Six Winners

Earlier this week, World Athletics announced its 2023 Athletes of the Year.  Except, instead of picking just one man and woman as in years past, they chose six Athletes of the Year!  Track and field were separated for the first time, and they also selected an Athlete of the Year for the road events (so, basically, the marathon).  The reaction has been mixed to say the least.

On the surface, their rationale for splitting track and field into two separate awards does at least kind of make sense.  It's extremely difficult to compare field event performances with those on the track, especially since field athletes only compete in their specialty and the runners often race over several distances.  Likewise, you can't really compare anything the in-stadium athletes do with what the road runners do, especially since road runners will generally only race a few times a year.

While that's a fair point, it's also an incomplete one.  I'll give you that it's tough to compare a sprinter with a pole vaulter with a marathoner, but is it any easier to compare a long/triple jumper to a shot putter?  Or a decathlete, who does it all?  Or a 100/200 sprinter to a 1500/5000 runner?  Or, when he was at the height of his powers, Usain Bolt to anybody?  Which is something you're still doing even if you separate "track" and "field."

However, the bigger problem is that this change was kind of just sprung on people.  World Athletics said that they made the decision, in part, because of feedback they received during the voting process.  But the voting process was already underway!  When the finalists were announced and people were asked to vote for a winner, they thought they were only choosing one man and woman.  Then...surprise!  You weren't!

There are a few problems with this last-minute change.  The first is the most obvious--the lack of transparency about it.  People didn't actually know what they were voting for, and it does seem like it was a decision that a higher-up just made because they wanted to make sure somebody got recognized.  Then there's the fact that the finalists weren't divided by event.  They announced five finalists per gender, with no "track," "field" or "road" distinction.  Three of those five received the award.

The five men's finalists were three field event athletes (Neeraj Chopra, Ryan Crouser and Mondo Duplantis), one track athlete (Noah Lyles) and one marathoner (Kelvin Kiptum).  Since there were no other finalists in their event area, Lyles and Kiptum were obviously two of the three men's winners.  So, the only actual competition was between Duplantis, Crouser and Chopra, with Duplantis taking home the third Athlete of the Year award.

For the women, it was the exact opposite.  Yulimar Rojas was the only field event athlete among the five finalists, and Tigit Assefa was the only road runner.  The other three finalists were track athletes--Femke Bol, Shericka Jackson and Faith Kipyegon.  Really, it was a contest between Kipyegon and Bol, with the Kenyan rightfully being recognized after setting three world records and winning two gold medals at the World Championships.  Frankly, the competition between Kipyegon, Bol and the other three finalists wasn't even close.  If Kipyegon was going to share the award with anybody, it should've been Bol.  Instead, she shares it was Rojas and Assefa.

Lyles didn't seem to mind sharing the award.  He actually joked with Duplantis during the season that one of his goals for this year was to "beat" him and be named World Athlete of the Year.  It would've been a close competition between the two.  And, frankly, I don't know which one of them would've won.  My vote would've gone to Lyles, but it's not as if Duplantis would've been a bad choice.  Instead, we'll never know if it would've been Lyles or if it would've been Duplantis.  Because dividing the award between three athletes sure feels like World Athletics was taking the easy way out.

Fortunately, there are a few ways to rectify this moving forward.  If they plan on keeping the three separate awards (which isn't necessarily a guarantee after the backlash they've received), they need to increase the number of finalists and have that number be equal across all three disciplines.  I'd say you make it nine finalists, three from each group.  That way, when they do the online fan vote, fans actually have a choice between different candidates.  It won't feel like there are predetermined winners, which it did this year with four of the six awards.

Although, I'd suggest going back to one award.  Keep the three candidates from each category, but make them semifinalists.  The three winners in each discipline then move on as the finalists for the World Athlete of the Year.  They could even make a distinction if they want.  Call all three of them the "Athlete of the Year" for their specific event group (Track, Field, Road), with the winner of that final vote between the three declared the "World Athlete of the Year."  That solution could be the best of both worlds.  They still have the separate awards without making the distinction feel watered down.

That's my biggest issue with the six World Athletes of the Year.  The award was first presented in 1988.  For 34 years, they had absolutely no problem choosing between sprinters and distance runners and jumpers and throwers.  That, frankly, was the point.  They were determined to be the one best male and one best female athlete across the entire broad spectrum of track & field over that calendar year.  That's a big deal and a tremendous honor.

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying it's any less of an honor to be one of three winners per gender instead of the sole winner.  It's not the athletes' fault that World Athletics changed the rules.  From an outsider's perspective, though, there is a bit of an asterisk on this year's selections.  World Athletics was able to choose only one athlete for 34 years, then, suddenly, in the 35th year of the award, they decided that it was too hard to do that.  Which, frankly, is a weak excuse.  And it does take a little something away.

It's also not as difficult as they'd like you to believe to determine who was the best across all event disciplines.  On the women's side, it wasn't even close.  Faith Kipyegon was the clear World Athlete of the Year.  The decision between Duplantis and Lyles, admittedly, would've been tougher.  But three gold medals at the World Championships and an undefeated season in the 200 is hard to overlook, even compared to continued dominance and another world record.

Choosing the World Athletes of the Year is supposed to be hard.  It would be even if track & field wasn't such a diverse sport.  But it's not an impossible task.  And choosing three per gender instead of one might look more inclusive and make World Athletics feel better, but really all it's doing is diluting what should be the sport's highest honor.  So, hopefully this is the first and last time there are six World Athletes of the Year instead of two.