The following column originally appeared in the August 2001 edition of National Masters News. It is reproduced here by permission of its author. Masterstrack.com has invited responses from WMA President Torsten Carlius and Executive Vice President Tom Jordan.

Which Way, WMA?

By Al Sheahen, editor, National Masters News

BRISBANE, Australia – Is the World Association of Veteran Athletes (WAVA), now known as World Masters Athletics (WMA), in danger of shooting itself in the foot?

The newly named WMA managed to stagger through another moderately successful world masters track and field championships, but the future is questionable for the venerable, 26-year-old organization.

Games Lose Money

For starters, the Games are proving increasingly difficult for the local organizing committee (LOC) to pull off.

“There’s no way to make money on these Games,” said David Lloyd, general manager of the 14th WAVA World Veterans Athletics Championships, held here July 4-14. “The entry fees aren’t high enough, it’s difficult to get sponsorship, and – even with all the free labor – the costs are enormous.”

Lloyd refused to say how much the event actually would lose, but others guessed it was perhaps a half-million Australian dollars (US $250,000).

Cutting Costs

As a result of the shortfall, the LOC appeared to be cutting costs at every opportunity:

1. The big item was the transportation. The LOC had promised frequent free shuttle bus service from the hotels to the venues, as in Gateshead in 1999, and as specified in the WAVA contract. But it reneged without WAVA’s okay. “We couldn't do it,” Lloyd said. “It would have cost two million dollars (US$1million).”

Instead, the LOC provided free passes for the city buses. Most athletes had to take three buses from their hotels to get to the stadiums. It took up to 2-l/2 hours the first day, but the time eventually got down to under one hour by the second week. That seemed acceptable to most athletes, who spent the time schmoozing with other athletes. There were occasional long waits, particularly after the Opening Ceremonies and International Party, but many athletes hopped into taxis that sometimes showed up.

2. There was no promised Games’ booth at the airport, but a few volunteers were on hand to help arrivees find their way around.

3. There was a noticeable lack of signs in English or any other language. Some athletes missed their event because they didn’t know where to declare or check in.

4. Volunteers and low-paid staffers – some inexperienced – did much of the work.

5. There was only one hip number for each runner in the distance races, and none in the lane races, causing confusion in trying to read the photos in close races.

6. At the opening ceremonies, athletes paraded into ANZ Stadium, behind their country’s placards. The speeches were okay, but the stands began to empty during the dull, low-budget entertainment.

7. The International Party cost US$28 for some chicken and burgers. Drinks were extra. The music was loud and raucous. There were no buses for early departees. “I’ve learned not to go to those things,” said New Zealand’s Helen Tobin, who wisely skipped the affair and saved 28 bucks plus cab fare.

8. Results were sporadic and very hard to come by. Results of the early days’ cross-country, racewalks, and decathlon/heptathlon didn’t come through for days. After that, daily results, when you could find them, were incomplete.

The staffers in the media center refused to provide complete results for each media outlet, saying it was “too expensive.” Instead, they asked: “What do you need?” and offered to copy that result. But the copier was often busy or out of order. There were only two computers in the media room. After the first few days, the local papers decided it wasn't worth the hassle and stopped reporting on the event.

In the results summary in this issue are several gaps and holes. Worse, the results are generally organized by age-group, rather than by event, making them harder to read. “The distribution of results was the worst I’ve ever seen at a world or national meet,” said Jerry Wojcik, NMN's senior editor and results compiler.

9. The announcing ranged from excellent to poor. Little thought was apparently given to this area; it was a very low priority of the LOC. One USA official, who signed up to work the vertical jumps, was assigned to the announcer's booth at the last minute.

The LOC seemed to feel if it had a warm body in front of a microphone, it was covered. There were no roving volunteers with walkie-talkies, relaying field-event data to the announcers, so field-event coverage was virtually nil.

10. In an apparent effort to garner even more tourist dollars, the LOC usually completed each day’s events in mid-afternoon so athletes could go into town at night and spend more money. Many outstanding races (e.g. 5000, 10,000) at the faraway Queensland U. track went unseen by most athletes. It would have been more enjoyable if some of those races had been held in the early evening hours at one of the two main stadiums.

11. The Closing Ceremonies were, in effect, canceled – presumably to save money. There were a few speeches and some fireworks (for the public, not just the vets), but that was it. The promised singing of “Waltzing Matilda” didn’t happen.

The city virtually said to the athletes: “The Games are over, we’ve got your money, goodbye.” Gilberto Gonzalez, a leader of the 2003 Games, said: “It was awful; we won’t do that in Puerto Rico.”

A Tourist Event

Lloyd said that despite the financial loss, he would do it again. “The city and state are happy with the numbers we brought in,” Lloyd said. “They’ll cover our losses.”

The event was considered by the Brisbane community to be a tourist event, not a sports event. The city and state of Queensland were thrilled to have nearly 5000 athletes and their families and friends freely spending money for 11 days. The meet had an economic impact on Queensland of about US$11 million, according to Queensland tourist officials.

Indeed, WMA President Torsten Carlius said he is so confident bidders want the event, he hopes to soon raise the rights fee from the current US $40,000 to US $150,000.

“They will pay it, no problem,” he said, citing the US$1 million rights fee for the 2002 World Masters Games (in Melbourne, Australia).

Others are not so sure.

That the event succeeded at all was remarkable. Literally hundreds of dedicated people had to work for little or no pay – sometimes long into the night – to get the job done.

Three Cities Bid for 2005

Despite the enormity of the task and the potential for financial disaster, three cities boldly stepped forward to bid for the 2005 Championships.

Helsinki (Finland), Sacramento (USA), and San Sebastian (Spain) each lobbied the voting delegates for a week and delivered well-produced, professional presentations. They had video, brochures, caps, pins, and more. Each must have spent at least in the tens of thousands of dollars. Sacramento bought uniforms, flew in eight representatives to wear them, and threw two big receptions for the voters.

For its trouble, Sacramento finished last with only 26 votes in balloting at the General Assembly. Helsinki, which also staged a well-researched, impressive presentation, didn’t fare much better with 29 votes. San Sebastian, with a good presentation, but the weakest of the three, ran away with it with 63 votes for a first-ballot victory. Europeans wanted to go to a warm climate and felt it was Europe’s turn after Oceania (2001) and North America (2003).

All three bids were essentially financed by their respective tourist associations. The San Sebastian bid was prepared by Octagon, a London-based marketing firm. Long gone are the days when a few masters athletes in track suits would stand in front of the Assembly with no video, no slides and not much preparation and quietly say, “We’d like to host the Games.” The Championships have become big business, with the focus on tourism first and sport second.

After the voting, a senior WMA official met with the Spaniards to begin planning for 2005. “But all I saw were a politician and a promoter,” he said. “No one from Spain knew much about putting on a track meet.”

U.S. Government Warnings

Moreover, the ETA Basque terrorist organization in the Spanish area has staged scores of attacks since 1999, resulting in more than two dozen deaths. The U.S. State Department warns travelers in the region to be wary of “muggings and pickpocketing.”

Are the delegates voting with their heads or their hearts? For geographical and political reasons? Or for who can put on the best event? Both cities they chose in 1999 – Kuala Lumpur for the 2003 Stadia Championships and Buenos Aires for the 2002 Non-Stadia Championships – are out. The Malaysians were forced out; the Argentinians withdrew.

A Waste of Athletes’ Money?

And where were the reports of the inspection trips? The WAVA Council sent one or more council members to each of the three sites earlier this year to inspect their facilities.

The inspectors reported to the Council that all three sites were “suitable.” But no written evaluation of any site was ever presented to the voting delegates.

Those trips cost several thousand dollars, nearly half of which was paid for by the $15 WAVA fee that each athlete pays to enter the Championships. So what was the value of those trips? What are the athletes paying for?

Tom Jordan, WMA’s Executive VP, said the procedure may be changed in the future. Let us hope so.

Because of logistical problems, many delegates had received little or no information on the bidding cities until the time of the presentations. As a result, it may have been hard to cast an intelligent vote. Some delegates wanted to ask questions of the bidders, but, contrary to past assemblies, Carlius wouldn’t allow it. A motion from the floor to spend 10 minutes asking questions of each bidder got only 28 affirmative votes. Carlius did not ask for the ‘no’ votes.

Bidders Treated Shabbily

Perhaps the delegates had, indeed, made up their minds. But the fact was that both Helsinki and Sacramento were treated shabbily. The three bidders were forced to wait all day and then allowed only 20 minutes each to present their cases. These bidders were high-minded, serious people who spent a fortune to prepare and come here. Yet WAVA brushed them aside with an arrogance that seemed to say: “We’ve got plenty of bids; we don’t have to be nice to you or anyone.”

Such an attitude may well come back to haunt WMA in the future. The Helsinki representatives reportedly stormed out, saying they would never again submit themselves to such treatment and humiliation. Sacramento was more philosophical. “It was a great experience and we learned a lot,” said John McCasey. “We might even bid next time for 2007; but if the rights fee is $150,000, we will politely decline.”

The whole presentation process was not, as the Aussies would say, fair dinkum. In the future, the presentations should be made in the morning, not in the late afternoon.

Another problem with the voting in the General Assembly is that it does not accurately reflect the wishes of the athletes. Nations with only one or two competitors each get one vote, whereas the big countries like the USA (with 405 athletes) and Germany (with 437) are limited to five votes. So, theoretically, six athletes from six different countries have more voting power than 405 USA athletes. The small countries have far more voting clout that the big ones. It’s an unfair voting system which is unlikely to change. In fact, there will be pressure in the future to go to a “one-country, one-vote” system, the method now used by the IAAF.

Lack of Openness

The lack of fairness, openness, and free discussion is becoming more pernicious within WAVA (WMA). Early in the meeting, it was hard to get Carlius to call for a vote on an important issue. Mary Rosado, a new USA delegate, was thrown out of three Standing Committee meetings which wanted to meet in closed (read “secret”) session.

At the Women’s Assembly, it was a virtual secret whether a new Chairperson would be chosen by the Women’s “Assembly” or the Women’s “Committee.” Or would incumbent Bridget Cushen continue as Chair for two more years? Or four more? No one knew.

When Carlius announced at the General Assembly that Cushen would continue as the Chairperson, he was challenged by an Australian delegate as to who made that decision and when. After much back and forth, Carlius declared nominations open for the women’s chair to be voted upon by the whole Assembly – not just by the women as in past years.

It was a mess and unfair to everyone involved. The final result, however, was popular. The capable Marina Hoernecke-Gil agreed to serve and won over three other women who had to compose a two-minute speech on the spur of the moment.

Kuala Lumpur Protests

There is still secrecy as to why Kuala Lumpur was booted out. No detailed report was ever given by the WAVA Council.

“Carlius did not give us any official letter stating the Games had been pulled,” said S. Sivapragasam, Malaysian Secretary. “We do not understand what went wrong.”

WAVA gives the impression it doesn’t care all that much for democracy. Of course, neither did the Wehrmacht or Louis XIV.

Puerto Rico in 2003

The 2003 Games were awarded by the WAVA Council – not by the General Assembly – to Carolina, a suburb of San Juan, Puerto Rico. Cauguas, P.R., was an impressive, but unsuccessful bidder in Gateshead for the 2003 event. But Carolina never made a presentation to the General Assembly.

Now the Puerto Ricans have to be ready in two years, rather than the traditional four years. Can they do it?

One positive outcome of the General Assembly was that the USA's Rex Harvey was chosen by the delegates to be the new Stadia Vice-President. Harvey is a technical T&F genius and an indefatigable worker. If anyone can save a meet – as he did in Durban in 1997 – or help an LOC get organized, it’s Harvey.

“I’ll be working closely with the Puerto Ricans for the next two years,” Harvey assured.

Officiating

The officiating at the meet – with a few notable exceptions – was excellent; 310 officials, including 126 from overseas, kept the meet moving smoothly. They devoted up to 11 days of their life for a free lunch and US$30 a day.

Why they do it is often a mystery. However, the dark side of it is that a few do it to stoke their egos and do a power trip on defenseless athletes.

“The officials were too officious,” said Brian Keaveney, Canada's team manager.

For example, about eight runners, including three potential gold medallists, were disqualified in the heats of the 400 for “stepping on their lane lines.” No proof was offered by the accusing official that any athlete stepped on the line. And even if the runner did, the violations reportedly didn’t affect the results of any race. Yet the jury of appeal upheld the DQs, sanctimoniously quoting the rule book, but abandoning common sense and fair play.

In horse racing, for example, if one horse impedes another, the animal is DQed only if the foul affected the outcome of the race. In basketball, they say: “No harm, no foul.”

To DQ runners in a heat for a ticky-tack violation seemed hardly in the spirit of what the World Veterans Championships should be about.

In the relays, 17 teams were DQed for minor infractions. Yes, you read that right. Seventeen! A few officials had a field day. Earlier, WAVA had threatened to DQ people who walked in the marathon.

A small minority of officials has “no life and no power,” said one observer. “Giving athletes a hard time is cheaper for them than paying a shrink to solve their problems.”

Officials should be told these are not the Olympics, but a friendly gathering of older athletes. Rules should be followed, but fairness and common sense should be paramount.

Doping

The delegates voted that WMA adopt the IAAF rules concerning doping and the use of banned substances. What about medical exemptions? None. The sentiment was nearly unanimous that performance-enhancing drugs should not be tolerated for any reason.

A motion that masters should be freed from strict controls until more data are available on age-required medication did not even reach the floor for discussion. A WMA Arbitration Panel to handle appeals in drug cases will be set up within WMA’s Discipline Committee.

Jacques Rogge, the new head of the International Olympic Committee, calls doping his biggest challenge. It is certainly one of the WMA’s major concerns, as well.

Nationalism

Here, again, the delegates voted that all competitors in future World Championships must wear national uniforms that are approved by their national governing bodies. This is a 180-degree turn from the early days when WAVA deliberately tried to stay away from the nationalism that has long permeated open athletics.

WAVA Arrogance

The final hint that arrogance has crept into the WAVA hierarchy is that, throughout the Brisbane Championships, the letters V.I.P. (Very Important Persons) were everywhere.

There were VIP receptions, a private VIP section at the International Party, and special VIP functions during the week at which athletes were clearly not welcome. At least one WAVA Council member was rightfully embarrassed by the ostentatious display. The whole thing smacked of elitism, royalty vs. the rabble, and an “us vs. them” mentality, exactly the opposite of what WAVA is supposed to be about.

Europeans Control WMA

All these issues – fairness, openness, free discussion, officiating, doping, elitism – reflect the schism that has troubled WAVA since the mid-1980s. The Europeans have gradually gained voting strength and now control nearly as many votes in the General Assembly as the other five regions combined. Four of the seven elected Council members are from Europe. The Europeans are very traditional in their athletic attitudes and clearly wish to be under the shelter of the IAAF umbrella in all matters.

The founders of the masters program – David Pain, Don Farquharson, Wal Shepard, Bill Taylor, Roland Jerneryd, Alastair Lynn, Jack Fitzgerald, and others – believed in friendly competition, equality and fairness. They were opposed to nationalism, elitism, and secrecy. Much of what they pioneered still remains. But much of what they opposed has crept into the program. It’s not the same anymore.

Maybe we should be grateful that any public votes at all are taken in the Assembly. Perhaps we should be content that no one refers to the President as “His Excellency,” as is de rigueur in IOC circles.

Maybe everything is okay with the athletes and even with many voting delegates. After all, many athletes said they had a good time in Brisbane. Maybe no one cares, as long as there’s a track, a starter, and a timer at a finish line.

Well, we should care. The new WMA should take a long, hard look at itself. It should ask itself what it is doing and where it is going. After all, nothing is forever.