Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. Collapse Details
    next thing you know the IAAf will be handing out "participation trophies"
    #1
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    61,704
    Last edited by gh; 09-26-2019 at 11:23 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #2
    I like this change. I've always been uncomfortable with the term fastest loser. Words matter.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #3
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    61,704
    fwiw, I don't believe I ever used the phrase in all my years in the IAAF both. My style was always (at least as far as I recall!) to say, "qualifying the first x in each heat and the next y fastest overall"
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #4
    Didn’t bolt and Johnson once each advance with a small q ?
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Sleeping in Finland
    Posts
    4,349
    I don't mind "fastest loser" or "lucky loser"-type terminology where it's applied to actual losers; but frequently time qualifiers are just athletes who knew what they needed to do to qualify, and avoided expending extra energy.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #6
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    61,704
    and to use the language properly, places 2-x are also "losers" even if they advance
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #7
    Coming soon from the IAAF: Athletics convicted of doping may no longer be called "drug cheats" because it sounds too negative. Going with the times, the IAAF recommends the more appropriate "hormonally enhanced". Also false starts will be called "premature acceleration" and disqualifications in the race walks will be "early disembarkments".
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    on walkabout....
    Posts
    2,145
    Ideally this will change the way the sport is covered (when it is) by mainstream media. Eliminating the negative connotations of anything less that a win in a WR performance needs to happen. Headlines from a positive direction must always be the case, no matter the performance. No other sport leads with "Athlete N fails to...." when someone is competing at this level.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    11,901
    Huh! Not sure I even noticed the 'fastest loser' use. I guess I thought it was 'next fastest qualifiers'.
    I don't think it's wimpification, just a clearer way of phrasing it.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #10
    Quote Originally Posted by MJR View Post
    Headlines from a positive direction must always be the case, no matter the performance. No other sport leads with "Athlete N fails to...." when someone is competing at this level.
    Really? Wanna google "worst NFL performances" and see how many 1000s of hits you'll get? US sports has perfected the art of critizising performances to perfection by keeping stats about everything. Try putting a positive spin on a zero passers rating, or lowest batting average, or, or, or...
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •