Why Usain Bolt Was Not Time’s Person of the Year 2009



2010 March, 4th
Phil Butler
Phil Butler
feature photo

Time’s Person of the Year issue has been a highlight of print and now digital magazinedom since 1927. Not always an agreeable figure, Time has often selected personalities of questionable moral fortitude. 2009′s nominees included a few such notorious figures, but maybe the world’s fastest human ever, Usain Bolt, was certainly not in that vein. So, why did Time cast such an extraordinary athlete negatively then?

The winner of Time’s 2009 Person of the Year was Ben Shalom Bernanke, a notable economist and Chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve under President Bush, and now President Obama. Just why he outdistanced people like Usain Bolt and many others, is for me, still quite unclear. Maybe bean counting has been transported somehow to the pinnacle of human endeavor? But for whoever wrote Time’s lead in to the issue and the nominees, everything boils down simply to, “knowing what the hell one is talking about.” Let me explain.

Time to Think

In an article about the nominees for 2009 Time offered up basically sound bit Pro’s and Con’s on various nominees, including Bolt. Whoever the author was (I cannot see any name), that person basically “half assed” their job. Which leads one to the realization maybe that expecting a true winner is as far outside reality as we can get. Bolt’s “Pro’s and Con’s” illustrate what I mean here. I highlight in italics the pertinent parts for later demonstration.

Pro: At this year’s World Championships, Bolt somehow topped his awe-inspiring performance at the Beijing Olympics. He ran the 100-m in 9.58 seconds and the 200-m in 19.19 seconds, breaking his own world records in each sprint and keeping track and field in the sports spotlight. In the wake of his latest achievements, scientists wondered if he’d pushed the limit of human athletic performance.

Con: Track and field is still essentially a fringe sport. Plus, given track’s sordid steroid history, it’s impossible for many observers not to wonder if performance-enhancing drugs had a role in his record-breaking dashes.

It is impossible for the author of these passages NOT to be some stuffy, desk riding, nincompoop in my view. This is what’s impossible. First and foremost, Track and Field is in fact the core essence of all athletic endeavor. Minimizing its value in to human athletic endeavor in any way, is tantamount to describing human cells as insignificant. True, the sport outside Olympic competition is not nearly as widely viewed on television, but this is a function of event dynamics rather than appeal. Running, jumping, walking, and throwing are the basis for everything, always have been. In fact, track dates to 776 BC just where Olympic competition enters – people have been racing one another since the dawn of time.

Usain BoltAs for Bolt’s accomplishments? Regardless of his ideology, personal habits, and especially considering he has to be the most steroid tested human being on the planet, he is the world’s fastest human being over both the 100 and 200 meter distances – ever.

Well, save one individual who did not have the benefit of modern timing, training, and equipment enhancements – one Bob Hayes. Since we are at Hayes, his exploits can also help us understand both how Bolt accomplished such feats, and negate the Time authors lazy assumption about steroids. Let me explain.

The Lesson of Bullet Bob Hayes – Anything is Possible

Bob Hayes was, and always has been, considered the fastest human being (speed wise) who ever lived. The basis for this is not revealed in his posted times in the Olympics or elsewhere, but via unofficially timed instances like the 4 x 100 meter final in Tokyo. The team behind, and impossible leg to catch up, Hayes was timed over the final 100 meters in 8.6 seconds, according to anyone who know’s the sport – a feat only Bob Hayes could have accounted for. Just the suspicion of this negates the impossibility of today’s athletes running 30 mph. I include a video of Hayes at that Olympics, excuse the poor quality. If you watch the last leg, the poor hand-off, Hayes position on taking the baton, and how far he won by, you can plainly evaluate human speed.

Bullet Bob HayesSo, if Hayes (pictured right) at 5 foot 10, 46 years ago, on a questionable track (an in his 100 meter event, in borrowed spikes) could leave humanity to become a god?

Well, Bolt at 6 feet 5 inches, with today’s enhanced training methods, on a much more modern and fast surface, is no work of magic other than raw athleticism. Hayes’ feats never had the honor of being analyzed by the Institute of Theoretical Astrophysics at the University of Oslo either. But, all this comparative stuff is fuel for another article. The point is, Time fairly well spit in the faces of anyone who gives a hoot about excellence in human endeavor, and I am not talking about just lonely hurdlers here either. Any athlete in the world with half an ounce of decency would back me on this.

If the reader needs any further evidence that “Time has lost its mind”, the “Con’s” for Apple visionary Steve Jobs list his health issues and his liver transplant as something which might put him out of the top spot? Wow! Taking 6 months off to almost die, and still having mastered in one of the most successful business ventures (innovation stimuluses) ever launched – is a negative? Nincompoops abound at Time.

Time for A Goofy

As a final epitaph of this (or these) Time reporters, the down side for maybe the people who should have won this accolade, the Iranian Protesters, was that their courage sacrifice was not ultimately successful. Another WOW! We have a Nobel Peace Prize recipient in the White House who deploys armies as large as Alexander’s days after snatching the award. Time, you are not only the PR Goofy Winners of 2009, you are just plain goofy period.

About the Author

author photo

Phil Butler is editor-in-chief of Everything PR and senior partner at Pamil Visions PR. He’s a widely cited authority on beta startups, search engines and public relations issues, and he has covered tech news since 2004. Phil wrote in the past for ReadWriteWeb, Mashable, Profy, SitePoint, Search Engine Journal, AltSearchEngines. Follow Phil on Twitter or send him an email at phil [at] pamil-visions [dot] com.

See All Posts by This Author

There Are 13 Responses So Far. »

  1. Comment by rolande momaud boisseau on 5 March 2010:

    It doesn’t matter!We all think that Mr Bolt is the best ,and this year he ‘ll be continued to do!(From LIMOGES FRANCE)

  2. Comment by michelle gaynor on 5 March 2010:

    Very intresting article Phil,keep up the good work.

  3. Comment by Phil Butler on 5 March 2010:

    Thanks Michelle, I appreciate your taking the time to come here and read some of these. And, of course, the compliments :)

    Always,
    Phil

  4. Comment by Пламен on 5 March 2010:

    Very nice article! I absolutely agree with Mr Butler!

  5. Comment by Joelle on 6 March 2010:

    Nice article, very interesting and I absolutly agree with you, Mr Butler.
    All the best

  6. Pingback by Laureus Awards March 10 - Bolt should run indoors - why Bolt wasn’t Time’s POTY | Puma Running on 6 March 2010:

    [...] Why Usain Bolt Was Not Time Magazine’s Person of the Year 2009. Phil Butler of Everything PR posts an interesting commentary including this line: “Con: Track and field is still essentially a fringe sport.” Continue reading here. [...]

  7. Comment by bobby on 8 March 2010:

    But you have to remember, Ben Johnson used steroids and went 8 years until he was finally caught. So the world will have to wait and see how long until something happens.

  8. Comment by Phil Butler on 8 March 2010:

    Bobby, Thanks for taking the time to comment. Ben Johnson beat Carl Lewis in the 100 meter final of the 1988 Olympics. His urine sample turned up positive for Stanozolol three days later. He was disqualified and Carl Lewis was awarded his first Olympic Gold.

    These athletes are tested more rigorously than in any other sport these days. This is largely due to shenanigans like the one Johnson tried to pull off. As for Usain Bolt, I doubt he could swallow two aspirin a month before an event without the officials knowing it. I just thought you should know the scoop.

    Always,
    Phil

  9. Comment by Dee on 10 March 2010:

    I am an unabashed Bolt fan, who thinks he is the real deal. Thanks for this perspective. As for the joker who thinks Track and Field a fringe sport – America sure didn’t think so in Berlin in 1936.

    The Bob Hayes leg gave me goose bumps similar to Asafa’s stellar 200 19.19 in Berlin and Asafa’s 8.7 on the anchor leg of the 4×100 in the 2008 Beijing Olympics. The sport is awesome.

  10. Comment by Phil Butler on 10 March 2010:

    Dee, Thanks so much for stopping by and making this comment, it frankly made my day. In the world, finding validation for what one knows is pure excellence, is frankly a rare thing. These feats, endeavors of man, in pure sport, should never be forgotten. They are, in essence, what stamps our humanity with hope, landmarks on a path toward the extraordinary. Not many think like this, but obviously this sentiment resides in people like you. Refreshing, really.

    For time to slight this sport, Usain, anyone, reduces us all. They should just forget about the nominees and pick some powerful politician or Wall Street tycoon – the people we really should look up to. :) Thanks again Dee.

    Always,
    Phil

  11. Pingback by A New IOC Ideal Toward Sport, Women and Excellence on 11 March 2010:

    [...] and A Memorable Olympiad2010/02/22 — Katarina Witt and the Lessons of Vancouver2010/03/04 — Why Usain Bolt Was Not Time’s Person of the Year 20092010/02/16 — Katarina Witt Playboy Images Surface Again [Updated] Filed Under: Featured • [...]

  12. Comment by Yard Girl on 23 March 2010:

    I read your articles, but tend to keep my comments to myself, as I know myself to be very opinionated. However, I just couldn’t keep quiet on this one.

    Phil, I wholeheartedly agree with your comments, including who the winner should have been and your dissection of the “cons” provided. As my father used to tell me as a child, common sense isn’t all that common. It astounds me how people are always so willing to dismiss things that are at the very core of our humanity because these things do not fit into what they are familiar with. Take football (soccer), for example. The most popular sport in the world, but because it was not popular in the US, it was, and still is, considered a fringe sport.

    American football is not common outside of the US, despite all the attempts over the years to make it so. Still, I do not denigrate the sport. As a matter of fact, I happen to love it and dedicate many Sundays (and some Saturdays) to watching the sport every year.

    I think what bothers me the most about the words in the Time article is that it speaks to people’s propensity to disregard anything that outside of their ken, despite the cultural importance it may have to someone else.

    Sorry for the diatribe, but I just felt the need to rant on this one, based on the utter stupidity of the words of those ‘journalists’. “Courage sacrifice was not ultimately successful” indeed. Clearly the author(s) of that article learned nothing from the sacrifice of those protesters, or anyone that came before or after them.

  13. Comment by Phil Butler on 23 March 2010:

    Hi Yard, I understand your abstinence, but really wish more people with your acumen and logic system would comment. What we see generally are the really good points being left our because many very smart people just do not waste their time. But, it is not always a waste of time.

    I used to belittle soccer myself, sad to say, as an American Football player, among other sports. I am pretty sure my unjust opinion way back was just a reflection of what I heard, and my ignorance of the sport. No excuse really, especially not for an athlete. You are so spot on with your comments, I need not elaborate. I just wanted to tell you thanks for taking the time to speak up. Maybe if more people who know what they are talking about do, the world will be better? I think it would.

    Thanks so much again…
    Always,
    Phil