The race is not always to the swift

[pecunium]

Picture the scene. You've just run the best race of your life. Not just a good race. Not just every ounce of energy, and wrung out like an old mop at the end.

Not just the best race of your life, but a personal best you've never run this fast before an incredible 12 minutes better than any other time you've done the distance.

They start to call the winners. Third place didn't run as well as you did, Neither did second.

First place came in eleven minutes behind you.

Why? Because Nike thinks there were two races.

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

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."

Right. The Olympics don't have this problem. My high school didn't have this problem. When I was running a compeptitive 2-miles we didn't have it either, nor yet when I was doing the Mud-Run at Cp. Pendleton.

See, it was the same race. Same day, same course, same distance, same weather, same everything. Each heat started at different times, but all the rest was the same (Pendleton was different, because there were three classes, "Open", BDUs and running shoes, and "Military" which was BDUs and boots. 10K in BDUs and boots over mixed terrain and obstacles was "fun", but I digress).

But same day, same name of race, same chance to win. If the best time came in from the last heat... the person who ran it won.

If Nike want's to have charity races, where selected people are given preference for winning, let them have invitationals. If it wants to separate the people who are after prizes from thos who are just running for the sake of running, let them inform people of it.

Because what happened is Nike ran a private race, and then piggybacked the good-feeling and reputation boost of a non-prized race run at the same time; and not differentiated. One of the things which make marthons like LA, Boston, etc. so popular is the idea that everyone is competing on fair shot. Anyone can win.

Only Nike doesn't believe people should, "Just do it," or rather, they think the vast majority ought to be willing to just do it, and the selected few can win the prizes.

Comments

[shunra.livejournal.com]

What a PR disaster!

What will cost more - explaining (or defending in a lawsuit)? Or giving her a special prize?

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Moving the next race up a few minutes, when everyone enters as "elite".

Esp. after the first time it happened, this was a stupid thing to do. An open field means, sooner or later, some unknown is going to beat the field. Once a marathoner hits a groove, they tend to move up 1-2 rankings a YEAR, until they peak.

But that's overall, it's not one race. The real thing is, they don't expect it to be a PR disaster. We shall see how far and wide the story goes.

[calimac.livejournal.com]

So if they really believe this bizarre theory that it's two separate races, then give her a prize for winning the other race. At the very least.

Blippin' morons.

[jonquil.livejournal.com]

"Because what just happened is Nike ran a private race, and then piggybacked the good-feeling and reputation boost of a non-prized race was run."

Wild applause. That nails it. It makes concrete what the article sort of dances around.

[wetdryvac.livejournal.com]

My money bought their shoes. I recommend those shoes to others. Now? I've contacted their customer service and expect them to fix it.

*shrugs*

Or my money goes elsewhere and I'll be suggesting others do the same.

"The reference number for your e-mail is #081022-000321.

You will hear from us within 1 business day, Monday through Friday, excluding Holidays.

For immediate response to your questions or to speak with a customer service representative over the phone, please call us at 1-800-806-6453 from 5AM – 10PM PST, 7 days/week.

You may also find answers to questions and available information on nike.com by searching through our FAQs in the search box.

IMPORTANT: If you do not receive a response from us, please check your junk mail or SPAM e-mail folder first as it may have been filtered there for your review."

I... have no words for how disgusted this story makes me.

[grum]

I doubt the "other race" had prizes for winning. And if that's the case, then why should she be entitled to receive something that she did not expect to be able to receive when she entered.

And though I agree that it was probably not made clear enough ahead of time, I always interpretted the triathlons that I worked as having different races for each start. (that said, each start had distinctly different demographics (usually determined by age) and the lower levels had different courses to run, so it's a lot more obvious that there is no expectation of comparison between the various competitors)

[vicious-wench.livejournal.com]

and... the decision's reversed. She's declared the winner:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/22/BACI13MAIT.DTL&tsp=1

Nike also claims it will eliminate the "elite division".

In less controversial news regarding the race, it's one of Team-in-Training's big events. Participants raised $18MILLION for leukemia and lymphoma research. And, while I think it's an imperfect way of fundraising, it's better than nothing.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

All the races I've been in which had different categories made it clear there as some qualitative difference (age, equipment, team status, somthing).

Nike, it seems, made no such distinction plain to the participants.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

There is almost certainly no grounds for a suit, as I suspect the entrance form says words to the effect, "All prizes will be awarded at the discretion of Nike Inc, and the race committee. All decisions are final."

But it seems they have caved in to publc pressure.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Not quite. They seem to have declared her "a winner", and awarded her the prizes they gave the person they first announced.

Which cheapens both awards.

[marydell.livejournal.com]

Well...she's declared "a" winner. Better than nothing, though.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I wasn't perfectly clear, they awared her paralell prizes; they did not take them from the person who ran the second best time, nor have they changed the official winner.

[vicious-wench.livejournal.com]

Yep, I was just coming back to amend my comment, having noticed the difference in articles.

It does cheapen both awards.

[shunra.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure that misleading advertising would constitute fairly effective grounds for a suit - but this way is by far better.

[calimac.livejournal.com]

If you're going to hold multiple races together, you should give similar honors for winning each. That's the only sensible thing.

And clearly, she did expect that the fastest runner would win first place. Otherwise she wouldn't have been so surprised when the fastest runner (which happened to be herself) didn't.

And since Nike has now reversed itself under protest, they've clearly realized they were wrong.

[wetdryvac.livejournal.com]

*nods*

Just got a reply from the folks at Nike regarding my email to them. I've posted it in full in my journal, and it looks like Nike has recognized the error (at least so far as this instance is concerned) and has acted upon that, awarding and recognizing the actual first place time.

Not clear if this means things will be explained more clearly and heats run in balance in the future, with team/age/etc explication, but it's a start.

[vicious-wench.livejournal.com]

Returning to add this coda to the story:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=55&entry_id=32452

Nike, 2.5 weeks after the race, sent her a trophy that does actually declare her first-place overall, women's division.

I haven't looked to see if they've adjusted any of the rankings/returns for the other runners.