01 November, 2026

The 1896 Olympics, or how de Coubertin became anti‑Greek (part 6 of “the real story of the Olympics”)

The 1894 Congress decided that the 1896 Olympics would be held in Athens. And now Vikelas and de Coubertin had to organise them. In less than two years’ time!

Vikelas was the first to go to Athens, in October 1894. He hoped that, by working with the Zappas Committee, he would be able to form a local Olympic Organizing Committee. But he learned that his wife had fallen seriously ill, and he left precipitously for France. So it was up to de Coubertin to take the relay. And what a disaster it was!

De Coubertin arrived knowing nothing about Greek politics. He met Crown Prince Constantine, and the latter agreed to preside over the organizing committee. But when de Coubertin met Prime Minister Trikoupis, he got a resounding “No” on the question of whether the Games would even be held. He got the same answer from Dragoumis, head of the Olympic Committee (and a political ally of Trikoupis). Of course, de Coubertin ignored the fact that Prince Constantine and Trikoupis were political enemies. After meeting with Dragoumis, de Coubertin decided to form his own Greek organizing committee. Dragoumis gave him a meeting room in the Zappeion and suggested some names for the committee, as per de Coubertin’s (naïve, as it turned out) request. The names that Dragoumis gave were essentially anti‑royalist; and when de Coubertin convened the group and announced that Prince Constantine would preside, the committee waited for de Coubertin to leave for France and promptly dissolved itself.

His wife dead and buried, Vikelas rushed back to Athens to repair the damage done by de Coubertin’s ignorance (and, perhaps, haughtiness). Together with Prince Constantine he formed another committee and proceeded to organise the 1896 Games. And they got lucky. Trikoupis lost the elections and was replaced by Deligiannis, who was in favour of sports (and had given substantial support to the Fokianos Panhellenic Games of 1891). Under the new prime minister, the Olympic Games preparations proceeded apace. The message was that these Games were the fulfilment of Zappas’ dream.

But still, Vikelas felt that de Coubertin’s support was missing. In December 1894 and early 1895, in letter after letter, Vikelas begged Coubertin to be more active: to write to specific men about the preparations; to help make decisions on facilities; to send the plans the Baron had promised for the velodrome; to come to Greece himself to work with the organizing committee. All to no avail. De Coubertin, occupied with writing a French history book and preparing for marriage, switched his focus away from the Olympic Games, in which he had lost interest. He refused to come to Athens to help and did very little for the 1896 preparations. At one point, it seems, he even tried to resign from the IOC. (Vikelas refused to accept his resignation). So the Games were organised by Vikelas, Constantine, and the Greek Olympic organising committee.

The medal carries the inscription Herodes-Averof (the former built the stadium in the 2nd century AD and the latter renovated it in the19th).

The Athens 1896 Olympics were a success. I will not give details of the competition itself. The literature on this abounds. But this success was not obtained thanks to de Coubertin, who arrived just ten days before the Opening Ceremony, after many of the other spectators.

Of course, when the 1896 Games succeeded, Coubertin claimed that he had been “the sole author of the entire project”. And he later complained that the ungrateful Greeks refused to give him credit, snubbed him, and had refused his suggestions about the Games, refused to let him take an active part in the 1896 organisation—doing everything on their own. This last point is true. The Greeks did nearly everything on their own. They had to. For the Baron was amazingly unhelpful, incredibly aloof from the actual preparation for the Games.

But the last act was written after the Games. Up to that point, de Coubertin was on excellent terms with the Greek royal family. In fact, when preparing the Paris Congress and fearing opposition (or perhaps mere lack of interest) to an Olympic revival, de Coubertin asked his archaeologist friend Charles Waldstein, then excavating in Greece, to approach the Greek royal family about his Olympic plan. Prince Constantine and Waldstein had a long talk about the Olympics, and the latter wrote to the Baron that Constantine had agreed to serve as an honorary member of the Paris Congress. However, after the successful Games, the royal family made clear their desire to keep the Games permanently in Greece. And at that point the schism became permanent.

De Coubertin went to great lengths to avoid Greece becoming the permanent organiser of the Olympics, up to and including rewriting history and covering up the very existence of the Zappas Olympics (which he knew very well; Vikelas himself had reminded him of it in no uncertain terms in a letter sent just after the 1896 Olympics: “… As you know, the idea of re‑establishing the ancient Games dates from far back. Evangelis Zappas, one of Greece’s benefactors …”). It probably has to do with the fact that de Coubertin felt that he had not been the most important person during the Athens Olympics, and he resented the fact. Be that as it may, from then on, de Coubertin was a sworn foe of Greece. And so, when Greece organised the Intercalated Games of 1906—the Games that saved the Olympics after the fiascos of Paris and St Louis—he excluded those Games from the official Olympic sequence, exacting revenge on the Greeks.

This completes “the real story of the Olympics”. I may write about the Paris and St. Louis Games one day, and perhaps about the Athens 1906 Games. But this is not a formal promise, so don’t hold your breath.

22 October, 2026

The Moment of the Year: the wait is over

We don’t have to wait until the end of November for the Moment of the Year. World Athletics spilled the beans by announcing the nominees for this new award. And I must say that I am impressed.

But let’s start at the beginning. What is the Moment of the Year? Quoting the presentation on the World Athletics site:

The Moment of the Year award has been introduced to celebrate the most memorable occasion of the season – one that may transcend a single performance and generate emotion and inspiration among fans and spectators around the world.


And they went on to present a long list (count them, there are no fewer than 18 entries there) of accomplishments that made a mark on the athletics season.

  • Tigst Assefa’s women-only world marathon record of 2:15:41 in London
  • Botswana’s men’s 4 × 400 m win on home soil at the World Athletics Relays
  • Alison dos Santos’ world 400 m hurdles record of 45.80 in Zurich
  • The pole vault duel between Mondo Duplantis (6.25 m) and Emmanouil Karalis (6.20 m) in Zurich
  • Simon Ehammer’s world heptathlon record of 6670 for world indoor gold in Toruń
  • Keely Hodgkinson’s world 800 m short track record of 1:54.87 in Liévin
  • Jakob Ingebrigtsen’s return after injury to win the European 5000 title
  • Melissa Jefferson-Wooden’s Ultimate Championship sprint double
  • Yomif Kejelcha’s world half marathon record of 56:51 in Buenos Aires
  • Josh Kerr’s world mile record of 3:42.66 in London
  • Agnes Ngetich’s women-only world record of 1:05:15 for world half marathon gold
  • Rumesh Tharanga Pathirage’s last-round 91.09 m to win the Ultimate javelin title
  • Masai Russell’s world 100 m hurdles record of 12.09 in Zurich
  • Sabastian Sawe breaking two hours with a 1:59:30 world marathon record in London
  • Gianmarco Tamberi’s world high jump lead of 2.37 m to win the Ultimate title
  • Ja’Kobe Tharp’s world 110 m hurdles record of 12.75 in the NCAA semifinals
  • Audrey Werro’s 1:53.70 800 m, the third-fastest time in history
  • Yan Ziyi’s world U20 javelin record of 71.74 m, the second-farthest throw in history

When I saw the page on the World Athletics site, I thought immediately: “Did they include the Zurich pole vault event?”. It turned out that they did. Not Duplantis’ world record, but the competition where Duplantis was pushed to his limit in order to conserve his supremacy.

And there are many more entries that I liked a lot. They balanced Assefa and Ngetich in long-distance running, and they did the same for Sawe and Kejelcha. There are entries for Tamberi and Ingebrigtsen, who did not make the year’s best list. Kebinatshipi does not appear individually, but the team of Botswana is there. K. Hodgkinson does figure, thanks to her indoor performance, counterbalancing Werro’s dominance. And Yan is selected, quite deservedly, for women’s javelin, despite having lost the Ultimate title.

I tried to think about possible misses, and I could not find any. M. Paulino would have figured if she had improved her 2025 400 m time. C. Jackson beating the unofficial world record of 21.24 m in the shot put would have earned a place on the list. And if Tentoglou had made the 8.80 m jump we are expecting, he would have figured not only in the “Moments” but in the Year’s Best list. Let’s hope he does it next year. There is still time.

14 October, 2026

The World Athletics year's best list

World Athletics published its list of the best athletes of the year, and I must say that I am somewhat perplexed.


But first, let me give the list. Here are the 10 best women (in alphabetical order):

Tigst Assefa
Chase Jackson
Melissa Jefferson-Wooden
Agnes Ngetich
Marileidy Paulino
María Pérez
Camryn Rogers
Masai Russell
Audrey Werro
Yan Ziyi

And the 10 best men:

Kenneth Bednarek
Kristjan Čeh
Andy Díaz Hernández
Alison dos Santos
Mondo Duplantis
Collen Kebinatshipi
Josh Kerr
Rumesh Tharanga Pathirage
Sabastian Sawe
Ja’Kobe Tharp

A. Ngetich was not among my choices, but I really hesitated before leaving Andy Díaz out of a list that was becoming really long. On the other hand my list contains athletes like F. Cherotich and G.Tamberi, to name but a few, who should have figured in the World Athletics list. I cannot understand how an athlete like Tamberi was left out. 

When I counted the specialties, I ended up with 4 track, 3 field and 3 out-of-stadium women. But for the men, there were 5 track, 4 field and just 1 out-of-stadium athlete. So it is impossible to designate the three best male athletes for the out-of-stadium specialty. Thus, I tried to parse the blurb accompanying the article.

It says:

A ... vote, which closes on Saturday 17 October at midnight CEST, will now determine their [i.e. the 10 athletes for each sex] final ranking, from first to 10th.

And further on:

The six finalists – three for the women’s World Athlete of the Year award and three for the men’s – will be announced on 10 and 11 November and be invited to Monaco for the World Athletics Awards on 29 November, when each winner will be announced live on stage.

So, the only possible explanation is that the specialty classification of the last two years will be abandoned and we are going back to the old format, where one “overall best” is selected. Unfortunately, not being privy to the confidence of Lord Sebastian, I can only establish my list based on last year’s criteria. And this encourages me further in the direction I was speculating about in my previous post: give a discipline-by-discipline report of the year and simply present the names of the three best female and male athletes.

PS. At the end of the WA article is a cryptic announcement: among the awards presented on stage, there will be, for the first time, the Moment of the Year award. I really wonder what that will be. But I guess we only have to wait until the end of November.