The finalists for the athlete of the year

World Athletics published the list of five finalists for the Athlete of the Year 2020 title. The five women finalists are 

Letesenbet Gidey (ETH)

Sifan Hassan (NED)

Peres Jepchirchir (KEN)

Yulimar Rojas (VEN)

Elaine Thompson-Herah (JAM)

When the list of ten appeared I made a prediction concerning the possible finalists. There was no discussion whatsoever about the first three and I predicted, correctly, that Rojas would be among the finalists. I gave Yeshaneh as fifth due to the fact that she had established a world record (and perhaps as attonement for having keft her out of my top list). Finally it was Thompson who was chosen, not an unwarranted choice but, clearly there since the list must contain five names.

For the men finalists we have

Joshua Cheptegei (UGA)

Ryan Crouser (USA)

Mondo Duplantis (SWE)

Johannes Vetter (GER)

Karsten Warholm (NOR)

The four names to appear in the list were a no-brainer and WA chose to add Grouser to the lot (while I had chosen Kiplimo).

This year WA did not publish a rising stars list of five. For the male rising star I believe that Kiplimo is clearly dominating and will clinch the tilte. However the things are not so clear for women. I guess that we'll have to wait till December 5 for the final announcement. I am quite confident about my choice of Duplantis for the men's title and I think that women's title will be decided between Hassan and Jepchirchir, but one never knows. After all, two years ago I was really surprised by the choice of C. Ibargüen (but I hasten to add that that was a very nice surprise).

Are they trying to kill the horizontal jumps? (I think so)

I have already written about the plan of WA to modify the rules concerning the judging of fouls in horizontal jumps. The new rules were supposed to come into force from this November, but given the current situation, with an almost inexistent 2020 season, their application was postponed to November 2021. 

Here is how the situation is summarised on the WA site.

Currently, a no-jump is called if an athlete is judged, while taking off, to have touched the ground beyond the take-off line. A plasticine board set at an angle of 45° has been long used to assist with such decisions. Under the new Technical Rule (number 30.1.1), it will be a failure on take-off if any part of the take-off shoe or foot breaks the vertical plane of the take-off line. It was felt that this would be more understandable and simpler to judge. 

Balderdash! (And I almost used another b-word).

The old rule occasionally allowed toecaps to visibly broach the line without marking plasticine. In the future, such moments are to be fouls.

Let me translate. From now on, the judge will be free to interpret the "broaching of the line" and distort the results as he wishes. 

In the article quoted above I was writing about what happened to poor King Carl and how he was robbed of a fantastic world record.

King Carl is getting real old

Before publishing that article I came accross a mention of the rule change. My reaction there was

"Where the people who proposed this completely brainless?" 

It looks like they are.

And just to make things harder, the plasticine board, if used, is to be set at 90°.

How many years have we gone without a world record in a horizontal jump? Unless I'm mistaken the more recent world record dates back to 1995. And WA, instead of adopting a strategy that would liberate the jumpers from the foul angst and help them go fetch longer jumps is moving to the opposite direction making things even harder for them.

But wait, things are getting worse. A new rule stipulates  that World Championships and Olympic Games are no longer excluded from competitions where events may be held in an alternative format. Which means that we may well see the "last jump absurdity" entering the Olympic Games.

Had this "last jump" been used in the 1991 Tokyo World's, M. Powell would have been second, having fouled his last jump while C. Lewis managed 8.86 m. Fortunately the competition ended with Powell first, with a world record 8.95 m, and Lewis second with a wind assisted 8.91  m. In the 1995 Göteborg World's I. Kravets who had registered a 15.50 m world record on her third attempt, would have ended up third since she fouled the last jump (while I. Prandzheva and A. Biryukova had valid jumps at 15.00 and 14.66 m respectively). Closer to us, C. Taylor would not have been world champion last year despite his 17.92 m, since he jumped a "mere" 17.54 m at his last try, while W. Claye and H.F. Zango had both jumps at 17.66 m. Same scenario for Y. Rojas in the women's event (which she won with 15.37 m). She fouled her last jump, while C. Ibargüen had a valid 14.47 m.

But if things do not reach this level of sport-ruining decisions it is highly probable to see one day the horizontal jump competitions limited to just four tries. And in fact why limit this to jumps? How about limiting throws as well to just four tries? Or perhaps allow three tries to all finalists and then allow a fourth one to just the first three. (And award the positions according to the "last jump" procedure).  I am feeling here that WA is trying to kill athletics. 

You may point out at this point that they are "only" trying to kill the field events, track ones are safe. Not so fast! They have also plans intended to ruin track events. In long distance races there is a possibility of an elimination system where all competitors start together and after a certain distance the last runner through each lap is eliminated till just four remain for the final lap. When I first saw such a race in the 2018 Continental Cup I found it entertaining. It is not a bad idea for a week-end competition among friends. But once you start looking closer at the difficulties, then all havoc breaks loose. 

When such a competition was first organised in 2009 European Team Championships, the winner of the women's race was disqualified because she should have been eliminated at a previous lap. In the men's race four athletes reached the line in the same time and stopped waiting for the photo-finish to tell who had to be eliminated. It's difficult to imagine a more ridiculous situation. 

So please, Sir Sebastian, don't add insult to injury telling us that the new rules are introduced in order to promote athletics. They are there to please the television producers, who at first will throw some extra money in the direction of athletics and, once people start not caring about the rigmarole of track and field "competitions", they will entirely forget our sport.

The World Athletics e-learning platform

World Athletics just launched what they call the e-learning platform. I don't know how much money the poured into that project but my feeling is that it is money thrown out of the window.

The platform was launched in order "... to enhance knowledge within athletics", and "... designed to educate everyone from newcomers to experts". "Experts", did they write "experts"? Really? OK. Just so that you can judge for yourself, here are the two examples given in the corresponding page:

Did you know that athletes competing in the shot put are not allowed to tape two or more fingers together?

Or that long jumpers are forbidden from doing a somersault during their run up, take off or landing?

Is there an athletics "expert" who is unaware of these details? Well, things are clear: if he is so ignorant he is no expert. 

So how about newcomers? Perhaps the pedagogical structure of the platform could be interesting to people who prefer to watch a video rather than perusing the rules (I prefer the latter). But then the information provided is both simplistic and over-quantitative. To me this looks rather self-defeating. Why on earth does a newcomer have to absorb the detailed measurements of run-ups, throwing sectors and so on?

There are some (moderately) interesting videos like the combined events one that shows a small sequence of each of the events. But after you have watched the video you have learned almost nothing about the decathlon and heptathlon, except which are the events composing them (provided you managed to retain them during the presentation).  

And the actual state of the platform is a mess. 

While a video is still playing a pop-up of the next available ones appears on the screen and covers a good part of the presentation. Hasn't anybody tested the workings of the platform before putting it online? 

I have given my opinion on the project in the opening paragraph of this post. While I do find some WA innovations, like the Weekend Reads, excellent, the headlong race into modernisation leads often to questionable choices. 

And just an advice for newcomers (assuming that a "newcomer" ventures into this blog): if you feel like following something from the WA website you should opt for the "Our Sport" section. It is really informative (although I object to the appearance of G. Devers as the representative of women's sprint, alongside the greatest of the great, J. Owens). 

The World Athletics list of athletes of the year is here

World Athletics just published their list of the top ten men and women athletes of the year. Despite the paucity of championships and even high level competitions, the summer season has been rich in results (and the winter-indoor season even more so). So here is the list of the top ten male athletes, in alphabetical order:

Donavan Brazier (USA)

Joshua Cheptegei (UGA)

Timothy Cheruiyot (KEN)

Ryan Crouser (USA)

Mondo Duplantis (SWE)

Jacob Kiplimo (UGA)

Noah Lyles (USA)

Daniel Stahl (SWE)

Johannes Vetter (GER)

Karsten Warholm (NOR)

Since this year I have published my list ahead of that of World Athletics one can compare the two lists and it is clear that I nailed it. All WA athletes do figure in my list. Admittedly by grouping Cheruiyot and Ingebrigtsen as well as Lyles and Brazier I could squeeze one more athlete in the top list, since I have reserved Kiplimo for the rising star award. In fact I am curious: will WA nominate Kiplimo for this award now that he is in the "grown-ups" list? We'll have to wait till December for this. In fact if they do not consider Kiplimo for  the rising star award, then the obvious candidate is J. Ingebrigtsen. I included him in my top list but I could very well have switched him with Kiplimo. 

For the top ten female athletes, again in alphabetical order, the list is:

Femke Bol (NED)

Letesenbet Gidey (ETH)

Sifan Hassan (NED)

Peres Jepchirchir (KEN)

Faith Kipyegon (KEN)

Laura Muir (GBR)

Hellen Obiri (KEN)

Yulimar Rojas (VEN)

Elaine Thompson-Herah (JAM)

Ababel Yeshaneh (ETH)

Here my performance was not stellar: I missed Yeshaneh. I did know about her world record in the (mixed-race) semi-marathon but somehow her name did not spring to mind when I was establishing my list of top athletes. She definitely has her place there, all the more so, since I give an extended list of female athletes which would merit inclusion, before opting for the tenth name. In fact, Bol, Muir and Obiri made my top classification only through this extended list (which allowed me to include athletes like Allman and Dadic). 

I have trouble understanding the absence of Lasitskene from the WA list. She jumped a humongous 2.05 m indoor. Is there an unwritten rule in the WA choice which precludes the inclusion of ANA (i.e. russian) athletes from the top lists? Or has it something to do with the fact that Lasitskene is particularly outspoken. Her remark concerning the lift of suspension of S.E. Nasser "It turns out it is faster to break the rules by missing four doping tests and be freed than remain a hostage to being Russian for many years" must have stung the WA priesthood.

Given the WA top ten one can risk predictions as to the top-five finalists. For the men's list my choice is straightforward: my top four ones, namely Duplantis, Cheptegei, Warholm and Vetter complemented by Kiplimo. Concerning the latter my reasoning is "why put him in the men's list only to be taken out after the first round". For the women's list I will start again with my top three, Hassan, Kipchirchir and Gidey. Rojas is the obvious choice for fourth. And there I would be stuck, were I to base my prediction on my own lists. However given the WA choice I think that the fifth finalist will be Yeshaneh. 

Anyhow by mid-November we will be fixed and I will report as soon as the finalists lists are out. Usually they are accompanied by the rising star lists and I admit that I am eagerly waiting for them.

An interview with K. Tsagkarakis, second part

In a previous post I presented the interview with Kostas Tsagkarakis, a marathon runner and organiser, with whom I have forged a strong friendship link over the past years. I have already told the story of how we met, thanks to the book he had written on G. Papavasileiou. In fact, that was the second book Kostas had written on a sports' personality. At the end of out marathon-length interview I asked him to talk about the books and how they came to be.

The first book on marathon runner Chr. Vartzakis.

KT When I was training for the marathon there was Chr. Vartzakis. He was 35 older than myself, born in 1911. When we were running 20 km, Vartzakis was always beating me. And he was not running alone. He was always accompanied by a dozen younger runners and he was the one setting the pace. He always started slowly, warming up progressively. In the 20 km races I was clearly ahead of him at mid distance, however upon reaching the final 2-3 kms I was hearing Vartzakis and company approaching and finally beating me. I was hearing various things about him. He himself was also regularly complaining. He was a man born in the wrong period. He was an athlete of Peiraikos, a club not among the major influential ones. Moreover the coach of Peiraikos was not on good terms with the coach of the national team. 

One day I had the idea of writing a book with his story. I submitted the idea to Vartzakis, making clear that I was no writer and he would have a veto on everything I wrote. Moreover the book would cost him nothing and I was not going to make any profit from it. So we started. I visited regularly his house with a tape recorder. It was a difficult task since Vartzakis did not have a linear narrative. I was taking down everything and had to put some order to all that. I tried to write everything respecting the style of Vartzakis. He showed me all the memorabilia he had collected in his career, cups, medals, diplomas etc. When Vartzakis passed away the family, upon my advice, offered the collection to the Marathon Museum. In the  collection of the Marathon Museum one can find the donation of Vartzakis along with the one of Kyriakidis (the Boston marathon winner) and of more recent marathon runners. Vartzakis has never been the best greek marathoner. His best time was just over 3 hours. He could not compare to Kyriakidis who had a record of 2 and half hours. 

Once the book was written the real difficulty was how to edit it. I started by contacting the main publishers in Athens. They were discouraging, a book with this subject would not sell. They suggested that I pay for the publication, what was practically impossible. All this was just before the 2004 Athens Olympics. I decided to go and meet the Secretary General of the organisation. I had heard about the cultural olympics and that publications were among their activities. I obtained an appointment with him and I presented my project. His first question was whether there was any political views or critiques in the book. Of course, there were none. I left one copy with his secretariat and he promised a prompt answer. A few days later the edition was approved. Then I had to present a budget and so I found a professional printer. He was very well paid but I think that he ripped me off: the edition was too expensive. Also there were many misprints. I had to make several rounds of corrections and some misprints still remain. For the distribution I decided to give a number of copies to each of the clubs of runners for health. I kept a few copies for myself and Vartzakis. We made an official presentation of the book which was attended by many important personalities of the world of sports.

A yearly running competition in honour of Vartzakis

The book was distributed gratis. I did not like this because I know that people would not read a book given out free. I would have preferred to put a nominal price and use the money collected for some special purpose. That was what I decided for my second book.

The second book on the flying steeple-chaser, G. Papavasileiou. 

I had always been an admirer of G. Papavasileiou. I was meeting him regularly at various competitions. One day I asked him whether anybody has written anything on him, his story. Since nobody had done it I suggested that I do it myself. I would write a first draft that he could then amend, and I would need photos, press clippings etc. He knew about the book on Vartzakis and the plan was to make something similar. We agreed and we started recording in the stadium of Nea Ionia. Again I had to work in order to give a structure to these discussions. The problem of the publication arose again. This time I found some other editor who gave me a price half of what I had paid for the first book. By setting a small price for the book we could cover the editing expenses, provided we sold a reasonable number of copies. I contacted the Greek Athletics federation, where Papavasileiou was well known, having occupied several positions in the board, as member of the judges group etc. They agreed to buy 500 copies. 

The announcement of the presentation of the book

The presentation was programmed on the day where the great riots in Athens took place. For the presentation I had obtained the auditorium of the Hall of Commerce of Athens and moreover gratis, something really exceptional. We decided not to adjourn but we feared that nobody would show up a second time. Fortunately people came, more than 100 people showed up. At the reception my wife was selling copies of the book. She knew that, once we reached a number of copies sold, the publishing expenses were covered. While I was giving the presentation talk she made me a sign that we had got there and I could announce that the publication expenses were covered and from now all profits from the selling of the book would go to the Kivotos tou Kosmou, a greek non-profit organisation for the protection of mothers and children. We made a second presentation in Piraeus and we managed to push a few more books. My real disappointment was with AEK, the club of Papavasileiou. They did not show even the smallest interest in supporting the book. But I had also had pleasant surprises. One day a young lady called and ordered two copies of the book. When she gave me her name I realised that she was the daughter of one of my young athletes from Zakynthos, where I had served during my first years in the National Bank, the one who later became champion in steeple-chase. 

So, what's next?

I have more plans for books but most probably the next one will not be a sports-themed one. I am currently working on the history of the suburb where I live. It was populated by people who came as refugees from Asia Minor (hence the name Nea Ionia) in 1922.