In a message dated Mon, 19 Feb 2001 1:06:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Mcewen, Brian
T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<< The idea has always been to have a World Championship of XC ... and a race to suit
all the XC runners ... where one best one could be crowned.
I guess it is fair to say that (as one other person said) the 12k winner is
the World Champion ... and the 4k winner is just happy that they hold a 4k
.. so he has something to run.>>
All the 4K haters, i think, have lost sight of a bigger issue here, and that's
promotion of the sport. Part of the IAAF's idea when the second race was added was not
only to get some of the high-profile middle distance types into the race (a goal that
so far hasn't materialized well, unfrotuatnely), but also to make for a more sellable
product.
As Primo Nebiolo, ever the pragmatist, said at the time, "A one-day event does not
justify the expense, effort and organization."
In this day and age, events need to find a way to pay for themselves. Perhaps you'd
rather have no XC champs at all?
A greater variety of stars makes for a more attractive TV package sellable at a
greater price (even if not in the U.S. market).
I think the IAAF should be commended for trying to come up with ideas that help
promote the sport, even if the sensibilities of a few hard-core fans who loudly
protest "there shoudl only be one XC champion" are offended. The sport needs more
outside-the-box thinking like this.
gh
