.jpg)
.jpg)
Make Rotterdam a Major
By Bryan Green
Since the World Marathon Majors were announced in 2006, I've both loved the idea and had misgivings about the actual process. I think it's great that athletes are encouraged to compete in multiple races, and that the "best" marathoner in the world gets a prize. But it's not really getting the job done in my opinion.
The purpose, as the WMM website states, is to "advance the sport, raise awareness of its athletes and increase the level of interest in elite racing among running enthusiasts." That's a great goal, and as a self-professed running enthusiast, I'd love if it were increasing my level of interest and not just my level of head-shaking.
Here's how the WMM works. Athletes compete in any of five major marathons--Boston, London, Chicago, Berlin, and New York City. (In the case of a championship year, the IAAF World Championships Marathon and the Olympic Marathon are included.) The top five athletes in each race are awarded points based on their finishes: 25 for 1st, 15 for 2nd, 10 for 3rd, 5 for 4th, and 1 for 5th. The athlete with the most points over a rolling two year period--2008-2009 and 2009-2010 are both separate competitions--wins the prize: US$500,000 each to the top male and female.
There's a lot of potential here. You're going to have to run and win at least one marathon, and probably two, over two years if you're going to win. You're probably also going to have to place in another. So you've got to show up and race. It's also a huge payday for any distance runner, so it should be motivating (for the top few marathoners in the world). And most importantly, it gives TV commentators an extra 3 minutes of material to discuss during the races, which accounts for about half of the interesting information we'll get to hear watching any particular race.
But there are problems with the system and they need fixing (and unfortunately one of my favorite athletes, Haile Gebrselassie, is at the center of all of them).
First, there is only one winner. I'm actually okay with this in general, but if your goal is "to raise awareness of the athletes", then you have to have a reason for people to care about more than just the two or three athletes that are more or less household names (within the running community, at least). If 2nd place won $100,000 and 3rd won $50,000 the battles amongst the names not everyone knows (the Kiruis, Kebedes and Mergas) would be more interesting.
Next, unlike the Diamond League (for which the jury is still out, of course), the WMM doesn't even attempt to ensure top-notch head-to-head competitions. Each race signs whatever superstars they can get. Last year we had Haile in Berlin, Wanjiru in Chicago and Robert Cheruiyot in New York. In 2008 Wanjiru and Lel ran the Olympics and Haile chose Berlin. In 2007 Haile ran Berlin and Martin Lel ran New York City. Now I'm not saying any of the world's top marathoners are ducking each other, but a system that allows Haile Gebrselassie to be eligible for prize money while never facing the best in the world is a less than ideal system.
Third, courses matter, but not in the WMM scoring system. New York and Boston are slow courses. Chicago, London and Berlin are fast courses. You can choose one or the other type of marathon that suits you best and still win the championship. Personally, I think you should have to run at least one slow course and one fast course to qualify for the title. Haile shouldn't be able to just run Berlin time trials and be eligible. Similarly, if Meb wins Boston, he would be eligible to win because he ran London last year (even though he got smoked). But if he hadn't run it at all, he shouldn't win the title. Best shouldn't just mean fastest or strongest. It should mean fastest AND strongest.
Finally, the whole system is thrown out of whack when one of the best is above the system. Haile Gebrselassie doesn't need the WMM bonus money and doesn't try to get it. But he does like running one of the races: Berlin. And since the creation of the WMM, Haile Gebrselassie and the Berlin organizers have turned the Berlin Marathon into the Berlin Haile Time Trial-athon.
Like most elite marathoners, Haile runs his two marathons a year. In his case, however, he has two marathons willing to serve his every desire in Berlin and Dubai. Both are pancake flat and provide him with numerous pacers to assist in his world record pursuits. They also pay him a boatload of money just for showing up. The result is that fewer elite marathoners elect to run Berlin (either because they fear Haile or don't get the appearance fees) and then the WMM loses out again when Haile runs Dubai every year. Not only does he not attempt to win the title, he screws up one of the five WMM races every year. (I actually don't blame Haile. I blame the Berlin organizers.)
We can argue that this is destined to change with Haile's inability to run sub-2:04 these days (if not now, then soon). But the fact that it's been a problem for four years means it can become a problem again and something needs to change. I think deeper prizes, more head-to-head competition and requirements to run on both strength and speed courses would be nice adjustments, but I have an even better idea: kick out Berlin and put in Rotterdam.
I mean, talk about a "major" improvement! Berlin has major cachet as a global marathon for a few key reasons. First, it's in a big global city. Second, it has a history of fast times being run there, including four world record performances (da Costa's 2:06:05 in 1998, Tergat's 2:04:55 in 2003, Haile's 2:04:26 in 2007 and then his 2:03:59 in 2008). Third, actually there is no third. It has the weakest resume of the "major" five.
If the WMM was a basketball team, they'd look like this. Boston is the experienced center, maybe not the best anymore but a force to be reckoned with. New York is the power forward, consistently putting up 25 and 12. Chicago is the small forward, it can great numbers but tends to be the most hit-or-miss. London is the shooting guard, putting up a ton of points and doing it with speed. And Berlin has been the shoot-first point guard that focuses on getting its own rather than making the team better. It relies on its one dimension (super-fast course) to recruit one guy (Haile) at the expense of the WMM as a whole. Like a basketball team, all five marathons have to work together for WMM to be successful, but Berlin has been holding the team back. It's time Berlin sat on the bench for a while and let somebody else come in to play.
So why not Rotterdam? It's not quite the global city that Berlin is, but it's got just as good a history of fast times. Carlos Lopes ran 2:07:12 to break the world record there in 1985, and Belaynah Dinsamo was the first man to break 2:07 when he ran 2:06:50 to set the world record in 1988. More recently, we've seen five of the top ten times ever run at Rotterdam, and if you compare the top ten times ever run at Berlin and Rotterdam, Rotterdam wins with an average time of 2:05:15 to 2:05:30. And that's WITH all four of Haile's amazing performances included in Berlin's average.
Basically, Rotterdam brings to the WMM table most of what Berlin brings, except they sacrifice being a big global city focused on one super-big draw for added competition, unpredictability, depth, and relevance. It's everything that's great about marathoning, and it is so much more interesting to watch than a Berlin Haile Time Trial-athon. And can you really argue that Haile G deserves to be honored more than Patrick Makau? Or that Abel Kirui (2nd in Berlin in 2009) deserves points but not Geoffrey Mutai?
Rotterdam is not just a fast marathon. It's now the fastest marathon in the world. And it deserves to be a World Marathon Major as well.
Special Rotterdam note:
Big praise goes to American Magdalena Lewy-Boulet, who finished 2nd in a huge personal best 2:26:22. The time puts her 4th on the US all-time list behind Deena Kastor (2:19:36), Joan Samuelson (2:21:21), and Kara Goucher (2:25:53). I particularly enjoy seeing Americans travel over to Europe to compete in big marathons there, something we've rarely seen with...ahem...Berlin. (Sigh.)
 Haile G in Berlin: Good for Berlin, bad for the World Marathon Majors |
The purpose, as the WMM website states, is to "advance the sport, raise awareness of its athletes and increase the level of interest in elite racing among running enthusiasts." That's a great goal, and as a self-professed running enthusiast, I'd love if it were increasing my level of interest and not just my level of head-shaking.
Here's how the WMM works. Athletes compete in any of five major marathons--Boston, London, Chicago, Berlin, and New York City. (In the case of a championship year, the IAAF World Championships Marathon and the Olympic Marathon are included.) The top five athletes in each race are awarded points based on their finishes: 25 for 1st, 15 for 2nd, 10 for 3rd, 5 for 4th, and 1 for 5th. The athlete with the most points over a rolling two year period--2008-2009 and 2009-2010 are both separate competitions--wins the prize: US$500,000 each to the top male and female.
There's a lot of potential here. You're going to have to run and win at least one marathon, and probably two, over two years if you're going to win. You're probably also going to have to place in another. So you've got to show up and race. It's also a huge payday for any distance runner, so it should be motivating (for the top few marathoners in the world). And most importantly, it gives TV commentators an extra 3 minutes of material to discuss during the races, which accounts for about half of the interesting information we'll get to hear watching any particular race.
But there are problems with the system and they need fixing (and unfortunately one of my favorite athletes, Haile Gebrselassie, is at the center of all of them).
First, there is only one winner. I'm actually okay with this in general, but if your goal is "to raise awareness of the athletes", then you have to have a reason for people to care about more than just the two or three athletes that are more or less household names (within the running community, at least). If 2nd place won $100,000 and 3rd won $50,000 the battles amongst the names not everyone knows (the Kiruis, Kebedes and Mergas) would be more interesting.
Next, unlike the Diamond League (for which the jury is still out, of course), the WMM doesn't even attempt to ensure top-notch head-to-head competitions. Each race signs whatever superstars they can get. Last year we had Haile in Berlin, Wanjiru in Chicago and Robert Cheruiyot in New York. In 2008 Wanjiru and Lel ran the Olympics and Haile chose Berlin. In 2007 Haile ran Berlin and Martin Lel ran New York City. Now I'm not saying any of the world's top marathoners are ducking each other, but a system that allows Haile Gebrselassie to be eligible for prize money while never facing the best in the world is a less than ideal system.
Third, courses matter, but not in the WMM scoring system. New York and Boston are slow courses. Chicago, London and Berlin are fast courses. You can choose one or the other type of marathon that suits you best and still win the championship. Personally, I think you should have to run at least one slow course and one fast course to qualify for the title. Haile shouldn't be able to just run Berlin time trials and be eligible. Similarly, if Meb wins Boston, he would be eligible to win because he ran London last year (even though he got smoked). But if he hadn't run it at all, he shouldn't win the title. Best shouldn't just mean fastest or strongest. It should mean fastest AND strongest.
Finally, the whole system is thrown out of whack when one of the best is above the system. Haile Gebrselassie doesn't need the WMM bonus money and doesn't try to get it. But he does like running one of the races: Berlin. And since the creation of the WMM, Haile Gebrselassie and the Berlin organizers have turned the Berlin Marathon into the Berlin Haile Time Trial-athon.
Like most elite marathoners, Haile runs his two marathons a year. In his case, however, he has two marathons willing to serve his every desire in Berlin and Dubai. Both are pancake flat and provide him with numerous pacers to assist in his world record pursuits. They also pay him a boatload of money just for showing up. The result is that fewer elite marathoners elect to run Berlin (either because they fear Haile or don't get the appearance fees) and then the WMM loses out again when Haile runs Dubai every year. Not only does he not attempt to win the title, he screws up one of the five WMM races every year. (I actually don't blame Haile. I blame the Berlin organizers.)
We can argue that this is destined to change with Haile's inability to run sub-2:04 these days (if not now, then soon). But the fact that it's been a problem for four years means it can become a problem again and something needs to change. I think deeper prizes, more head-to-head competition and requirements to run on both strength and speed courses would be nice adjustments, but I have an even better idea: kick out Berlin and put in Rotterdam.
I mean, talk about a "major" improvement! Berlin has major cachet as a global marathon for a few key reasons. First, it's in a big global city. Second, it has a history of fast times being run there, including four world record performances (da Costa's 2:06:05 in 1998, Tergat's 2:04:55 in 2003, Haile's 2:04:26 in 2007 and then his 2:03:59 in 2008). Third, actually there is no third. It has the weakest resume of the "major" five.
 Like Gilbert Arenas, Berlin puts up big numbers but takes away from the team as a whole. |
So why not Rotterdam? It's not quite the global city that Berlin is, but it's got just as good a history of fast times. Carlos Lopes ran 2:07:12 to break the world record there in 1985, and Belaynah Dinsamo was the first man to break 2:07 when he ran 2:06:50 to set the world record in 1988. More recently, we've seen five of the top ten times ever run at Rotterdam, and if you compare the top ten times ever run at Berlin and Rotterdam, Rotterdam wins with an average time of 2:05:15 to 2:05:30. And that's WITH all four of Haile's amazing performances included in Berlin's average.
Basically, Rotterdam brings to the WMM table most of what Berlin brings, except they sacrifice being a big global city focused on one super-big draw for added competition, unpredictability, depth, and relevance. It's everything that's great about marathoning, and it is so much more interesting to watch than a Berlin Haile Time Trial-athon. And can you really argue that Haile G deserves to be honored more than Patrick Makau? Or that Abel Kirui (2nd in Berlin in 2009) deserves points but not Geoffrey Mutai?
Rotterdam is not just a fast marathon. It's now the fastest marathon in the world. And it deserves to be a World Marathon Major as well.
Special Rotterdam note:
Big praise goes to American Magdalena Lewy-Boulet, who finished 2nd in a huge personal best 2:26:22. The time puts her 4th on the US all-time list behind Deena Kastor (2:19:36), Joan Samuelson (2:21:21), and Kara Goucher (2:25:53). I particularly enjoy seeing Americans travel over to Europe to compete in big marathons there, something we've rarely seen with...ahem...Berlin. (Sigh.)
.jpg)
.jpg)
One comment to "Make Rotterdam a Major"
I agree, although I don't know if you need to replace Berlin, which is still a pretty competitive affair. Why not add Rotterdam and maybe Fukuoka, which certainly has as rich of a history as any major marathon.