Commercializing Athletics – Is it Even Possible to Fix?

By The Secret Strategist

As an athletics fan, I have been pondering what the sport should do during the roughly 200 weeks between each Summer Olympics. An article by Mark Darcy captured this growing challenge when he

wrote, "the more we elevate the Olympics, the more we seem to diminish all other manifestations of our

Olympic sports." While this observation rings true, the more existential issue for Athletics is whether this

dynamic is inevitable.

Commercializing Athletics

Many argue that because sports such as athletics, swimming, and gymnastics generate such high levels of engagement during the Olympics, there must be a way to harness this commercially during the intervening years. Athletics, in particular, seems ripe with opportunity. It's truly global (43 countries

medalled at the 2024 Olympics), it creates genuine international stars, it benefits from widespread

understanding of most events and has certain disciplines like middle-distance running that enjoy massive participation numbers.

For over a decade, The Diamond League has been athletics' premier annual competition. While it has

established itself as the sport's flagship series, it struggles with fundamental issues that appear to limit

its commercial appeal: top athletes frequently skip events, events are scattered across different locations with little narrative tying them together, and even dedicated fans struggle to follow its complex

points system. When even engaged athletics fans can't easily track when and where events take place,

attracting new viewers becomes extremely challenging.

Many in the athletics community believe there is huge untapped commercial potential – if only they had

the right combination of leadership, format, star athletes, and marketing strategy. This thinking has

spawned initiatives like the Grand Slam Track series or at a more local level, events such as the Keely

Klassic or the Night of the 10000m.

There are a number of frameworks that could help any potential administrators, investors or governing

bodies with building out a future athletics series or event. Twenty First Group have a framework for

assessing how compelling an offering is, with the best sporting competitions delivering against three

pillars, (i) quality (fans are impressed), (ii) jeopardy (fans are in suspense), and (iii) connection (fans care).

However, whilst these pillars are necessary for success, I wonder if they are insufficient for a sport such

as athletics. The sport itself might be fundamentally limited in its ability to sustain mainstream interest

beyond annual or quadrennial events. The problem isn't marketing or organization – it's variability, or

rather, the lack of it.

Let me break this down into four key areas of variability:

1. Actions

In athletics, the core actions of most events are remarkably specific and unchanging. A 100m race

requires essentially one action: sprinting at maximum effort in a straight line. Even in field events, the

fundamental action (throw, jump) remains constant.

Compare this to football, where players must constantly switch between a vast array of actions: short

and long passes, sprints, tackles, headers, shots, and defensive blocks. Even within each of these

categories, there's variety – a pass might be a driven cross, or a through ball. This diversity of actions

creates endless combinations and possibilities that keep viewers engaged.

In athletics, the limited action set means that once you've seen an athlete perform their event a few

times, there's little new to discover.

2. Opponents

Most athletics events occur in parallel rather than in direct competition. In the majority of running events, while athletes compete simultaneously, they're effectively running independent races in their own lanes.

Their performance is largely unaffected by competitors' actions (beyond perhaps the psychological element). Field events are even more isolated, with athletes taking turns to perform.

However, this contrasts with cricket, where every ball is a direct tactical battle between batter and

bowler. A bowler must constantly adjust their approach based on a batter’s technique, favoured shot and dynamics of the match. Each batter brings different challenges – facing a left-handed opener requires different tactics than bowling to a powerful middle-order player. Even in individual sports like boxing, every punch and movement is a direct response to an opponent's actions.

The lack of this dynamic interaction in the majority of athletics events means there's less strategic depth for viewers and is probably why the 1,500m has historically created some of the most interesting races.

3. Teammates

Athletics is predominantly an individual sport, and even in relay events, the interaction between teammates is limited to a single baton exchange. This solo nature means performances exist in isolation, without the complex interplay that makes team sports unpredictable and engaging.

In rugby, for instance, every player's decision affects their teammates' options – a stand off’s choice of

pass influences the entire backline's movement.

Athletics lacks this layer of complexity, where multiple participants must synchronize their actions in

real-time.

4. Environment

The standardization of athletics facilities, while ensuring fair competition, removes an element of variety

that enriches other sports. A track is a track, with strictly controlled dimensions and surfaces. Even the

shift from outdoor to indoor seasons offers minimal variation in how events are approached.

Contrast this with golf, where each course presents unique challenges through different hole layouts,

bunker placements, and greens. Even tennis, despite using standardized court dimensions, creates

variety through different surfaces (clay, grass, hard court) that affect playing styles and strategies.

This environmental consistency in athletics means that, unlike these other sports, the venue rarely adds

an extra layer of intrigue or requires athletes to adapt their approach.

What Does This Mean for Athletics

While other sports can rely on different combinations of actions, opponent interactions, teammate

coordination, and environmental challenges to keep each competition fresh, athletics offers largely the

same experience each time.

This lack of variability, I argue, creates a natural ceiling on athletics' commercial potential between

Olympic Games. Even with perfect execution – top athletes, brilliant marketing, compelling format – an

athletics series will struggle to maintain mainstream attention simply because the sport itself doesn't

generate enough novelty to sustain regular viewing.

Perhaps the harsh reality is that sometimes a sport's fundamental nature determines its commercial

destiny more than any efforts to "fix" it.

This analysis of variability helps us place different sports on a spectrum; team sports like football and

basketball at one end with constant variability, athletics and swimming at the other with minimal

variability, and a sport such as tennis occupying a crucial middle ground.

For tennis, this middling position on the variability spectrum has led naturally to a commercial structure

built around four to five tentpole moments per year. This isn't coincidental - it's a commercial model that

matches the sport's inherent variability levels. While tennis benefits from high opponent interaction and

surface changes, it remains constrained by limited action types, absence of teammate dynamics, and

standardized court dimensions. These limitations make a year-round series less compelling but provide

enough variability to sustain multiple major events.

There is certainly more that athletics can do to address these fundamental issues, potentially a greater

focus on middle distance running, further attempts at team-based competition, or maybe even a greater push to leverage unique venues.

But when it's all said and done, athletics might just have to accept that it will always be a sport that

shines brightest in its Olympic moments.

The Secret Strategist works in sports marketing.