A track back to fan friendliness.

Byline: COMMENTARY By Curtis Anderson The Register-Guard

Can you imagine a PGA golf tournament without a leaderboard? A baseball, football or basketball game without a scoreboard? A NASCAR race without knowing who's ahead or how many laps have been run?

Of course not.

To do so would make an athletic event completely inaccessible to the average fan. We need to know the context of a competitive event in order to fully understand what's at stake at any given moment.

It's the essence of sports drama.

Sadly, it's a concept that continues to elude the sport of track and field.

Don't get me wrong.

Track and field is a sport that I hold dear to my heart, one that has given me a lifetime of memories, from pure exhilaration to heartbreaking agony, and the vast majority of athletes are humble, gracious and candid.

I will never forget the deafening silence of U.S. decathlete Dan O'Brien's no-height in the pole vault at the 1992 Olympic Trials in New Orleans, or the ear-splitting roar that erupted from the East Grandstand at Hayward Field at the 2001 Pre Classic when schoolboy Alan Webb began his record-setting charge on the backstretch, eclipsing Jim Ryun's 36-year-old prep record in the mile.

In my opinion, no other sport can match the simple humanity or pure emotion of `run faster, throw farther, jump higher.'

Unfortunately, to the average sports fan in America, track and field is largely irrelevant in a non-Olympic year, and even when attending a meet in person - such as the recent USA Outdoor Track & Field Championships in Indianapolis - it can be a frustrating and bewildering experience.

Why? Because nobody tells you what's going on.

This is especially true in the field events, where each throw or jump can be filled with tension, at times making the difference between a berth on the U.S. team that will compete in the World Championships, or catching a flight home to begin another cycle of training for the next season.

At a championship meet, there is simply too much going on for the announcers to provide timely updates on every event.

Unless you're locked in on a single event, and lucky enough to have an unobstructed view of the infield indicators - hand-operated signs or electronic readerboards that give the athlete's name and mark - you have little or no idea who's on the runway, where they stand in the competition or what they've done thus far.

Or maybe there's no indicator at all, as in the men's and women's hammer throw in Indianapolis. God forbid you turn your head to chat with a friend, go buy a hot dog or take a restroom break.

At that point, you are completely lost.

With the 2008 U.S. Olympic Track & Field Trials less than one year away, and the promise of a brand new state-of-the-art videoboard at Hayward Field, an opportunity exists to correct these wrongs.

Here's what I think should happen:

Create a field event scoreboard.

This would be used for the javelin, shot put, discus, hammer, long jump, triple jump, high jump and pole vault.

As each event unfolds, maintain a list of the top eight competitors with their best mark of the day, the current round of competition and where they stand overall. Update those elements after each throw or jump.

Make sure every fan in the stadium can figure out who's performing and what the stakes are with one easy glance.

Utilize a sports ticker.

Much like CNN does with stock reports, or ESPN with daily sports results, produce a continuous stream of agate-style information at the bottom of the scoreboard with complete results of the day's events.

Update and repeat throughout the meet.

In this manner, fans can catch up with any event by waiting for results to scroll across the bottom of the scoreboard.

Treat distance races like NASCAR.

In the 5,000 and 10,000, in particular, there is no reason why fans shouldn't know the exact order of the race after each lap.

Who's leading? What pace are they on? What lap did they just complete? How fast was their split? How far behind are the other runners? All of that information should be available on the scoreboard after each lap of the race.

OK.

Now that we've made the experience of attending a big-time track and field meet more accessible, and one hopes, more enjoyable, why not try a radical concept in hosting the U.S. championships?

First of all, don't mess with the Olympic Trials.

Every four years, bring together the nation's best and brightest track and field athletes at one venue for a 10-day celebration. With Olympic berths at stake, there will always be good crowds and tremendous energy.

As a Eugene resident, I would selfishly argue that Hayward Field deserves to host the Trials on a semi-regular basis. We can't hog the event, but a rotation that would guarantee the Trials come to Track Town, USA, at least every third Olympics - or once every 12 years - should suffice.

However, during the non-Olympic years, why not experiment? It's not like anybody is paying attention.

One of track and field's main problems with mainstream America is that during a multiple-day championship meet, there are too many events and it takes too long for a single day of competition.

For example, at the U.S. championships in Indianapolis, with the exception of Sunday's compressed made-for-TV format from noon to 2:50 p.m., the meet schedule on Thursday, Friday and Saturday dragged on for eight to 11 hours each day.

By anybody's standards, that's way too long.

In this regard, the Prefontaine Classic is the gold standard.

The number of contested events is manageable. There are no qualifying heats or flights. Each event is stocked with world-class performers. The athletes are introduced and their performances are updated in a meaningful fashion.

And best of all, the whole thing lasts less than 2 1/2 hours.

So, why not break up the U.S. championships into separate and smaller meets?

Bring the distance events to Eugene. Take the sprints, hurdles and horizontal jumps to Sacramento, or a similar hot weather climate, and find a willing host for the throws and vertical jumps.

Each championship venue gets a three-year deal. Stagger the meets so they aren't taking place on the same dates. Jack up the prize money and get live television involved. Promote and interview all of the athletes. Sell beer at each event.

Would it work? I don't know.

But imagine the buzz created in Eugene if the best distance runners in America showed up at Hayward Field to run the 800, 1,500, 3,000 steeplechase, 5,000 and 10,000 in two-hour segments each night over a four-day period.

Nick Symmonds vs. Khadevis Robinson in the 800? Alan Webb in the 1,500? Galen Rupp and Dathan Ritzenhein in the 10K? Alysia Johnson and Rebekah Noble in the 800? Deena Kastor in the 10K?

I think it would be off the hook.

The U.S. championships in Indianapolis drew 33,540 fans over five days last month.

I bet you would come close to that figure with a four-day U.S. championship meet in the distances in Eugene, and I have to believe a similar response could be generated for the world's best sprinters, hurdlers and jumpers.

Once people got used to the idea, and they were able to actively engage the athletes and their events, I think the throwers, high jumpers and pole vaulters would be welcomed on a slightly smaller scale.

Obviously, I have conveniently ignored any discussion of financial or logistical problems, but if track and field is serious about wanting to grow its fan base outside the sport, what does it have to lose?

It's already one of the least fan-friendly sports in America.