Let me tell you a little about one of my hobbies.

Every year I make a book - sadly not a best-seller - but a book of photos to capture all those incredible moments that make up a year in your life.

I have a terrible memory and it is my way of documenting all the places I have been and people I have met.

I have just finished making my book of 2010 and am having a look through. If I were to sum it up I would use the words "hard work" and "bronze".

The three bronze medals we won last year - at the Champions Trophy, World Cup and Commonwealth Games - were the result of our fantastic central training programme and the hard work of the entire squad and management.

These results have given us the boost to keep going through the winter as well work on the parts of our game we need to improve on for us to achieve that ultimate goal in London.

Looking at this year we have the Champions Trophy (for the top six women's teams in the world) in Holland and the European Nations Cup in Germany. Both are very difficult tournaments but we would like to go even further than we went last year. That means silver, or one better.

Looking ahead further still, next year the London Olympics are here. I cannot believe it is only one year away.

The Olympics are important to me for two reasons.

The first is the most obvious and the reason we train every day. There is no greater honour than being a part of the squad that has an ambition to win that Olympic gold medal.

The second reason is my passion for sport and the power I believe it holds in changing young people's lives.

I am very privileged to work with students from all over the country on the Sky Sports Living For Sport Athlete Mentor Programme. This is a free initiative for all secondary schools and recognises the power that sport has to engage, motivate and inspire young people.

My mentoring role is both rewarding and often very funny.

My best moment, only last week, was being proposed to by Tim....aged 12!



I have been fortunate enough to witness first hand how sport can change young people's lives, give them continuity, a fresh start, confidence, competition, leadership, and most importantly aspirations.

So imagine the impact and legacy a home Olympic Games will have on our entire nation?

But my first challenge of the year is more immediate.

Next weekend (January 30) the Super Sixes National Indoor Hockey finals are hosted at Wembley Arena.

We - I play for Reading - had two really tough rounds of matches to get there and we were over the moon to beat Leicester, a really strong team including many of my England teammates, in the semi-final to secure our place.

I live with two of the Leicester girls so coming home together after the game was a little bit quiet, but I think we are all friends again now.

The finals will be brilliant. Having not played much indoor hockey before this year, I have come to love how quick and exciting it is and how in two minutes the tide can change.

We also heard yesterday that tickets are selling really quickly and it promises an amazing atmosphere. Hopefully I'll see you all there with my orange (Leicester) housemates cheering on the [Reading] blues.

For more information about the National Indoor Hockey Finals click here.

Alex Danson is GB Hockey's star striker, who recently scored 16 goals in one weekend

The row about the post-Olympic use of the Stratford stadium is the price of unexpected victory. And, if it is not quite like the wages of sin, it is just as painful.

In many ways, the 2012 bid book pledge to retain an athletics track at the Olympic stadium was the sporting equivalent of the Liberal Democrats' pledge not to raise tuition fees.

They made it in good faith but then they did not expect to be in Government, some of them are clearly still uncomfortable with being in power. And, once inside the tent, they had to renege on the pledge as realities struck. Just as the Liberal Democrats didn't expect to be in Government, London did not expect to win in Singapore. If, at the end of the day, the promise on the track is broken, it must be seen as one of those hard realities that confront those in power.

Now let me make it clear. I speak not as a sceptic of the Games but as an enthusiast. Indeed, back in 2002, I launched the Daily Telegraph's campaign for London to bid. At that time, the rest of the media were sceptical, Ministers were not at all sure and the Treasury very hostile. And, in Singapore in 2005, I was confident that London had run a vastly superior campaign to Paris and could win, indeed I won money on London.

However, the fact is that, when the bid promises were made, many in the British Government just did not think London could win. The Treasury, under Gordon Brown, which had only very reluctantly been persuaded to back the bid, certainly did not. As Ken Livingstone, then London Mayor, has since frankly confessed, when the bid book figures were put together, the Treasury did not really examine them. They saw the bid, as Livingstone puts it, as "Ken and Tessa's [Jowell, Culture Secretary] little toy." Treasury officials have since told me that they were convinced that London was not going to win they didn't bother with the figures.

This explains why the bid book figure of £2.375 billion went up to £9.3 billion 18 months after the bid. Even this higher figure was only for building the infrastructure for the Games. Remember, unlike Paris, London was building from scratch.

The post-Olympic use of the stadium was something else entirely and, from the beginning, football has been Banquo's ghost in this debate. Richard Caborn, then Sports Minister, tried very hard but failed to make his colleagues understand that, to make the stadium viable, there had to be a football anchor tenant. Initially, there was much optimism that a non football solution could be found, including attracting rugby clubs.

Subsequently a football solution was sought and, until a year ago, the plan was for the stadium to be scaled back to 25,000 seats after the closing ceremony. And the football tenant was to be – wait for it - Leyton Orient.



It seemed logical enough. Brisbane Road, the home of this 130-year old club, London's second-oldest Football League Club, is one long goal-kick from the Olympic Park.

As Barry Hearn, chairman of Leyton Orient, told me: "We negotiated with the Olympic authorities for three years and would have loved to have been in the Olympic stadium." At Brisbane Road, Leyton can accommodate 9,000, although at present they average round 5,000. Post-2012, with a 25,000 stadium to fill, Hearn felt this, "would have given us capacity to grow to perhaps 24,000. But they built the wrong stadium. In an athletics stadium, the slope of the seats is different, they go up at a different angle to a football stadium. And then Seb [Coe, chairman of 2012] said, 'I have given my word that the running track must remain.' I said, 'Spend money on a hydraulic system, like at Stade de France where seats come forward during football to cover the track,' but they did not want to spend the money. A running track kills football. In modern football, proximity to players gives the atmosphere."

Eventually, a year ago, Hearn broke off talks. Just as he did so, West Ham changed hands, and the new owners, the two Davids, Sullivan and Gold, revived the idea of the Hammers moving there.

Sullivan has never made any secret that moving to the Olympic Stadium was central to his ambition. At the time of the takeover, his ambition was to get West Ham to the Champions League within seven years. Now West Ham's ambition may be to stay out of the Championship, but the Olympic Stadium is still attractive. It was Sullivan who first started questioning plans to convert the 80,000 stadium into a 25,000 one after the Games. As Sullivan put it to me after the takeover, "It is obscene in the credit crunch to build a stadium and bring three quarters of it down."

At that stage, he also was insisting that the track had to go. When Lord Coe reiterated that the track would stay, Sullivan said what Daniel Levy, chairman of Tottenham, would echo today: "He [Coe] can have an athletics' track somewhere else. How many athletics' tracks does he want? It is a minority sport. The bigger dream is for West Ham fans to have a football stadium."

Sullivan was sure then he could fill a stadium of 80,000. "We would offer tickets at £5 a go for some matches. We can bring Premier League football back to the people." It is interesting, given talk of Tottenham changing names if they move, that Karren Brady, the West Ham vice-chairman, suggested a name change. However Sullivan quickly quashed it saying: "There is no possibility of West Ham being called anything other than West Ham United."

About the time that Sullivan was saying the track should go, Baroness Ford, the chair of the Olympic Park Legacy Company, in evidence to MPs, was insisting that athletics could co-exist with football, "For me, premier athletics must be part of the mix because that was part of the bid commitment."

Clearly, since then, West Ham has had to bow to the Baroness. But their willingness to accommodate the track shows their great desire to get hold of the Olympic stadium. Why? They see the possibility of harvesting football gold from Stratford. On offer is a stadium proving excellent transport facilities: within seven miles of King Cross, with links to the continent, and near enough to the City to be able to attract the high rollers you need to buy executive boxes.

West Ham has long-eyed the stadium, going back to 2006 when Gordon Brown had told us he had abolished bust. West Ham's then owners, led by Terry Brown, used the prospect of gold to hawk the club. It did not go according to plan with West Ham going through two ownership changes and having to be rescued.

However Sullivan and Gold, being the shrewd businessmen they are, must have worked out that, even post crash, a West Ham at Stratford would be a much better economic proposition. And, should they ever sell, West Ham at Stratford would fetch a much higher price.

Interestingly, Tottenham's interest in the site, which also goes back to 2006, was initially motivated by the desire to deny West Ham. And, for a long time after that, they clearly wanted to use it to get more concessions from Haringey. But, while they now profess a different strategy, I think a lot of their motivation is still to make sure that another club does not get a site which would be much more valuable than even a redeveloped White Hart Lane ever could be.

Football as a property game is not attractive. But it has been always thus. Tottenham is playing the property card as much as West Ham.

However, let us not forget dear old Leyton Orient. As the club says:"The impact on Leyton Orient will be huge. The prospect of excess capacity leading to discounted tickets and the broader appeal to floating fans of a more high-profile club threatens to swamp us. A huge question mark hangs over our long-term viability at Brisbane Road with the move of another professional football club to within a mile of what has been our home since 1937."

The club has appealed to the Premier League and the Football League, both of which have regulations which are meant to prevent two clubs being too close together. Orient has not heard from either organisation but, should Hearn choose to pursue this issue, the whole debacle could become even more interesting.

Mihir Bose is one of the world's most astute observers on politics in sport and, particularly, football. He formerly wrote for The Sunday Times and The Daily Telegraph and until recently was the BBC's head sports editor.

www.mihirbose.com

http://twitter.com/mihirbose

In a little over seven months time the world's best athletes will gather in Daegu South Korea for the XIII World Championships and just 12 months before the assumed "great British athletics finale" at the London Olympic Games.

Niels de Vos, UK Athletics chief executive on £192,000 per year, reportedly said recently that he believes Britain can be represented in every event in London,that we will be in 50 per cent of the finals and we can win 10 medals.

However, the statistical event by event survey of British athletes' world rankings from the 2010 season, published daily by www.topsinathletics.com in line with the day by day Olympic programme and together with the Deagu entry qualifications to indicate what might be achieved, suggests nothing of the sort and is even more significant in relation to this year's WorldChampionships.

In considering British athletes performances in 2010 it must be noted that entry standardsfor Deagu - with the Olympics entry standard likely as usual to be identical - must be achieved during the qualification period from  October 1, 2010 (1 January 2010 for the 10,000m, marathon, combined events, race walks and relays) to August 15, 2011.

The last World Championship in Berlin in 2009 resulted in just four individual medalists so it is considerably puzzling to see how UK Athletics can possibly justify lottery funding for 47 individual event athletes deemed "Podium Potential" for Deagu and London when clearly we have nothing like that number capable of getting on the podium? Presumably, UK Athletics is forced to produce this number in order to justify their huge staffing levels and administrative costs?

UK Athletics' record on World Championships achievement so far, comparing the five from 2001 to 2009 contested during their administration, with the previous seven Championships where athletes and coaches had no lottery funding, shows a considerable drop in achievement with only the last two events showing a reasonable improvement on their previous three; but still a long way offwhat was achieved before they took over, as the table shows.

GB Overall team ranking, medals and points

Year	Position	Gold	Silver	Bronze	Total	Points
1983	5th	2	2	3	7	104
1987	4th	1	3	4	8	88
1991	5th	2	2	3	7	76
1993	4th	3	3	4	10	95
1995	4th	1	3	1	5	78.5
1997	4th	1	4	1	6	78.5
1999	4th	1	4	2	7	70
2001	8th	1	0	1	2	58
2003	11th	0	1	2	3	46
2005	14th	1	0	2	3	34
2007	6th	1	1	3	5	61
2009	7th	2	2	2	6	80

Of the points gained for top eight places/finals at the seven World Championships, which took placeunder the old mainly "amateur" system, between 1983 through to 1999, British athletes, who, along with their coaches mostly all had to work for a living, averaged a total of 84.2 points from
each Championship with a high, in 1993 of 95 points and won a total of 50 medals including 11 gold, 21 silver and 18 bronze. But, compared with UK Athletics' period in charge over the next five Championships, performances, even by removing the two highest medals/points championships - 1983 and 1987 - under the former non-lottery funded National Governing Body - still leaves a total of 35 medals won, including eight gold, 10 silver, 15 bronze and an average points score of 79.6. Clearly, a far better achievement than UK Athletics' efforts over their five World Championships.

Their comparative lack of achievement in the World Championships, since the Government funding took over and with the additional benefit of far more sponsorship and TV money than ever before, amounting to some £80 million, is in massive contrast to what has been achieved without them.

Prior to UK Athletics being put in control, British elite athletes had no lottery funding. The previous athletics governing body, the British Athletics Federation (BAF) wasn't awash with money, didn't have a professional staff as UK Athletics now have, numbering some 120 (the largest of any NGB for athletics in the world) nor did they have costly High Performance Centers, (most now closed down because of under use and/or ineffectiveness) plus UK Athletics' own full time paid coaches, specialist department directors and the best possible medical and scientific support staff; all of which should have resulted in the delivery of the sport as originally promised over ten years ago.

Apologists for Uk Athletics will claim, ignoring the fact that the sport has been given millions to do something about it, "the world has moved on," that we have "a missing generation" and "far more countries now take part". But in actuality world top standards have only improved in a few events, notably in the men's' 100 metres and 200m and men's 5,000m and 10,000m, mainly through just two outstanding individuals, Usain Bolt of Jamaica and Kenenisa Bekele of Ethiopia.

The five World Championships between 2001 and 2009 under UK Athletics' heavily funded responsibility for UK athletics, British athletes in those five World Championships scored an average of 55.8 points and won a total of 19 medals including five gold, four silver and 10 Bronze. All in all aconsiderably way down on the previous - unfunded - five Championships and, more significantly inview of their remit, also way down on UK Athletics' predicted and agreed targets with the Government funders.

When the public has funded a sport like athletics - to the tune of £150 million - they expect results. But from 2001 - by which time and after three years, UK Athletics should have been fully up to speed - through to this last Championship, the overall GB team performances have been very disappointing, with the odd highlight, including Phillips Idowu (pictured) in the triple jump at Berlin in 2009.



Those Championships in the German capital showed an improvement, but it had taken ten years and a major clearout of the previous top management at UK Athletics at considerable cost to the sports potential development and lost opportunities for our undoubted athletics talent. This has been largelydue to the Government's funding agency's failure to officially recognise and deal with UK Athletics' sunderperforming management, their total lack of a comprehensive development strategy and their Coach Education Programme which was deemed "unfit for purpose".

Rather than being carried away with UK Athletics' media department output of hysterically hyped acclamations for mainly mediocre performances to date and future predictions for the next 19 months to London 2012 - the same "false dawns" of hype and spin we've suffered the last ten years - it might be noted that despite some very good British successes in Berlin, Britain gained only one medal more than in Osaka two years ago but finished one place further down the medals/points tables. It should also be noted that Britain's Berlin performances would only have returned two silver medals in Osaka in 2007. This is seen because the World Championships in the year before an Olympic Games is recognised asproducing generally higher standards than the Championship "lull" following the Olympic Games.

What is most significant is that we have been disgracefully unrepresented in most of our endurance and throwing events and depleted in others as, seen by GB's Berlin entry, where no British athlete was entered in 17 of the 47 Championships events and with only one athlete entered in 12 other events. So much for developing the talent pool and raising standards.

However, overall achievements by UK athletes must be measured against the amount of financial investment handed to the National Governing Body for athletics, UKA, Ltd., since 1998.

UK Athletics Ltd., the national governing body for the sport is a private limited company with no shareholders and wholly unelected and unaccountable to the sport has received around £150million pounds of public money from the Government since they were originally set up andfunded by UK Sport - a Government quango - over 12 years ago.

UK Athletics' mission statement was, "to deliver the sport the likes of which has never been seen before." They claimed standards would rise, injuries would be reduced and more medals wouldbe won. Of course we all held our breath and expected wonderful things. That was the promise because the sport, or rather the sport's administration now had plenty of public money to ensure our best development and more medals in global championships than ever before. But, like Napoleon's march on Moscow, things didn't go quite as planned.

The British public - and particularly the Government - is looking to London 2012 as the fulfilment of 14 years of its financial investment and support for the sport at the global level. But what they will reap?

Unless Hugh Robertson, the current Minister for Sport responsible for overseeing UK Sport's funding of UK Athletics, immediately takes a far closer look at how taxpayers and lottery moneyis being spent and demands an objective and independent analysis of what is really happening behind the hype and spin produced by UK Athletics, they will sadly fall very short of what couldhave been possible had this NGB been athlete and coach centered on a performance rewarded basis rather than company management centered on a salary rewarded basis which now exceeds £5.5million per year.

John Bicourt was an English record holder and represented Britain in the 3,000m steeplechase at the 1972 and 1976 Olympics. He has coached, advised and managed a number of Olympic and World Championship athletes from Britain, Australia, South African, Kenya and the United States, including medallists and world record holders. He is an elected officer of the Association of British Athletics Clubs

It is always good to hear from old friends when you are hospitalisedfor a few days so, while recovering from a recent op - nothing too serious thankfully - it was especially heartening to receive a call from someone who arguably remains Britain's outstanding all-round sports personality.

Anyone under 40 may not have heard of Jim Fox but back in the swinging Seventies he led the charge down sport's superhighway,a swashbuckling, Corinthian hero in an age when sportsmen were men, and women seemed happy to be ladies.

And Foxy was a ladies' man, the ruggedly handsome, 6ft 3in dashing white sergeant, single, and single-minded who, on his own admission was a bit of a stud; swordsman supreme, in every sense.

To hear his voice again was a warming reminder of a gentler, moreromantic era before the pursuit of sporting glory became suffused by greed, drugs and duplicity.

Foxy competed in four Olympics, winning a gold medal with the British modern pentathlon team in the Montreal Games 35 years ago, a bronze in the World Championships in Mexico and was 10 time snational champion.

A fencing master who literally foiled the Soviet cheat Boris Onischenkoin Montreal, he was also a prolific cross-country runner, swimmer, marksman and horseman.

Lately, there have been some disturbing rumours about his state of health. For Fox is a victim of Parkinsons, the wretched affliction which attacks muscles and mobility - the same crippling disease that affectshis famous namesake, the actor Michael J Fox and his even more illustrious sporting contemporary from the Seventies, Muhammad Ali.

During a visit a couple of weeks ago to modern pentathlon's headquarters at Bath University I was told that Fox was believed to be far from well. So it was good to hear from the horseman's mouth, so to speak, that in fact that Jeremy (Jim) Fox, OBE, is not only aliveand kicking at 69 but looking forward to being at Greenwich Park when mod pen's Olympic honours are fought for next year.

His is indeed a tough battle but it is one he does not shy away from. There is no skirting delicately around the subject. He always tells people, up front, what's wrong with him. "I don't want them to think I'm pissed," he laughs.

Parkinson's is a degenerative lesion of the brain which affects not only movement and appearance but also the psyche. Many patients become depressed not only because previous activities are beyond them but also because the actual disease process can affect mood.

The hands that once relied now on absolute steadiness for impeccable aim on the range now shake almost uncontrollably but unlike Ali, Fox's speech has not become slurred, although he does suffer tremors and increasing rigidity with a withering of the lower part of his body. But again, unlike Ali, he has not been reduced to a ponderous shuffle. Rather, he paces himself at a brisk trot, leaning forward to assist his balance.

He was diagnosed 14 years ago when he kept stumbling and losing his balance. He believes it may have been caused by a fall from a horse, but he isn't sure. There is no known cause, no known cure. An array of specialists have offered different prognoses, different advice and although he now faces his future with fortitude, it wasn't always like that.

I remember him telling me about the onset of the disease. "I couldn't wash myself or raise my arms above my head. My missus even had to roll me out of bed. You begin to wonder what happens when you get incontinent and start to think about other possibilities. Is it time tocall it a day? You know, Euthanasia, even suicide. You get fed up and wonder why you've been fingered when you've never smoked or done drugs and drank only in moderation. Then you slap yourself for being a morbid old fool and realise what a lucky sod you are to have had such a cracking life and start believing that there's a lot more to come."

In Fox's case the fact that he spurned self-pity for a vigorous, reborn self-belief was spurred by the positive effect of new medication andthe dedication of his family.

A soldier from boyhood, Fox (pictured) was made up to captain a year afterhis Olympic triumph. He quit the Army in 1983 and with his lump-sum pension got stuck into property buying, renovating and sellingat a profit. For some years he was an active chairman of the Modern Pentathlon Association, operating from his splendid home in Pewsey,Wiltshire, where bob skeleton silver medalist Shelley Rudman is a neighbour.

After his many conquests he settled into happily married life and has three effervescent, athletic daughters. His wife, Aly, is a high- flying accountant and much involved in the equestrian world.

In a sporting world so disfigured by excess, Fox knows the modern pentathlon is something of an anachronism.

The Greeks usually had a word for it, but one of their early sports fans, old Aristotle, apparently had several. "The most beautiful sportsmenof all," he opined of the pentathletes when the original Olympics took off in ancient Athens, his philosophy endorsed by Baron Pierre de Coubertin, who adapted the event for the modern Games "because it produces the ideal, complete athlete, testing a man's moral qualities as well as his physical resources and skills."

In a sporting world disfigured by excess, "mod pen" is still regarded bysome as an anachronism, yet it remains the most authentic of Olympic pursuits, symbolic of what De Coubertin - and Aristotle - thought the Games should be about, though it is no longer merely men who make it a thing of sporting beauty.

Modern pentathlon, embracing five sports - running, swimming, fencing, shooting and riding - has long been an understated activity in Britain, but it is an efficiently run and successful one. The most demanding of all disciplines, and the hardest to train for, especially as it used to be spread over five days but is now compressed into a one-day dawn-to-dusk affair, mainly to make it more televisual.

Britain has an outstanding track record, based on the team gold medal brought home from Montreal by Fox and his men in 1976, and subsequently the World Championship won by Richard Phelps in 1993. Fox was the mod pen pioneer but latterly the new Foxes largely have been vixens.

In the past decade it has been British women who have taken overfrom the men, with Steph Cook's stunning Olympic gold in Sydney 2000, where Kate Allenby won bronze, Georgina Harland's third place in Athens and Heather Fell's silver in Beijing, as well as some notable team triumphs in global competition.

Now, down in Bath, one of the nation's top notch sports hubs, these throughly modern pentathletes, latter-day Lara Crofts, seven ofthem in the world top 40, are preparing for a serious assault on London 2012 under performance director Jan Bartu, who competed for Czechoslovakia against Fox in 1976 and in his 12 years here is up there with cycling's Dave Brailsford, rowing's Jurgen Grobler and boxing's Terry Edwards as one of the most consistently successful GB coaches.

And among "Jan's Angels" there is a new girl on top – Freyja Prentice (pictured) ,a 20-year-old slim blonde from Aberdeen, who, at number 11 in the world, has nudged ahead of Fell and with other team-mates Samantha Murray, Katy Burke, Mhairi Spence, Louise Helyer and Katy Livingstone, typifying a sporting blend of beauty and the beef.

Fit and feisty, all could be candidates for the catwalk rather than the podium. Prentice, a world junior silver and senior and junior team gold medalist, was born in Stavanger, Norway - where her father, originally from South Africa, was working as an oil rig drilling supervisor. She was named Freyja after a Norwegian goddess, which also happensto be a brand of chocolate which her New Zealand-born mother, a former racehorse trainer, was particularly fond.

Now in the second year of a biology degree at the university, she says: "The standard among the girls is amazing. We are all friends because there is a team element as well but we all want to beat each other, so even our training sessions are like a competition."

Only two from each of the women and men's teams can compete in London so this is a vital year for gaining qualification points, starting with the first of World Cup series in Palm Springs, USA, next month,with the final in London on 9-10 July. The World Championships follow later that month in at Medway, Kent. Bartu describes Prentice as "almost the ideal individual for the sport inbecause of her all-round athletic ability. What she needs now is more experience to raise her game .She needs to compete as much as as possible."

The mod pen remains the ultimate Olympic test, and with the new biathlon-style combined running and shooting is even harder graft. But with Prentice no longer the apprentice, and the men's squad, led by European silver medalist Sam Weale re-gaining some ground lost to the women, Britain can be optimistic for 2012."We have athletes in both groups who can go all the way," says Bartu.

Never mind Aristotle, even Homer would nod in agreement. Foxy too.

Which is why when they present the Olympic mod pen medals next year the old soldier is determined to be there on parade with his own, and the sport should salute him.

Alan Hubbard is an award-winning sports columnist for The Independent on Sunday, and a former sports editor of The Observer. He has covered a total of 16 Summer and Winter Olympics, 10 Commonwealth Games, several football World Cups and world title fights from Atlanta to Zaire.

At the English Institute of Sport (EIS) national conference this week (January 18-19), our team of practitioners and support staff are coming together to reflect, recognise and focus on where their work has and will make a performance impact leading up to the London 2012 Games and beyond.

As the EIS moves into its tenth year, the development of the sport science and medical system, designed to support high performance sport, has been phenomenal in meeting challenges and achieving fantastic results.

Perhaps one of the biggest developments we have experienced over the past ten years is as a result of the growth in high performance sport and the system around it.

The evolution of sports performance programmes has led to athletes, coaches and performance staff having more questions around performance and wanting to measure the impact of training techniques and interventions to keep ahead of the game.

Sport science and medicine has played a key part in answering these performance questions, learning from them and looking not only to what has worked previously but forward to what can work next in sport's fast paced climate of change.

We've learnt such a lot from across the range of sports we work with on a daily basis that we are able to harness the experience gained and continue to apply what we know works well.

But we will also continue to seek further innovations and collaborations which will help to keep sports ahead of their rivals and continue to deliver a performance impact.

The institute structure has helped bridge the gap across areas of expertise, helping to ensure the team behind the team live up to expectations.


High level coaches and athletes are now far more aware of how sport science and medicine can impact upon performance, and expertise within these fields are on the agendas of sports bodies as they plan performance programmes.

But the journey is by no means complete. Now as we face the countdown to the London Games, it's the culmination of understanding from across the sports we work with, and the performance questions our staff continue to ask and answer, which will play an important role in getting the British team in best shape alongside their coaching and support staff.

What's particularly exciting are the discussions about which of the developing pieces of work over the past Olympic and Paralympic cycle will come into fruition for the London Games, and also what the next ones are moving forward to the next key events such as Glasgow 2014, Sochi 2014 and Rio 2016.

Sport never stands still and neither does sport science and medicine and the London 2012 Games will be a landmark of over a decade of developing a vital system of expertise.

Let's hope the next 10 years bring us even further towards understanding more about performance and keeping athletes at the top of their game when it counts.

Nigel Walker is the English Institute of Sport's national director and one of the few people to compete in both the Olympics, as a hurdler, and Five Nations rugby for Wales

The governance of sport is rarely out of the headlines these days.

Since Christmas we have had the Prime Minister calling the FIFA machinery "murky" and the FIFA President accusing the International Olympic Committee (IOC) of treating its finances "like a housewife" - by which I think he means secretively.

There is also an on-going Parliamentary inquiry into football governance which asks whether the FA, and the owners of our professional clubs, are fit for purpose.

Working with the Commission on the Future of Women's Sport (CFWS), chaired by Baroness Grey-Thompson, we recently published Trophy Women? 2010 based on the premise that sport could improve its governance by appointing more women to senior decision-making positions, including the Board.

The report showed that only one in five board members of National Governing Bodies (NGB) were women, 10 NGBs, including the FA, have no women on their Board at all, and only 11 of the 46 Sport England-funded NGBs have female chief executives.

The report has provoked some interesting responses, including from the Sport and Olympics Minister Hugh Robertson, who has made the link between the lack of women in the boardroom and the fact that participation rates for women continue to lag well behind those of men.

The logic is clear, if decision makers are "pale, male and stale", they are less able to run sport in a way which is appealing to a diverse participation base.

Private industry has shown us that you get better decision making and superior results if you incorporate diversity into your board and other senior decision-making teams. The minister's support is very welcome and it is good to see him challenge governing bodies to address this issue.

The next set of responses included a number of governing bodies saying they understand the logic and want to do something about it, but they have difficulties in finding appropriate women.

The Commission has committed to help them by running an open recruitment campaign in the next few months.

We also had governing bodies tell us about recent appointments they have made since we conducted the research.

Great to know, and hopefully when the Commission repeats its survey later this year, we will see a number of governing bodies taking similar steps forward.

And finally, the most interesting response was from Professor Sarah Springman, the chair of British Triathlon, who challenged us to prove more explicitly the relationship between diverse leadership and increased performance within sporting bodies.

It's not that she is sceptical, but she wants to see more evidence of the link in a sporting context and she sees the CFWS as ideally placed to investigate and report.

Triathlon is one of the few sports (I would be interested to hear of more) to have formally adopted the IOC recommendations of a 20 per cent quota of women on their boards at both International Federation (IF) and domestic NGB level.

Interestingly, both the President and secretary general of the International Triathlon Union (Marisol Casado/Loreen Barnett) and the chair and chief executive officer of British Triathlon (Sarah Springman/Zara Hyde Peters - pictured left and right respectively) are female, with 33 per cent and 20 per cent of the current statutory board members being women.

According to Sarah, the quotas have helped establish a culture of true gender equality within the sport as well improving the dynamics of both boards and led to enhanced performance.

Although the quota system is in place, board members are still recruited via competency-based interviews, which helps to negate the argument that these are "token" appointments.

The lack of female leaders in sport, and the fact that so many IFs and NOCs have failed to meet the IOC's targets, remains a global concern.

The International Working Group on Women and Sport continues its work in this area and is very shortly launching an international database (called the Sydney Scoreboard) to keep track of the number of women in top jobs.

Quotas can provoke strong reactions if individuals believe they have been passed over because of them, or organisations feel their hands are tied.

However if governing bodies continue to miss out on such a wide range of potential talent, shouldn't they welcome some external pressure to ensure they benefit from a balanced board?

Tim Woodhouse is head of policy at the Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation

The battle of who will play football on the site of the London Olympic Stadium after 2012 is hotting up and it is like a re-run of 2006 when both West Ham and Tottenham Hotspur were interested in taking over the stadium.

As the UK's Sports Minister at the time I was very supportive of the West Ham bid, which not only delivered athletics and football in the stadium but also gave Newham Council a great opportunity to redevelop the site of the old ground, breathing new life into the heart of the Borough

What also should not be overlooked, just up the road from the Olympic Stadium, is the brand new Lee Valley Athletic Stadium. This is possibly one of the best in Europe and, along with Loughborough, a UK Athletics elite squad development centre.

Linking  a dual-use Olympic Stadium with Lee Valley athletics Centre of Excellence delivers the Olympics athletics legacy in a positive and sustainable way.

Such an arrangement would entail very little cost to the public purse, while keeping the stadium in near-Olympic mode for future generations to visit.

Most members of the public will think it daft to rip down a stadium that has only been used for a few weeks, that cost over half-a-billion pounds and that, with a bit of creative thinking and application of new technology, could create a lasting legacy for the Olympic Park.

Of course, the economic and financial situation today bears little resemblance to 2006 when, much to my annoyance, the Olympic Board turned down a multi-million pound dual-use proposal for the Stadium which West Ham made.

If the Board had had a bit more foresight, this issue would have been settled then, at acceptable cost to the public purse.

Spurs were also at that time making inquiries.

However, like today, they encountered opposition from their fans, along with concerns from the police about the need to transport North London-based Spurs supporters to every home match and the problems that could cause.

Then as today, the key question that a Spurs ground development has to answer is, "Why can't it be carried out in the area where the club has its roots and thus have maximum benefit for the fans and the community in which they and their families live?"

Whilst I have sympathy for Crystal Palace and its need for investment, that should not be a distraction from the need to make the most sensible use of the Olympic Stadium, taking into account the linkages to the wider activities of the Olympic Park.



It would be wrong to wipe out half-a-billion pounds of public investment when it could be used to give the nation and Newham a true Olympic legacy.

I hope a second opportunity to develop both the Olympic Stadium and the Olympic Park is not missed.

The Olympics only come around once in a number of generations.

We have our opportunity in 2012.

It will be a great success and the nation will be proud.

We should make sure we have a legacy about which we can be equally proud.

The West Ham proposal goes some way towards achieving that.

Unfortunately, the Tottenham proposal is totally void of any Olympic legacy, adds no sporting value to the Olympic Park and is just about building a new Premier League football ground.

As my old dad  used to say "some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing".

Richard Caborn was Britain's Sports Minister between 2001 and 2007, the longest anyone has held the position, and was instrumental in London's successful bid to host the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics

In the murky world of drugs abuse in sport, there have been many weird and wonderful excuses put forward over the years for the presence of prohibited substances in an athlete's sample. In the last year alone, we have heard the extraordinary - and truthful - defence put forward by Richard Gasquet,the French tennis player, for testing positive for cocaine, which he put down to kissing a girl in a Miami nightclub who had taken the drug earlier in the evening, Alberto Contador's contaminated meat defence, and now, perhaps most extraordinarily of all, LaShawn Merritt'sexplanation following his positive test for DHEA.

The American Arbitration Association (AAA) adjudicated last year on the case of US athlete LaShawn Merritt, the reigning Olympic and world champion at 400 metre. Suppressing their sniggers, the panel accepted Merritt's contention that his positive testswere caused by ExtenZe, a product he had purchased in his local 7 Eleven store after a night out tohelp him "last longer and stay firmer...with his lady friend."

Despite the ExtenZe packaging clearly listing DHEA as an ingredient, Merritt had in his haste failed tocheck the label. Also in his favour was the fact that hehad taken the medication during a break from training and without intent to enhance his - athletic - performance in any way.

On this basis, the panel found that Merritt has shown "no significant fault or negligence" under the World Anti-Doping Code and reduced the standard penalty of a two-year suspension to 21 months with a pre-dated start date so as to end in July 2011: conveniently enough, one month before theWorld Championships. This conclusion followed similar logic to the Gasquet case - where there hadbeen found to be "no significant fault or negligence" - and a line of other cases involving the Courtof Arbitration for Sport and the AAA in which athletes had come to have banned substances in theirbodies for reasons totally unrelated to sport or sport performance.

So far, so straightforward. However, there are a couple of angles to the Merritt case which will nodoubt demand closer attention over the coming years. The first is that it is difficult to reconcile thefinding of no significant fault with the fact that DHEA was clearly listed on the product label. Previous decisions have found significant fault and negligence where: a tennis player had taken nutritional supplements without taking adequate steps to check them; an athlete had consumed a glucoseproduct labelled as containing a prohibited substance, which was listed in French, a language whichthe athlete could not read; and a swimmer had ingested a contaminated supplement without enquiringas to its contents. A case of home-town leniency shown to Merritt by the AAA?



Of wider significance is the eligibility of Merritt to compete in the Olympics. As reigning Olympic champion, there is clearly great interest in him defending his title but, despite his ban ending in 2011, his chances of appearing at London 2012 appear to have been scuppered by a rule of theInternational Olympic Committee, which states:

"Any person who has been sanctioned with a suspension of more than six months by an anti-dopingorganization for any violation of any anti-doping regulations may not participate...in the next edition ofthe Games...following the date of expiry of such suspension."

The IOC is not alone in implementing a rule of this type: a similar rule of the British Olympic Association prevented Dwain Chambers from competing at Beijing.

Plainly, there are decent arguments for the existence of this type of rule - or "eligibility criteria' as the IOC likes it to be known - not least given the perceived values of the Olympic movement to whichintegrity and fairness are integral. However, there are many, including those actively involved instamping drugs abuse out of sport, that look less kindly on additional Olympic bans.

Why is this? Well, for one, the great success of the World Anti-Doping Agency over the past decadehas been in establishing a uniform drugs code, procedure and punishments across virtually all sportsglobally. It is this certainty and level playing field which has helped to eliminate bias and leniency incertain sports and countries. By implementing an additional ban, the IOC challenges this uniformityand reduces the authority of the World Anti-Doping Code.

Perversely, it has also led to the reduction of bans imposed on athletes in some cases due to the fact that the Olympics ban only kicks in if an athlete is banned for six months or more. Fearful of the legal challenges that may be put forward by athletes whose marketability, ability to compete and earningpower will be compromised by a six month ban leading to automatic exclusion from the Olympics,there have been instances where drugs panels have imposed lighter sentences on guilty athletes. In other words, the IOC rule is in fact hampering effective anti-drugs enforcement.

This is an issue likely to gather momentum. In the Merritt case, the panel was damning in its view of the IOC rule and opened up grounds for a potential legal challenge to the rule on the basis thatthe IOC, as a signatory to the World Anti-Doping Code, has agreed not to implement rules which contradict the Code.

Dressed up as "eligibility criteria" or not, the rule plainly is a contradictory. Readers are advised to watch this space for further developments. What price Chambers and Merritt lining up in the starting blocks in London in 2012?

Jon Walters is a member of the Corporate Commercial team at Charles Russell specialising in sports law. He advises clients on a range of commercial rights and regulatory issues, including Nike, Mercedes GP Petronas F1 team andthe Welsh Rugby Union.

So that's it - just one year to go to the Innsbruck 2012 Youth Olympic Games.

The innovative mixture of sport and culture as well as new competition formats makes the organisation of this event a special challenge and we are on schedule to deliver a memorable competition.

With just one year before the Opening Ceremony for the Games, we are excited that it is now all so close and we are working at full blast to turn them into a unique experience for the 1,058 athletes.

Several initiatives have been taken around the world by National Olympic Committee (NOC), federations and others to celebrate and promote the one-year-to-go countdown with us.

In Innsbruck, festivities to celebrate the event include the start of a countdown clock to the Games at 20:12 by Tyrol Governor Gunther Platter, while a gathering of Tyrolean Olympic medallists, media and other guests will be invited to try out some of the sports on the Innsbruck 2012 programme.

So I would like to use this opportunity to thank everyone for the support we get and hope to welcome as many as possible in one year's time.

Peter Bayer is the chief executive of Innsbruck 2012

O what a tangled web we weave, when we first practise to deceive!

So tangled, in fact, that most attribute the quotation to Shakespeare when actually it was penned by Sir Walter Scott.

I make the point not to boast any great literary leaning but because had sports politics been on the agenda when it was written back in the 19th century then never would it have been more aptly described.

And talking of tangled webs and deception brings to mind the future 2012 Olympic Stadium and the heated game of political football now being played over it, and eventually on it.

It is all kicking off big time as West Ham and Tottenham Hotspur go head to head in the fight to inherit it once the Olympic flame has been extinguished.

Some fight, too, with sporting bigwigs, athletes, politicians, Newham Council and even Spurs fans themselves lining up in unison to oppose what local club West Ham's vice-chairman Karren Brady has called a "smash and grab" raid by Tottenham to demolish the £500 million, 85,000-seater stadium and build a 60,000-capacity football-only facility - thereby leaving those who bid for the Games red-faced with embarrassment at seeing the Olympic legacy they promised cynically betrayed.

West Ham, happy to retain the track and share the stadium with athletics, are becoming increasingly concerned that the Tottenham bid - backed by US partners AEG who own and operate the O2 - may find favour with the Olympic Legacy Board, due to announce the decision in March, as it offers a better financial deal. It is likely to become the most vexed sporting topic of 2011.

With apparently only the Tottenham Board themselves wanting such a contentious move from White Hart Lane to Stratford, theirs is hardly a cause celebre, which is where that tangled web comes in.

Webs are spun, and none are better at it than Mike Lee, arguably the most consummate spinner since Shane Warne.

Yes, how ironic that the former West Ham director who, as the 2012 bid team's communications chief was instrumental in persuading the International Olympic Committee (IOC), hand on heart, that London's Olympic stadium would have an athletics legacy, has now been hired to try and convince us that it doesn't actually need one. Tangled web indeed.

What the West Ham case needs is an equally powerful voice - one within earshot of not only the decision-makers, but the political heavies.



Enter Alan Pascoe MBE (pictured), winner of Olympic silver and European and Commonwealth Games gold medals, who has risen from council house schoolboy, hard-up hurdler and one-time rebellious shop steward of athletics in the seventies, to Britain's most successful sports marketeer as head of Fast Track.

He is calling for Prime Minister David Cameron to intervene for the sake of the future of sport in this country.

This is what he had to say when we met this week: "It is a disgrace that this situation is even being considered.

"If you drew up a list on the benefits of the Tottenham bid, the only thing in the plus column would be saving £100 million for the money men at Spurs, against, on the other side, a multi-sports stadium that is there with all the facilities for all the young people and the community of East London.

"Spending half a billion pounds on building a stadium for 12 months, then knocking it down, would make us a laughing stock in the world of sport.

"It would be internationally embarrassing not to have a stadium capable of staging a major athletics championships in London.

"The commitment that was made – and I was part of it as bid vice-chairman - brilliantly fronted by Seb [Lord Coe] and supported by all of the team in Singapore, some of whom are in the Tottenham camp now, was that we would have an Olympic stadium with a proper legacy.

"Bear in mind we took kids to Singapore in place of directors of the bid to show our commitment to this. If we now allow the stadium to be knocked down I do not think we would have any credibility in being able to bid for anything significant in the future without people saying: 'But you don't keep your word.'

"I think David Cameron has got to step in and stop this happening. If it was just about money then we shouldn't have bid for the Games in the first place, but it is actually about a huge investment in the east end of London and the infrastructure of a sport in this country and the entire credibility of sport here, especially when people are realising that sport is at the heart and soul of every nation.

"Our business (Fast Track) is about marketing to people's passions and how more passionate can it be than when the Games come next year.

"The Olympics are going to change people's habits, with more people getting involved in activity as a result. Underlying all of that, we will lose this iconic inspirational opportunity not just for the kids, but even for those people who won't get tickets for the Games but will just want to come and visit it afterwards.

"Now if this Tottenham bid goes ahead, what they'll see initially is a pile of rubble. It's not, as I have read, one or two people saying it's about tearing up the track. It's about knocking down the whole stadium and to me we are just heading for a national embarrassment.

"People won't want to come and see a pile of rubble or just another football stadium - we've got loads of those, some great ones in London.

"There is no doubt the Tottenham bid is a serious one and they are paying a lot of money to put themselves in pole position purely because it is a better deal financially for that piece of land. It shouldn't be about finance, it should be about what we are committed to for the benefit of sport and the east of London.

"Nine years ago we were lamenting the fact that we'd won the world athletics championships and then had to give it back as we wouldn't have a stadium because of the Pickett's Lock fiasco. The Prime Minister [Tony Blair] had actually committed us to the championships in writing. I found it hard to believe then that sport could be stabbed in the back so cold-bloodedly. Now here we are again."

But what of Tottenham's offer to tart up Crystal Palace and thus provide London with a possible world-class athletics arena?

"That's a totally different discussion. Yes, a renovation of the Palace, with which I have had many happy associations, would be good for British sport, but what we are talking about here is the iconic Olympic stadium being reduced to rubble having made a commitment to the world of sport that we would use that stadium to create a legacy.

"If they are going to rebuild Crystal Palace, OK, it's equally ludicrous, but why don't Spurs go down there? The Spurs fans don't want to move to Newham and the local community and local businesses and shopkeepers say they will be devastated.

"I feel sorry for Seb. Given the position he is in he has made it as clear as possible that he favours the West Ham bid. Where I think others have been slow is in not recognising that he is our foremost sports politician and that he was at the forefront of the most successful and creditable bid that this country has ever made, and possibly will ever make if you judge what has happened subsequently.

"People should be saying: 'We just can't allow this to happen to the people who led the bid, to the commitment we made and to our foremost sports politician, someone who does have total credibility worldwide.'"



Karren Brady (pictured) has described Tottenham's current romancing of David Beckham as "a cynical ploy" to boost their bid.

Says Pascoe: "If this is the case, I would hope that David, as someone who has benefited from the sporting infrastructure of this country and was part of our bid team in Singapore, won't get involved."

And what of Sir Keith Mills, who is Coe's vice-chair at LOGOC and is now a Tottenham director.

"Keith is obviously in an invidious position but he is an honourable man, a terrific guy."

And Mike Lee?

"Mike the ultimate pro and a hired gun. But I find it slightly strange that he is now lining up against Seb when he was the man spinning for him in the 2012 bid. But no amount of spin can get away from the fact that this is about the money men of Spurs against the kids of this country.

"Fortunately we are seeing a groundswell of opinion building in opposition to the Spurs bid, not least from the athletes themselves - people like Denise Lewis, Kelly Holmes and Daley Thompson, and also through the fans' websites at Spurs.

"We must also hope that those leader writers who came down heavily on the government's initial plans to stop money going into school sports, and got this flipped, will take the same stance.

"No doubt Cameron will know what is happening and will see what is being written about it and hopefully take similar action to that he did over the school sports funding.

"At a time when we are increasingly looking to bid for big events and have just had such a disappointing attempt at getting the World Cup and FIFA's credibility has been called into question, are we going to go back on our commitments and our policies?

"Something that was absolutely central to us getting the Games and fundamental in changing people's minds when the IOC voted in that room?

"If it comes about that we renege on this when we bid for major events, in future why should people believe a word we say.

"On a personal basis, I intend to ensure that everybody who needs to be is made aware just how significant this could be to the future of sport in this country. Our Olympic Stadium is surely worth more than just 40 days football a year."

David Hemery once said of the athlete Pascoe, now 63: "Alan's a real striver. He never gives up." Now that he's in the striving seat again, that's something of which Tottenham should beware as tangled webs are spun and pending deceptions are practised.

Alan Hubbard is an award-winning sports columnist for The Independent on Sunday, and a former sports editor of The Observer. He has covered a total of 16 Summer and Winter Olympics, 10 Commonwealth Games, several football World Cups and world title fights from Atlanta to Zaire.

It's been an incredibly busy last 12 months and I will remember 2010 as a year which provided some incredible highs but equally some extreme challenges for school sport.

The year began with much of the UK blanketed in heavy snow as the country faced its coldest winter in decades.

Despite the extreme weather, schools refused to be beaten and found innovative ways to continue providing pupils with high quality PE and school sport.

Inspiration through the power of sport continued to be the theme for the next few months as February saw us launch our sports college legacy programme - Inspiring Future Generations.

Excitement around the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics keeps growing as does our ongoing work with each of the 500-plus specialist sports colleges to ensure a genuine legacy follows the Games.

March welcomed a celebration event for Playground to Podium, the scheme we support, and it enables youngsters dreaming of competing for Great Britain at a future Paralympic Games to demonstrate their talents.

As summer approached, our focus shifted to the annual Step into Sport Camp which sees the Youth Sport Trust empowering the next generation of sports leaders and volunteers.

Another landmark in the early part of 2010 included the 1,000th school signing up for Sky Sports Living For Sport, an initiative which uses the power of sport to encourage young people to be the best they can be.

Lloyds TSB National School Sport Week, in June, saw a record number of nearly 14,000 schools and five million children taking part across the home nations.

From cubs to Lions, rugby legend Sir Ian McGeechan joined the Youth Sport Trust in July as our national coaching ambassador to help tackle the shortage of coaches working in school sport.

Our efforts to support talented young athletes were witnessed first hand by Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt in September when he was among the guests who were treated to four days of truly inspirational sport at the Sainsbury's UK School Games, in Gateshead, Newcastle and Sunderland.

Other highlights in 2010 included Olympic great Sir Steve Redgrave helping us launch Matalan Sporting Promise which aims to get more young people taking part in sport and our partnership with Adidas to launch adiStars as part of the hugely successful Young Ambassador Programme.

October saw the Youth Sport Trust and PE and school sport as a whole facing its most challenging period yet following the Comprehensive Spending Review.

I don't think any of us working in this industry expected school sport not to take a hit given the unprecedented turmoil surrounding the country's economy.



However, the announcement to totally cut Government investment into school sport threatened to destroy the phenomenal achievements made by school sport partnerships, clubs and national governing bodies in the last decade.

What followed was an unbelievable show of support from young people, parents, teachers, elite athletes, politicians and the media for those people who work tirelessly to transform the lives of young people through sport across the country.

This overwhelming wave of positivity from all sides led to the Government making an announcement in December that it would be reinvesting monies into school sport – less than was there before, however, a welcome confirmation that school sport really does matter.

We were also delighted to be asked by the Government to lead the development of the nationwide School Games – further evidence of how the Government is committed to ensuring more young people, particularly at a primary school level, have access to competitive sport.

So with 2010 behind us we look forward to 2011 and what it may bring.

As we creep ever closer to London 2012 efforts to ensure a genuine legacy from the staging of the world's greatest sporting event will provide us with a clear focus.

We look forward to building on our successful corporate partnerships, strengthening our relationships with NGBs of sport, working with government to increase physical activity and transform competitive sport and to supporting schools the length and breadth of the country to put school sport where it really matters – right at the heart of the school.

Thanks to all the partners who supported us in 2010 – we wish you luck in 2011 and look forward to working with you to build a brighter future for young people through PE and sport.

Steve Grainger is the chief executive of the Youth Sports Trust

When the 2012 Olympic Games were awarded to London back in 2005 Lord Coe threw down the gauntlet to towns and cities across the UK to make sure they grabbed a share of the benefits.

In Birmingham we took that challenge very seriously and - just as the athletes will be doing in 2012 - decided to go for gold. We had the vision five years ago and I am delighted that we have shown the determination to see it through.

Eyebrows were definitely raised when we made public our desire to attract not one but two of the major training camps to our city but subsequent deals with both USA Track and Field and Jamaica have shown we were right to set our sights high.

The prospect of the fastest athletes in the world coming to our city is a mouth-watering one. It means the eyes of the world will be on Birmingham and that global exposure will undoubtedly raise our profile.

We will be placed under an intense worldwide media spotlight in the build-up to the Games and we can show the best that our city has to offer.

But this isn't just about enhancing Birmingham's reputation as a global city. The two training camps will create a significant boost to the local economy - with conservative estimates suggesting the economic impact of the USA and Jamaican teams will exceed £15 million ($23 million).

Welcoming the likes of Usain Bolt to Birmingham will also have a lasting impact on the city's sporting pedigree and a planned schools engagement programme can only serve to inspire our young people.

The citizens of Birmingham have a once in a lifetime opportunity to see dedicated athletes at the peak of their powers as they fine-tune their preparations for the Games.

Lord Coe himself summed it up when he said Birmingham was setting an example for other cities and we have every reason to look forward to the 2012 Olympic Games with real excitement.

There was of course stiff competition to attract the top teams but, to use the Olympic motto, Birmingham is making the most of 2012 because we were faster off the marks than our rivals, we aimed higher and our case proved to be stronger.

Mike Whitby is the Leader of Birmingham City Council

As 2011 gathers pace following a sluggish start - I'm speaking personally here - new concerns are playing on my mind.

For instance, having leafed backwards through my new 2011 diary from Sunday, April 17 – when the Virgin London Marathon takes place - I now have a relevant number which is offering me some comfort - 14. The number of weeks I have left to transform myself into someone capable of finishing that race. Comfort. Fear. It alternates.

Numbers have begun to press in on me – How many miles should I run? How often? At what pace? - as I have started to train for an event with which I am in some ways familiar, and in others not at all.

Having covered around 20 London Marathons as a journalist I am now about to experience the race from the other side by joining the struggling throng upon whom I have been wont to gaze down at idle moments from the vantage point of the press centre at the Tower Hotel, a glass of red wine in my hand.

Not that the event has been easy from the press side over the years. I remember once, when we were all based in the Institute of Contemporary Arts building on The Mall, there was a delay of several minutes before a fresh batch of tuna pasta could be prepared for me in the free press restaurant.

On another occasion I recall having to wait almost quarter of an hour beyond the scheduled time before a race winner had the good grace to get themselves over from the finish line to attend their press conference. How the gathered media managed to remain so professionally focused in such circumstances remains a mystery. Red wine may have helped.

Enough, however, of past struggles. And enough, I perhaps hear you say, of my current and future struggle.

I do of course acknowledge that the route I am taking, from marathon observer to participant, is not original. Okay, so it's been done before. But not by me.

Does anybody recognise those last two sentences? They close the prologue to Cliff Temple's Challenge of the Marathon, A Runner's Guide (Stanley Paul, 1981, £4.95), summarising, with characteristic wit and wisdom, the author's sense of achievement after running his first marathon.

Amid a glut of advice from various sources I am finding inspiration in the wry insights of a former friend and colleague who connected so memorably with the sport as a participant, journalist and coach before his untimely and tragic death 17 years ago this month.

The glut? Well, it's turning out like I always feared. The more information you seek on how to achieve the perfect preparation for the marathon, the more you find. Of various kinds.

And anyway I have already left it way too late to attempt the perfect preparation. Even Cliff thinks so. He recommends a minimum preparation time of at least a year before running your first marathon.

But as he swiftly acknowledges, many people have, and will, take less time than that before seeking to complete the distance that was first established at the 1908 London Olympics, when the Royal children wished to see the marathon started on the private lawns at Windsor Castle and their Royal mother, Queen Alexandra, wished to see it finished directly in front of her Royal Box at the White City stadium.

That offers me hope. As Cliff remarks later: "The marathon runner who started his preparation last year may be ahead of you, but if you start now, you'll be ahead of the runner who is going to start next year."

But the numbers! The numbers!

A selection of running magazines purchased on impulse the other evening offer a cacophony of doubtless sound pointers: "Five sessions to help you run faster." "Twelve easy moves to power up your legs." "Drop 10lb in 30 days." "Marathon training: 12-week plans for every level." "Six steps to stay injury free."

Doubtless there are myriad ways forward to a successful experience in a marathon. I have decided to personalise the experience as much as I can by following the guidance of my old friend. Not just any old friend, it should be added, but one who coached runners to Olympic finals and indeed guided the progress of the young man who won the 1983 London Marathon, Mike Gratton.

There are several suggested training schedules in Cliff's book – information which also has a place in his later publication Marathon, Cross Country and Road Running (Stanley Paul, 1990, £9.99).

I don't exactly fit any of the categories – I'm not a rank beginner, I'm not an active club athlete, and somehow I think I am not an ambitious international runner. The 2011 Virgin London Marathon – I'm not in it to win it.

But there are kernels of good sense lying in so many of the paragraphs as Cliff reiterates the essential formula: hard work plus rest equals success.

The nub of things for me seems to lie in his discussion of an American theory which holds that the point at which a marathon will become massively difficult arrives at three times the daily average mileage a runner has put in over the previous two months.

Which means, essentially, that if one wishes to avoid such a "collapse point" over 26 miles, one needs to be averaging a third of the distance – say nine miles to be safe – per day for the eight weeks preceding.

Nine miles a day. That's 63 miles a week, and way more than I've ever run. It's something to aim at. But then I'm the wrong side of 50. Does that change things? Cliff? Cliff?

We'll have to see. Whatever the weather, I will try and hold to the more general advice offered elsewhere in that particular chapter: "We all have days when we don't feel like training, but the marathoner has to accept that his or her feelings may change maybe three or four times during the course of a single long run, as they might in a race."

The marathoner. That's what I want to be now. I can sense the race ahead of me, exciting and frightening, like an ocean. Please don't let me get injured running down the beach...

Mike Rowbottom, one of Britain's most talented sportswriters, has covered the last five Summer and four Winter Olympics for The Independent. Previously he has worked for the Daily Mail, The Times, The Observer, the Sunday Correspondent and The Guardian. He is now chief feature writer for insidethegames

Niels deVos, the Government's UK Sport-appointed chief executive officer of UK Athletics, believes that British athletes can win 10 medals at the 2012 London Olympics and expects that they will be represented in every event and appear in at least 50 per cent of all finals.

This would be our best ever Olympic performance and is only to be expected after 12 years and around £200 million ($310 million) of public and commercial sponsorship which has enabled the formation of a highly professional body put in charge of the sport by the government - with 120-plus staff - to provide the very best in support for our elite athletes.

A new head coach from Holland was brought in on a million-pound contract three years ago, following a rather dismal GB performance in Beijing, to replace the previous performance director and is being hailed by Athletics Weekly's editor, as "Mastermind, the man with the Midas touch" for all his apparent successes. His job for GB is to oversee and determine all aspects of our elite athletes' coaching, preparation and competition programme.

Specifically staffed high performance centres were set up across the country where our best athletes have access to the best facilities and can be under the supervision of highly-paid appointed coaches, including foreign coaches brought in from Canada, the US and Australia.

The very best in sports science and medical and physiotherapy support has been made available to all these designated "podium potential" lottery-funded athletes, who are also individually funded to free them from the stress of having to work and therefore able to concentrate wholly on achieving medals or at least a top eight (final) position.

Regular trips over the winters to warm weather and altitude training camps in South Africa, Australia, United States, French Pyrenees and Kenya have provided the perfect environment for optimum training leading to expected maximum performance in the Government's Sport Minister's designated global medal targets of the biannual World Championships and Olympic Games.

In addition to all the support and financial payouts to our elite athletes, groups and individuals together with their coaches have been sent by UK Athletics to the finest IAAF sanctioned international meetings, outside of the championships, to ensure the very best competitive opportunities.

British athletics has never had it so good.

No stone has been left unturned in the pursuit of the goal for GB's success in London 2012 and the media, the Government and not least the public can look forward to a great British bonanza for athletics in the principal sport of the 2012 London Olympics.

For a daily event-by-event analysis (according to the Olympic athletics programme) of our current medal and top eight prospects click here.

John Bicourt was an English record holder and represented Britain in the 3,000m steeplechase at the 1972 and 1976 Olympics. He has coached, advised and managed a number of Olympic and World Championship athletes from Britain, Australia, South African, Kenya and the United States, including medallists and world record holders. He is an elected officer of the Association of British Athletics Clubs