![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
To date, scholars have side-stepped examining the applicability of the Anti-Blowout thesis in parallel sports. This essay is an attempt to test this construct in the context of endurance footraces. After a review of the central tenets of Dixon’s definition of the Anti-Blowout thesis, I will provide a sketch of what blowouts look like in footraces including a description of a secured victory and the subsequent creation of a wide margin of victory. Conclusions suggest that opportunities do exist for runners to malevolently run others into the ground, although efforts to remedy such actions are challenging due to the structure of the footrace practice.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. Hardman et al. (Citation1996) define interactive tests, such as football and basketball, as games where ‘opponents’ actions become part of the testing conditions. The challenge presented to players is contingent on the others’ abilities. Contestants are both ‘test-makers’ as well as ‘test-takers’, and proficiency at both elements determines the pursuit and achievement of excellence’ (61).
2. Hardman et al. (Citation1996) define parallel tests, such as ‘track races run in lanes’ and golf, as games where ‘participants can play to the best of their ability, primarily independent of the progress of their opponent’ (61).
3. For quick reference, Santana (Citation2017) summarizes these threads.
4. This is based on the 2019 USATF (Blackburn, Citation2019) rules and, as such, provides a USA-centric example. Rule 7 (pages 13 and 14) covers team scoring. What I describe here is what they term ‘scoring by place’. I would also note that there is ‘scoring by time,’ which includes ‘the aggregate time of the scoring members’ (lowest aggregate time wins) and ‘scoring by distance’, which is ‘the sum of the distance covered by scoring team members’ (greatest aggregate distance wins). In my experience, scoring by place is most often used in competitive cross-country settings.
5. Per USATF rules, if scoring was by time or by distance instead of place, this would not be the case as runners could continually add to their final score until all participants completed the entire race. Perhaps this is why scoring by place is most common.
6. For an analogous interactive sport example, consider an American football game where a team is down five touchdowns in the first quarter of play versus the same team being tied through three quarters and then giving up five touchdowns in the fourth. The former scenario would most likely be described as a blowout while the latter would be qualified as being blown out in the fourth quarter. I would suggest that the former carries more AB thesis consideration than the latter, much like a runner who builds a sizeable lead in the early parts of a race versus one that does not do so until the final leg.
7. Dixon expresses surprise at Feezell’s (Citation1999) use of baseball to test the validity of his claims noting that in baseball ‘no time limit exists, so that dramatic comebacks are possible, if unlikely, even when facing a large deficit … in the ninth inning. For this reason, some doubt always exists about whether victory really has been secured in baseball before the final out, so that it isn’t clear that any given blowout actually violates the (revised) AB thesis’ (Citation2000, 94).
8. I am, of course, ruling out highly unlikely occurrences such as the lead runner giving up, succumbing to injury or taking a wrong turn. These exceptional happenings could occur even if it was a close race and are not dependent on the trailing runner’s skillful ability. It would be difficult to describe this as a dramatic comeback, but rather benefitting from someone else’s misfortune.
9. As noted earlier, the sooner this point is achieved in the race, the greater the potential for one to meaningfully run someone into the ground.
10. To be clear, these authors do not overtly claim this perspective within their essays. Yet their language also does not include a caveat that tempers the pursuit of ‘excellence’ and ‘achievement’ for ongoing strategic success from race to race.
11. Dixon (Citation1992) acknowledges this in his original work highlighting that it might be ‘unwise’ for a coach to pursue wide margins of victory and risk injury or forgo opportunities to rest players (3). In his reply to Hardman et al. (Citation1996), he also notes that these responses to a wide margin of victory might be ‘prudent’ and acceptable strategies (Dixon Citation1998, 63–64).
12. I think primarily here of cross-country races. On tracks or looped courses, the runner may certainly have greater awareness of this.
13. We must at least acknowledge that footraces are generally horrible spectator sports. More often than not, spectators and coaches will gather in key locations along the course with the most significant concentration at the start/finish line. For much of the course, runners are generally on their own. This contrasts with interactive sports where all action is displayed on the pitch or court in front of and in earshot of all spectators and coaches.
14. Consider one basketball team blowing out another. As the winning team approaches the 100-point mark, the coaches and spectators encourage the team to keep scoring and achieve that total. I believe that encouraging runners to lap others results in similar optics.