > https://broadband.msn.com
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Fretting that your Hotmail account may expire because you
> forgot to sign in
> enough? Get Hotmail Extra Storage today!
> http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
