Why Track and Field NEEDS more rivalries
The future of track depends on more than fast times, it needs storylines
Hello everyone, and welcome back to the Kicking For Home newsletter! I say welcome back because I’ve been away for about five weeks. I figured the best way to return was with a topic I think could help improve track and field. That topic is rivalries, a constant that exists in most sports, whether they’re mainstream or more niche. But unfortunately, track and field just misses the mark with this, and it needs more rivalries. So let’s break down why that is, and why more rivalries could actually be a huge win for the sport.
The biggest reason track lacks rivalries is the race schedule. There are just too many meets. For example, in the NBA, each team has 82 games, and there is no variation within this; no choice. But in track, the only standardized event that everyone prepares for is the Olympics, which only happens every four years. This is one of the issues. Since athletes pick and choose meets, it’s rare to see the same competitors going head-to-head regularly. Take Jakob Ingebrigtsen and Josh Kerr. They’ve got the makings of a great rivalry—but they only race each other at the biggest meets, like the Pre Classic or the Olympics. This can be in part because athletes train on different schedules, but top athletes competing at the same meets, maybe in a league format, should become the norm, like Grand Slam Track, which I’ve mentioned before. However, while this is a start, there should be more rivalries in track and field, but here’s why rivalries really matter.
Rivalries drive engagement, not just from the athletes, but from fans too. A real rivalry means you’re willing to go all out just to beat that one person. This drives engagement from the athletes because it pushes athletes to give that little bit extra, taking one step further to beat that person. This then translates to the fans because, as a fan, if I see or know that an athlete is going to try harder to come out on top, I would be more excited knowing that the runners could run faster than they ever could have before, just to beat someone. Another benefit, which I kind of touched on already, is that rivalries lead to faster times and better performances. Now more than ever, races are often times led by pacers, or wavelights, simulating competition. But rivalries are REAL competition, person vs. person at all times. While pacers do bring fast times and performances, nothing promotes great performances like a fellow competitor. It is so much easier to run fast when there is someone who is racing alongside you, and someone that you want to beat. A rivalry gives an athlete a reason to push harder, resulting in better performances over time.
Overall, track and field needs more rivalries; that’s the bottom line. Rivalries let the sport get faster, more exciting, and more fun to watch.