1. Why are you running for masters T&F chair?

I did not intend to run. 

As a member of the nominations committee, I sought candidates and attempted to recruit those who appeared to be well-qualified, but they were not available. One candidate in particular had all of the qualifications that I feel necessary for chair.
-- A strong vision for the future of the masters program
-- A proven record in the USATF context of introducing new programs and organizational changes in face of stiff opposition
-- The ability to operate effectively in promoting/defending our program in the USATF organization as a whole
-- The ability to organize and maintain effective committee structures in our own committee to accomplish the program goals
-- A proven record of tolerance to criticism and the ability to resist pressure from forceful minorities when the overall goals might be compromised

When the candidates that I felt were qualified turned us down, a longtime contributor to our program asked me if I would consider a nomination. After much thought and encouragement from longtime contributors whose opinion I respect, I felt that my candidacy could be more effective that the available alternatives. 

In all sincerity, if the other candidates who met the qualifications described above decided to run, I would withdraw in a moment. In fact, if the other active candidates convince me that they meet those qualifications better than I meet them, I will immediately throw my support behind them. In the meantime, let the voters decide.

2. What is your background in track and field -- your accomplishments as an athlete or official or both. What do you do in your nontrack life? Where do you live?

Let me be clear about my athletic abilities – I am a mediocre athlete who trains hard but needed a goodly share of luck for whatever success that I have had. 

My only success is at the steeplechase with four national championships (87, 90, 91, 92) when the competition was not as stiff as now. I continue to place in most races and was 4th in Eugene this year. I usually make the All-American standard in the steeple (missed it when recovering from a knee injury) and did so this year. I also compete in LDR and have good relationships in that community as well. 

I am currently Masters T&F Chair for the Southern California Association and member of its board since 1992. I was president of the Southern California Striders for three years. I have attended and been an active masters committee participant as a voting delegate to the national convention since 1992. Since the introduction of the Legends events in 1997 at the Mt. San Antonio College Relays, my subcommittee has gradually increased the number of masters events in elite meets and this year added an event at the USATF  Indoor Championships, the Prefontaine Classic and two events at the U.S. Olympic Trials. 

I have some past record in organizing athletic events and founded a company which put on a training camp – the Mammoth Athletics Camp – in 1987-89. This still survives as a division of my personal computer consulting company and provides fitness services to corporations. This experience led to close personal relationships with many important figures in USATF and the elite programs. 

3. Masters track is perpetually underfunded. How would you raise more money for the masters program?

The constant struggle to obtain adequate financial support has been an abiding issue with me since I learned the painful lessons about business in track and field when I founded the Mammoth Athletics Camp – and lost money! My answer is best described in my detailed proposal which is currently under review by Craig Masback. This proposal was conceived well before I had any notions of being a candidate. This was just in response to the struggle to make the Masters events at the elite meets work better and included other experiences as the past president of the Striders track club.

Briefly, the proposal identifies the fact that by trying to sell programs which are separated into youth, elite and masters, we limit our attractiveness to potential sponsors. A unified approach makes business sense and works well for the few examples that try it. If this became a standard at the national level, a whole new class of sponsorship would become available, both locally and nationally. Refer to the proposal for the details. I am currently in discussion with some backers for an example club in my area.

4. Masters meets on the local level attract relatively small numbers. How would you promote the program to increase the number of participants?

The proposed unified track club proposal is also an answer to providing a feed into our masters program from aging elites – as it is from youth to elite. Additionally, my bio (available on request) describes many small innovations (founding the UCLA Sunday morning track group and initiating the publication of masters training groups in Masters News) which have helped improve participation.

5. The national headquarters of USATF in Indianapolis reminds the public that track is a "sport for life," but its TV commercials and Fast Forward magazine ignore the masters element of the organization. How would you change this?

My proposal addresses exactly this issue and suggests how it must change. If I were chair, I would have the opportunity to make this change at the national level. In promoting the proposal, I obtained the support of several of the chairs and the first vice president, and we are on the path to making it happen.

6. Although the recent Eugene national masters outdoor meet was highly praised by participants, the previous year's meet at Disney World's Wide World of Sports Complex in Orlando was almost universally despised. What can the chairman do to insure a wider selection of host city candidates?

The nationals are now big business. My initial thoughts are to consider the same solution that works for the Indoors. Fairness is secondary to the proven ability to meet professional standards in meet management. Eugene clearly knows how; so does Boston and other organizers of great meets. We shouldn’t take chances with groups that need to learn. The Olympics almost died making that mistake and Greece is now facing it because an emotional choice was made. It is still a committee election to confer the award, but we can now afford to be choosy because we bring a lot to the host city.

7. In 2000, USATF regional masters meets in the Southeast and West have run into serious problems. One was canceled and one almost was. How would you make sure all regions are assured of meets?

This is really a reflection of an incomplete committee structure. There was no clearly identified responsibilities for the regional coordinators and some positions remained unfilled – hence the work went undone. There should be some hierarchy in the maintenance of the committee structure – national -> regional -> local association. It won’t be perfect but the chain of responsibility is largely nonexistent at present and has been for some time. This is one of my three priorities to make the committee structure fully functional. See # 12

8. Part of your mandate as masters chair is communicating effectively with the various parts of the masters movement. How would you share your plans with the masters masses?

Briefly I served as the representative to the national governing body for communications -- when that committee existed. The NGB doesn’t do as good a job as we do with National Masters News. Obviously, that has to continue and expand in some respects. The real potential is with the new Web-based media. As a computer guy for 40+ years, it really appeals to me. This very questionnaire is a great idea. How else can we get these issues out to everyone and get a good dialogue going? It is a perfect example of the positive use to be made of the new technology.

My only request is that we keep it civil. We are sportsmen because we enjoy it – there is no place for personal attacks in the name of communication. That is no way to increase the enjoyment of our sport. Constructive critique is welcome. Just keep it polite and stick to the issues. I would propose that you – Ken – wield that mighty journalistic sword on anyone who violates that rule.

9. Sacramento is hoping to bid for the 2005 world WAVA meet. How can you help this bid?

Those folks sure knew how to put on the best OT’s ever and they even showcased our Masters for the first time. I am really inclined to believe that their WAVA meet would be as good – with a real crowd to fire us up. Obviously, the committee ought to establish a dedicated group to help make it happen. This would also be a perfect excuse to go to the NGB and get them to back the US bid in a manner similar to their backing of U.S. bids for other international meets. Why not? We are promoting T&F in the U.S. in a way just as important as an elite meet.

10. Does USATF masters need a Web site for promoting the program? If yes, how would you create/produce and supply content for this site?

 The lack of an “official” masters Web site is indefensible. Whatever holdup exists at the NGB, it can be removed. This is no different than the blockades we ran into for our events at the OT’s. Kick hard enough, long enough and it yields. We must have an official path (link) from USATF to Masters T&F (and LDR, get them to help kick). Of necessity, the “official” site will be less free-wheeling than the private sites are, but there must be one. 

Supplying a webmaster is another issue. I would lobby for a sponsor to be able to support a stipend for a paid webmaster. The details of doing this are unclear, but I feel sure that you must have somebody getting paid even a nominal amount to demand consistent quality and responsiveness.

11. What changes are needed in the anti-doping rules to accommodate the different needs of masters athletes (from elite athletes)? How would you go about putting such changes into effect?

Some change is needed for masters. Clearly when large numbers of our senior women were unknowingly taking an ordinary hormonal-replacement-therapy (HRT) prescription that contained a small amount of a banned substance for obvious medical reasons, something needs to change. I don’t think that we should be imposing the rule on the doctors so we should do the changing. I am sure that similar examples exist for the men. A thorough review of this is vital but we have to set the precedent with this clear-cut example.

I have already been discussing a simple means to get some timely solutions under way. Graeme Shirley – our worthy rules coordinator – suggested a procedural method to get some action going. Also, with Ken Weinbel’s approval, we have solicited an able volunteer who will be the action person to carry this through the tortuous process. Rose Monday was the Active Athlete’s chair when the drug program was restructured for the NGB and she played one of the key roles in getting the program going. She knows the details, knows the people and has a record of pushing through the stiffest opposition. A key meeting will be taking place soon, but it is only the beginning. This will be a tough one. Fortunately, we have the talent to solve it.