Flumpy wrote:jour·ney·man (jûrn-mn) n. 1. One who has fully served an apprenticeship in a trade or craft and is a qualified worker in another's employ. 2. An experienced and competent but undistinguished worker.
You are being deliberately and repeatedly antagonistic, it does not suit you and it does not make this board a better place and it does not add anything to this thread. So why are you doing it and why are you keeping it up?
US distance runners are clearly the third best in the world now, and Symmonds is a many-times US champion. By your standards, only the Brit medalist are other than journeymen and you never refer to them that way, even when almost all of them are less distinguished than Symmonds.
It would be generous to call most of our athletes journeymen !!
mdzleosnoba wrote:It seems like there are two or three separate debates going on.
How he handled this situation is independent of his "journeyman" status.
Tuariki:
As you are well aware I was far, far from being a great long jumper - a good journeyman perhaps.
Being #74 on the all time list for 800m makes him a journeyman
Where were you on the all-time list? WC or Olympic final? (not trying to be annoying, honestly curious)
I have no idea where I was on the all-time list in 1974. But I can assure you I was never anything more than a journeyman - and a lesser journeyman than Symmonds. IMO the reference to journeyman however is dependent on just what level of competition one is talking about. On the international stage in 1974 I was a journeyman. In the 1974 Northern Districts meet (WSU, UW, OSU and UO) perhaps I was not a journeyman.
If you'll reveal your real name to me, I could probably tell you EXACTLY where you were on the 1974 (or any other year!) list!! You (and several others here on the MB) seem to be current or past-world or national class athletes (or coaches, officials, administrative bureaucrats, etc), using "alias" to "cover-up" your true identity!! Being a FAN of track and field, and one who has shamelessly sought autographs from athletes (at meets), I'm sure I'd recognize your name if you revealed it!!
Whatever the case, I'm happy to be communicating with a "STAR" athlete of my "youthful" years!!
mdzleosnoba wrote:I believe every line in his post is fact. Yours is opinion. I can't speak for everyone, but for me, he's not the one that comes across as arrogant.
mdzleosnoba wrote:It seems like there are two or three separate debates going on.
How he handled this situation is independent of his "journeyman" status.
Tuariki:
As you are well aware I was far, far from being a great long jumper - a good journeyman perhaps.
Being #74 on the all time list for 800m makes him a journeyman
Where were you on the all-time list? WC or Olympic final? (not trying to be annoying, honestly curious)
I have no idea where I was on the all-time list in 1974. But I can assure you I was never anything more than a journeyman - and a lesser journeyman than Symmonds. IMO the reference to journeyman however is dependent on just what level of competition one is talking about. On the international stage in 1974 I was a journeyman. In the 1974 Northern Districts meet (WSU, UW, OSU and UO) perhaps I was not a journeyman.
If you'll reveal your real name to me, I could probably tell you EXACTLY where you were on the 1974 (or any other year!) list!! You (and several others here on the MB) seem to be current or past-world or national class athletes (or coaches, officials, administrative bureaucrats, etc), using "alias" to "cover-up" your true identity!! Being a FAN of track and field, and one who has shamelessly sought autographs from athletes (at meets), I'm sure I'd recognize your name if you revealed it!!
Whatever the case, I'm happy to be communicating with a "STAR" athlete of my "youthful" years!!
It took me about 5 seconds to find out his identity on google !! give it a go
I agree it's his choice as it pertains to making money for the meet, but it seems like if he just plain dislikes certain athletes that is not an acceptable reason for not allowing them in meets.
Money - and that is what it is all about. With his tweeting Symmonds, plus the subsequent media interest, has possibly increased his market value to meet promoters.
aaronk wrote: Whatever the case, I'm happy to be communicating with a "STAR" athlete of my "youthful" years!!
I note that you appear to be from Bellingham. If you want to know more about my youthful journeyman years you can contact Coach John Chaplin of WSU or former Spokesman Review Sports Editor Bob Payne.
Tuariki wrote:Mumpboy is correct in line 1. Line 2 is just a tad over the top.Maybe more than a tad. But looks like mumpboy got a bite.
Nope. "I" care about line 1. Therefore, it is factually false to use the word "nobody" in this case. And, who knows, there may be 2 or 3 other people who actually care.
Tuariki wrote:Mumpboy is correct in line 1. Line 2 is just a tad over the top.Maybe more than a tad. But looks like mumpboy got a bite.
Nope. "I" care about line 1. Therefore, it is factually false to use the word "nobody" in this case. And, who knows, there may be 2 or 3 other people who actually care.
OK this is 100% my last post
I obviously meant nobody in the UK audience cares about his US exploits when putting together a GP field. The fact that anyone would name national championships, US based GP and coming 3rd in another race as evidence of 'big wins' does show insularity and arrogance.
I have absolutely no anti US bias, i just don't think winning at a national level has any relevance when demanding a place in a UK meeting, the same way that no UK athletes without international honours could expect a guaranteed spot in a US one.
mump boy wrote:NOBODY let me repeat NOBODY cares what races NS has won in the USA Your post demonstrates nothing but US insularity and arrogance
You've gone over the edge into pure idiocy. Your post demonstrates nothing but anti-US insularity and arrogance.
Mump Boy may be showing "anti-US insularity and arrogance", but he DOES have a point!! INSIDE the US, we venerate our leading athletes, even when they are relative non-entities on the world stage. In my self-compiled T&F Record Book, I keep lists of the Top 24 (I call it my Double Dandy Dozen, or DDD, lists!!) performers for each event, male and female, indoors and out!!
Following is where US athletes are on my outdoor lists, in events from the 800 to the marathon.
If you eliminate the mostly American-run mile, you're left with just 5 male and 4 female athletes that make the Top 24 World Performers Lists for the events 800-Mar!!!
So I can understand "outsiders" accusing us of "insularity and arrogance"!! Maybe not LIKE it, but......
There are also about 20 other athletics events, most of which the U.S. is better at than distance.
There are insular and arrogant fans from every place I'm sure. I don't think the post he made was arrogant. It's true that national results are irrelevant as far as placings, but times are relevant. I like to give him the benefit of the doubt and I think he was just trying to point out that NS was no slouch.
Last edited by mdzleosnoba on Mon Jul 16, 2012 1:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Of course mump makes a valid point, and is actually right, however he could have perhaps chosen his words more carefully and not provided an opening for those with an opposing view by allowing them to deflect the argument to a definition of journeyman.
I'm curious though; it seems to me that if this situation was exacerbated by a high ranking US official's relationship with a European promoter (and I don't know if this was the case, or if it's pure coincidence), why our American friends here are not more upset by such a conflict of interest within their own governing body, rather than taking major umbrage at this meet director not regarding one of their favorite sons with quite the same reverence as, for instance, one from Eugene, OR.
Tuariki wrote:At USA domestic level competitions Symmonds is clearly not a journeyman - he is the star attraction. But in 2012 in the 800m at Olympic level some of us consider Symmonds to be a journeyman, not because he is not a very, very good 800m - because he is - but because compared to Rudisha, some of us think he and all other 800m runners are journeymen.
By this measure, Gay and the WC champion Blake are journeymen and I have not seen you or anyone else use that term for them, so it is a comparison that is completely besides the point and, if anything, makes the point of how silly that characterization is, and now, since the author of that term seems intent on his full position, cannot seem to retreat from it but feels a need to defend it.
In contrast, I think that no one that is considered a likely OG Finalist is a journeyman. It is a completely useless term if it is.
Fact #1 - Nick is NOT a journeyman to Americans or international T&F FANATICS. The former esteem him for his OT wins, the latter esteem him for his rankings and high finishes.
Fact #2 - Nick IS a journeyman to the average British fan, who is the one being asked to shell out money for a seat to watch a world-class (which, as has been mentioned before, had BETTER have lots of UK names, including some of whom Ami fans have never even heard of (how's THAT for journeyman?)).
Conclusion - Y'all are using the word in two totally different contexts and disagreeing what it means. Well, duh!
Fact #1 - Nick is NOT a journeyman to Americans or international T&F FANATICS. The former esteem him for his OT wins, the latter esteem him for his rankings and high finishes.
Fact #2 - Nick IS a journeyman to the average British fan, who is the one being asked to shell out money for a seat to watch a world-class (which, as has been mentioned before, had BETTER have lots of UK names, including some of whom Ami fans have never even heard of (how's THAT for journeyman?)).
Conclusion - Y'all are using the word in two totally different contexts and disagreeing what it means. Well, duh!
Even more germane is what I pointed out 127 posts back: in meet-promoter speak, everybody but Rudisha is a journeyman in that event, and that's the crux of the whole thing here. To place him on that high a plane isn't demeaning to the rest, although some of you seem hell-bent on reading it that way.
A little meet-promoter 101 here: every one of them is a cold, calculating, bottom-line kind of guy. If he's not, he doesn't last long in the business. He fills his fields as he thinks is best (and since he's responsible for the bottom line, so should it be).
There are a few pieces on the chessboard that truly matter; most are simply interchangable parts. That includes many/most of your favorites. Sorry about that.
"Deserving" athletes don't make it into the bit meets every time they are held. Has always been that way and it always will be, until somebody invents a track with an infinite number of lanes.
Now whether Stewart (a prickly sort, to be sure) handled the Symmonds situation well in the PR department is totally another matter.
I do find it interesting that the Brit press, usually so hip to leaping on this kind of hoo-ha, seems to have ignored the story altogether.
This has brought a damning issue to the forefront in our sport. There is a fatal flaw in flumpy mump's point, this is NOT just about the audience where this meet so happens to be this week! This is a diamond league meet. It is televised. It is held as the standard of our sport on the international level. Keyword, international! That means all countries. The entire argument about journeyman and relevance is EXACTLY why Symmonds went public! This is not an isolated incident, nor is it the first time. And until the inmates start making more noise, this will continue to happen. We are talking money, a lot of money. Kaki dropped out of the race and look who won. Speculation says Symmonds had a more than good shot at winning this race. That is 15k! More importantly, this is the London DL meet, it is the ONLY meet that holds ALL the events. It is the biggest meet on the circuit, and this year it was a good place to test the weather and see the level of competition you will see in a months time. He is the US champ, one of the best in the world, yet he was black balled! It was not based on his performance, yet one man's feelings. All your other squabbling misses this valid and singular issue. THIS is what matters, not your personal opinion about if NS matters to the fans in a random country. With that logic, very few folks matter to any meet but we know this to be a falsehood
This complete crap about Symmonds being an also-ran is utterly beside the point since, we have ALL decided, only one 800m runner matters in the slightest. The real question then, if the "real" 800 guy didn't show up, why have the event at all? What a complete and hopeless bore watching cripples and imbeciles run twice around the track. Any moron could do that, couldn't they?
And I say all of this as a distinctly luke-warm Symmonds fan; he does nothing in particular for me.
bushop wrote:I just hope we don't become like boxing... but maybe we already are.
Maybe Don King and Bob Arum aren't around YET, but maybe we aren't far from it. The problem with Arum and King were, they were match promoters but also AGENTS of individual fighters too. Talk about a conflict of interest! I still lean toward a tennis ATP kind of thing, but I also realize each tennis tournament just has a number of entrants who progress through elimination rounds to a "final". In other words each tournament is just a single "event", while a track meet is a WHOLE BUNCH of events. That makes it a LOT more complicated, especially with equity of prize money distribution across the events. A union could go crazy trying to negotiate a profit sharing scheme without there being so much internal squabbling that they'd get nowhere.
Smoke wrote:There is a He is the US champ, one of the best in the world, yet he was black balled! It was not based on his performance, yet one man's feelings.
Do you think that Ian Stewart's "feelings" were impacted by his wife, Stephanie Hightower, Chairman & President of USATF, part of whose mandate is I assume to look after the best interests of US athletes?
Smoke wrote:There is a He is the US champ, one of the best in the world, yet he was black balled! It was not based on his performance, yet one man's feelings.
Do you think that Ian Stewart's "feelings" were impacted by his wife, Stephanie Hightower, Chairman & President of USATF, part of whose mandate is I assume to look after the best interests of US athletes?
I think the Hightower conspiracies are overblown. I think Stewart would hate Symmonds either way, and I would imagine Hightower likes Lolo just fine. No one is going to be able to prove she had anything to do with any of this, and it would be inappropriate for USATF to be getting involved either way. The athletes have agents whose job it is to deal with this stuff.
Smoke wrote:There is a He is the US champ, one of the best in the world, yet he was black balled! It was not based on his performance, yet one man's feelings.
Do you think that Ian Stewart's "feelings" were impacted by his wife, Stephanie Hightower, Chairman & President of USATF, part of whose mandate is I assume to look after the best interests of US athletes?
How ironic would that be? Symmonds spends the better part of a year trying to get USATF out of his business and now we're getting suggestions he should turn to them to help him manage it?
This is the kind of personal detail that USATF should steer well clear of. If there's a systemic problem involving the country's athletes as a whole then yes by all means some formal movement should be made through channels.
Made by the almost-invisible CEO I would add, not by Hightower.
Tuariki wrote:At USA domestic level competitions Symmonds is clearly not a journeyman - he is the star attraction. But in 2012 in the 800m at Olympic level some of us consider Symmonds to be a journeyman, not because he is not a very, very good 800m - because he is - but because compared to Rudisha, some of us think he and all other 800m runners are journeymen.
By this measure, Gay and the WC champion Blake are journeymen and I have not seen you or anyone else use that term for them, so it is a comparison that is completely besides the point and, if anything, makes the point of how silly that characterization is, and now, since the author of that term seems intent on his full position, cannot seem to retreat from it but feels a need to defend it.
In contrast, I think that no one that is considered a likely OG Finalist is a journeyman. It is a completely useless term if it is.
Now you are getting stupid.
I have not used the term journeyman to describe Gay and Blake for the simple reason that they are not.
Gay and Blake are world champions in their own right. Symmonds? Don't think so.
Gay is 2nd fastest ever at 100m. Blake is 2nd fastest ever at 200m. Symmonds is #74.
Gay and Blake have both beaten Bolt. Has Symmonds beaten Rudisha?
To make it easier for him has he beaten Kaki? or Yego? or Mulaudzi? or Lalang? or Kiprop? or Aman?
Smoke wrote:There is a He is the US champ, one of the best in the world, yet he was black balled! It was not based on his performance, yet one man's feelings.
Do you think that Ian Stewart's "feelings" were impacted by his wife, Stephanie Hightower, Chairman & President of USATF, part of whose mandate is I assume to look after the best interests of US athletes?
OR the other way around, part of her mandate could be impacted by her husband's entrepeneurial pursuits? At the very LEAST it has the appearance of a potential conflict of interest. In most leadership jobs they push all over the place to avoid even the APPEARANCE of any conflicts of interest. I'm not saying run out and get a divorce.. LOL ..... but maybe one or the other of them should step down.
Tuariki wrote:... But in 2012 in the 800m at Olympic level some of us consider Symmonds to be a journeyman, not because he is not a very, very good 800m - because he is - but because compared to Rudisha, some of us think he and all other 800m runners are journeymen.
...
Now you are getting stupid.
I have not used the term journeyman to describe Gay and Blake for the simple reason that they are not.
26: Rudisha,everybody else, not Rudisha <=> Bolt, everybody else, not Bolt
Not really a stretch because that is exactly how you used it
To make it easier for him has he beaten Kaki? or Yego? or Mulaudzi? or Lalang? or Kiprop? or Aman?
My dictionary is complimentary about the word " journeyman" as it states that in this age it means a man who has learned his craft and is no longer an apprentice.
Clearly Simmonds is therefore a jouneyman with all the other experienced athletes around.
However it is all really a red herring to the essential point made on this thread by gh and others that if you start managing, controlling and dictating to Meet promoters I reckon that you will soon discover that the DL meets disappear in a few years if not quicker.
Did not the swiss courts ill advisedly interfere on behalf of the "charming" Dehiba and made the sport look stupid??
Is it fair?? , well all i can say that life aint fair, especially when you pick up an injury at the wrong time. BTW, it happens every week here in Soccer where guys think they should have been selected for the team, but they are on the bench for either not performing in training, out of form or otherwise displeasing the manager. The decision about Symmonds was "personal" obviously but he may well have made a rod for his own back with certain behaviour.
Symmonds will not get invited to any Meets here the longer this silly spat goes on. He might try shutting up.
