cryptique Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 This is pretty ridiculous. link (from SFGate.com) - - - - - - - - - - - - - At Women's Marathon, fastest time didn't win C.W. Nevius Tuesday, October 21, 2008 There were over 20,000 competitors in Sunday's Nike Women's Marathon in San Francisco. And 24-year-old Arien O'Connell, a fifth-grade teacher from New York City, ran the fastest time of any of the women. But she didn't win. It doesn't get much simpler than a footrace. All it takes is a starting line, a finish line and a clock. You fire the gun and the first person to the end of the course is the winner. However, as the marathon officials said to O'Connell - not so fast. While O'Connell had the greatest run of her life and covered the course faster than any woman, she was told she couldn't be declared the winner because she didn't run with the "elite" group who were given a 20-minute head start. So what could have been a lovely Cinderella story about a young woman rising above her expectations in a race that bills itself as all about empowering women turned into a strict the-rules-are-the-rules edict. That's not the image we're trying to promote here. San Francisco has become one of those destination locations for the new breed of distance runner. Between the San Francisco Marathon in July and the Nike race - billed as the largest women's marathon in the world - over 40,000 runners will visit this year. It is great that these events are held here, but they are also representing the city. What we are hoping is that they leave town talking about the terrific location, the great restaurants and the perfectly organized event. Instead, we look like we don't know how to operate a stopwatch. "That's pretty weak," said Jon Hendershott, associate editor of the authoritative Track and Field News magazine, based in Mountain View. "Think of the PR they could have had with this girl coming out of nowhere. It sounds like they got caught totally off guard." O'Connell, who describes herself as "a pretty good runner," had never managed to break three hours in five previous marathons. But as soon as she started at 7 a.m. Sunday, she knew it was her day. In fact, when she crossed the finish line 26.2 miles later, her time of 2:55:11 was so unexpectedly fast that she burst into tears. "I ran my best time by like 12 minutes, which is insane," she said. At the awards ceremony, the O'Connell clan looked on as the top times were announced and the "elite" female runners stepped forward to accept their trophies. "They called out the third-place time and I thought, 'I was faster than that,' " she said. "Then they called out the second-place time and I was faster than that. And then they called out the first-place time (3:06), and I said, 'Heck, I'm faster than her first-place time, too.' " Just to make sure, O'Connell strolled over to a results station and asked a race official to call up her time on the computer. There it was, some 11 minutes faster than the official winner. "They were just flabbergasted," O'Connell said. "I don't think it ever crossed their minds." No one seemed exactly sure what to do. The trophies had already been handed out and the official results announced. Now organizers seem to be hoping it will all go away. "At this point," Nike media relations manager Tanya Lopez said Monday, "we've declared our winner." O'Connell said some race officials actually implied she'd messed up the seeding by not declaring herself an "elite" runner. "If you're feeling like you're going to be a leader," race producer Dan Hirsch said Monday, "you should be in the elite pack." So this is her fault? O'Connell was just being modest. "I'm a good, solid runner," she said. "I never considered myself elite." Jim Estes, associate director of the long-distance running program for USA Track and Field, did his best to explain the ruling. He's had some practice with the issue. The Sunday before last, at the Chicago Marathon, a Kenyan named Wesley Korir pulled off a similar surprise, finishing fourth even though he wasn't in the elite group and started five minutes after the top runners. In that situation, and in this one, Estes made the same ruling: It didn't count. O'Connell wasn't declared the winner and Korir didn't collect fourth-place prize money. "The theory is that, because they had separate starts, they weren't in the same race," Estes said. "The woman who is winning the elite field doesn't have the opportunity to know she was racing someone else." Estes admits that giving the elite runners a sizable head start may not be the best policy. "These are things this race and other races need to look at," Estes said. "It comes down to what a race is, and who is racing who." Nonsense, said Track and Field News' Hendershott. He said O'Connell took her best shot, ran the fastest and should have won. "What's she supposed to do, lay back because she's not an elite runner?" he asked. "If the elites are going to lay back, that's their fault." As for O'Connell, she's not bitter. After all, she got her best time ever, had a nice weekend in San Francisco and comes home with a story. But she didn't win. Maybe the best way to explain that is to say it is just another case of the elites in San Francisco giving the city a bad name. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mfwahl Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Ouch. I didn't know racing was so complicated. I thought it was all about who gets the end first. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 one of my friends ran in that race. This ruling sucks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GtrPlyr Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 What a ridiculous turn of events. I hope things get rectified and she's awarded her 1st place medal like she deserves, and earned. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Good last line in that story. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stooka Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 That is one big crock-o-shit!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I'll be the voice of dissent and say that they have a point about the woman with the fastest time not running in the same group. It's a little different race if she's out front setting the pace. It is at least conceivable that the leaders of the elite group would have run differently if they were chasing someone in front of them rather than setting the pace themselves. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I'll be the voice of dissent and say that they have a point about the woman with the fastest time not running in the same group. It's a little different race if she's out front setting the pace. It is at least conceivable that the leaders of the elite group would have run differently if they were chasing someone in front of them rather than setting the pace themselves.I agree. Distance running is as much about race strategy and mind games as it is pure athleticism. I'm sure she won't make this mistake next time. That being said, you'd think they'd at least be able to give her an honorary award or something. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stooka Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 So, they would have tried harder had they known someone better was there? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 All this time I thought I understood running. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 It's probably true that those in the "elite" group probably would have paced themselves a bit differently with someone else out ahead of them, but would the official winner really have been able to run a full 11 minutes faster? Seems like a stretch. Impossible to know of course. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gobias Industries Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Running is a lot of strategy, but for real, that is pure athleticism, it's total bullshit to not even recognize it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted October 23, 2008 Author Share Posted October 23, 2008 Nike is now trying to rectify the situation. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nike fudges, recognizes fastest marathon runner as "a" winner C.W. Nevius, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, October 23, 2008 Marathon runner Arien O'Connell will be a winner after all. O'Connell ran the fastest time in last Sunday's Nike Women's Marathon, but when she finished she was told she couldn't be awarded first place because she hadn't run in the "elite" women's group, which was given a 20-minute head start. O'Connell said she was contacted early this morning by a Nike representative who said they were going to award her a trophy and recognize her as a winner. Not the winner - "a" winner. Notice the distinction. "She told me they had been getting lots of calls and e-mails," said O'Connell, a fifth-grade teacher in New York City. "She said they were going to send me the same prize as the one awarded to the winner." O'Connell's story, which first appeared in Tuesday's Chronicle, set off a firestorm of controversy, most of it directed at corporate sports giant and race sponsor, Nike. O'Connell said the Nike representative also said that the sports shoe corporation had also decided to eliminate the "elite" category in the annual San Francisco event and would let everyone start at the same time. The annual event is billed as the largest women's marathon in the world with 20,000 entries. O'Connell ran the race in 2 hours, 55 minutes and 11 seconds. The fastest woman in the elite group ran it in about 3 hours, 6 minutes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Kind of sounds like a sandbagger. In a cycling race she'd have won her category but certainly not the overall. No doubt the tactics in the race would have been different. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jenbobblehead Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 So I don't get it. The Elite group actually ran slower than they usually would because they were just running against the times of the other people in the Elite group? I mean, 11 minutes is like a lifetime. How is it that this woman ran that much faster than the professional runners?! Unless they were mailing it in, figuring that no one would beat their lackluster times? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 the elite group isn't running against times, but against each other. if no one pushes the pace and leaves the race for the kick that's the way it goes. I've been in plenty of races where guys were content to mark me but no one would actually challenge by lifting the pace. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
myboyblue Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 the elite group isn't running against times, but against each other. if no one pushes the pace and leaves the race for the kick that's the way it goes. I've been in plenty of races where guys were content to mark me but no one would actually challenge by lifting the pace. Couldn't they have picked it up when this lady passed them or am I misunderstanding? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Couldn't they have picked it up when this lady passed them or am I misunderstanding? you are misunderstanding. Not everyone can start at the same time in large races. So racers start in staggered groups. The person with the "fastest time" didn't finish "first." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Couldn't they have picked it up when this lady passed them or am I misunderstanding? they started 20 minutes before her but she ran 11 minutes faster than them, so she was 9 minutes behind them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mfwahl Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Couldn't they have picked it up when this lady passed them or am I misunderstanding?The elite group had a 20 minute head start and her time was 11 minutes faster so they would have been done for 9 minutes before she finished. Am I right? I'm still hungover. EDIT: Hungover and slow. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
austrya Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 This would be a good story problem in a 4th grade math book. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Couldn't they have picked it up when this lady passed them or am I misunderstanding?She started after the elite group, so she finished after them and still ran the race faster. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Just wait til it comes out that this lady took the subway for most of the course. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Believe me, I'm waiting for it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.