US Olympic Marathon Team may come from Chicago, New York and Boston Marathon?

I would bet your "dollar to donuts" it will go to whoever actually puts a bid together. Doesn't sound like they get too many bids, from what I have read. Why would they if the people that put on the trials hands are tied by sponsors from doing anything good?

Miles and Miles--

That is a load of crap that is probably being fed to you by someone at USATF that is not being creative enough to figure out how to deal with the USOC. There are so many ways around the USOC's rules but USATF is not bright enough to figure it out. Watch how other sports deal with their qualifying and you will see how uncreative USATF really is. Swimming Trials are on National TV not because the Host city was asked to work out a TV deal. Their governing body worked out the TV deal. In addition athletes were wearing caps in the pool during their event that had their individual sponsors on it (no duct tape). Why? Because their governing body has a back bone. It is not all that difficult, if it is important. USATF has told us (the folks that they represent) that we are not all that important. So deal with it.

The Oly Swimming Trials are coming to Omaha.

Will, do they have a "seement pond" big enough ;-)

Who is the constituency? You and the other three people who have made up this entire thread? The fact is from what was posted that there is nothing on the table right now. nothing has happened yet. This thread needs to die because you have a few people that cant let go of what they know nothing about. If the bids havent been made, why is this an issue? I commend USATF for looking at other options, if they work or not. I am not in support of anything way right now because nothing is being offered. What if or a freakin po dunk middle american town coughs up 1 million dollars right now.. I think that USATF will consider anything. We will have to wait and see what that is.

I still like my idea of holding the trials in conjunction with either Chicago, NYC, or Boston. Doesn't Kenya hold their trials at the Boston Marathon, or did they use to at one point. The only problem with this is that anyone can run these races. So, you could either:

1. Run the race the day before or start 30-60 minutes earlier than the people's race.

2. Pay for expenses for sub 2:22. So that there's only one standard instead of two. Heck, just make it 2:20. Anyone can run Boston, but paying the expenses for anyone under 2:20 or 2:22 gives it that trials format.

Other things...

1. If you have a Ritz who wants to make his debut he'll be comped anywhere he goes anyway so that's not a big deal. He'll be comped along with the sub 2:20/22 guys.

2. Another idea would be to just find some random race in the spring (Cincinatti, Louisville, Boston, Cleveland) and have it serve as the trials. Comp anyone under a set time (2:20, :22?). Hold both the men's and women's trails there.

Alan

You may want to read the handbook for the 2004 Olympic swimming Trials, Page 4:

"USA Swimming will strictly enforce Rule 61 of the Olympic Charter,

which states that no commercial identification of any product or

service or any promotional matter of any kind may appear on the

swim suits, caps or goggles of the competitors except for the standard

manufacturers’ equipment identification. The maximum size

of this logo is 20 square centimeters."

Page 3:

"Please be aware that the Olympic rings are not allowed on apparel

or other items according to the Amateur Sports Act. This will be

policed by USOC personnel at the Trials."

You may want to rephrase your argument, and here is the link:

As a 2:21 guy I personally am fired up by the idea of a Chi, NY, Boston trials series.

Sure, its not perfect, but it would be a hell of a lot of fun to throw down in the fall, go out on the town, crack a few beers with the boys, and then do it all over again in mighty Boston, where the prize money will go so DEEP, the crowds will be extra delerious, and the plublicity will be tremendous.

Birmingham was a great experience, the folks down there went out of their way to make us feel comfortable, and the race was fast and decided a great team.

But the media exposure was almost nonexistant.

Look, the gap between the team in training people and us so-called "true-runners" is wide and growing by the day. I am of the opinion that in order for this sport to survive into the mid-decades of this century we need to tap into the enthusiasm of all of those folks who are willing for whatever reason to run a five hour marathon. If all that takes is having them run over the same course on the same day that someone(Meb, Culpepper, Miles and Miles?) is chosen for the olympic team, so be it.

The three way trials will provide great exposure, will bring in three ultra-professionally managed races with big bucks and great competition, and will be a hell of a lot of fun for those willing to sac-up, get the qualifier, show up ready to race, and be willing to take the risk to try something new.

Bring it on. Jim, Fred, and Glenn you have my full support.

-Nate Bowen

Fred Finke wrote:

You may want to read the handbook for the 2004 Olympic swimming Trials, Page 4:

"USA Swimming will strictly enforce Rule 61 of the Olympic Charter,

which states that no commercial identification of any product or

service or any promotional matter of any kind may appear on the

swim suits, caps or goggles of the competitors except for the standard

manufacturers’ equipment identification. The maximum size

of this logo is 20 square centimeters."

You proved my point exactly. The rule was in their handbook and yet they obviously chose to ignore it. THE CAPS HAD THEIR INDIVIDUAL SPONSORS ON THEM DURING THE OLYMPIC TRIALS. Riddle me this. Why did Swimming choose to look the other way while USATF had the duct tape out? Answer. Because USATF is afraid of the USOC and Swimming supports their athletes interests.

Manhattan Dude wrote:

Would U.S. athletes competing for Olympic team berths get more, or less, media attention vs. the current Trials system if they were running at in one of the Big 3 marathons? It's not even arguable that they would. The decision which has to be made is this: is the extra promotion worth the trade-off of losing the stand-alone Trials and all that it means, and has meant, to U.S. athletes. It's a tough call...

Manhattan Dude

I'm not sure I agree with that, at least in an absolute sense. For both Trials races last year, there were several websites (including this one) that posted live coverage of the races. And let's face it, that's how anyone who cares is going to get the news. The dailies will pick up a story from the wire services the next day, and weeklies will run "hometowner" stories about local qualifiers before and after the race. National monthlies such as RW, RT & T&FN will run a race story/analysis some months after the race is over, when it's old news.

The bottom line as I see it: the people who care and are interested will find out in one of these ways, and those who could care less will STILL care less, no matter how much or how little coverage there is - maybe 5 per cent of the currently disinterested masses (Penguinites, Gallowalkers, TiTers) might expereience a spark or momentary glimmer of interest in who's on the team, but the overall level and demographic is just simply not going to change.

But the hard-core fans will be LESS well served if the Trials are rolled into an existing event (and I'm not talking about a separate race held a day or two before the big race - that's quite a different story). But if it's run within the main race, even with a head start or similar, the coverage will be DILUTED. Trust me, all media outlets have a finite space/time they can fill with stories, and there's a certain amount allotted to any event. If you think some baseball/football/basketball stories are going to get cut to make room for additional marathon coverage, you have little idea how the media works. And NBC, OLN or whoever is going to add an hour to their broadcast just to make sure the Trials portion of NY/Chi/Bos gets adequate coverage? Dream on.

Finally, try explaining to the average sports fan or casual runner how this multi-race selection process if going to work. Even dedicated fans are sometimes confused by the current T&F setup where an athlete can finish well back and still go, or place top 3 and be left home. Imagine if baseball's All-Star voting were as convoluted a process: "OK, Carlos Beltran was a top 3 vote getter, but since his stats aren't as good as Andruw Jones, he doesn't play, unless he raises his average 15 points before the All Star Game." That's about the state of things in T&F right now, and people wonder why interest is so low? At least the current marathon Trials format is more or less cut and dried - win and you're in. There's something to be said for simplicity.

Actually I did not prove your point. The caps that were worn were the caps of the colleges that the athletes were swimming for, not their sponspors. If you look at the name-Pro athletes, there was no advertising other than what was allowed under the rule 61 written below.

Don't drink the Kool Aid wrote:

Fred Finke wrote:

You may want to read the handbook for the 2004 Olympic swimming Trials, Page 4:

"USA Swimming will strictly enforce Rule 61 of the Olympic Charter,

which states that no commercial identification of any product or

service or any promotional matter of any kind may appear on the

swim suits, caps or goggles of the competitors except for the standard

manufacturers’ equipment identification. The maximum size

of this logo is 20 square centimeters."

You proved my point exactly. The rule was in their handbook and yet they obviously chose to ignore it. THE CAPS HAD THEIR INDIVIDUAL SPONSORS ON THEM DURING THE OLYMPIC TRIALS. Riddle me this. Why did Swimming choose to look the other way while USATF had the duct tape out? Answer. Because USATF is afraid of the USOC and Swimming supports their athletes interests.

One reason so many people are opposed to this idea is that there is a whole bunch of 2:20-ish marathoners out there for whom the trials ARE their Olympics. They are participants, not real competitors.

These are people who have no prayer of actually making the team but just want to be able to tell everyone that they "ran in the US Olympic Trials". If this new format is adopted, then tens of thousands of other runners can pretty much say the same thing. All those "special" US Olypmic trials participants will blend into a crowd of foreigners and near-miss Americans.

All those fragile egos will be irreparably damaged.

Nate Bowen wrote:

Look, the gap between the team in training people and us so-called "true-runners" is wide and growing by the day. I am of the opinion that in order for this sport to survive into the mid-decades of this century we need to tap into the enthusiasm of all of those folks who are willing for whatever reason to run a five hour marathon. If all that takes is having them run over the same course on the same day that someone(Meb, Culpepper, Miles and Miles?) is chosen for the olympic team, so be it.

Not totally related, but the fields for the "open" marathons/half marathons that followed the Trials races last year (Mercedes/Spirit of St. L) both experienced significant increases. But not sure what you mean by "tap into the enthusiasm." Of course, USATF has been pondering this same question for several decades now and they haven't come up with any answers, either.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Doesn't Kenya hold their trials at the Boston Marathon, or did they use (sic) to at one point.

When has Tergat ever run Boston? The KAAA uses Boston as one of its Olympic qualifiers.

The only problem with this is that anyone can run these races.

Please explain, just how is that a "problem"??

Pay for expenses for sub 2:22.

Since when do men who run that slow (even if it's 2:20, instead) deserve anything besides a comp'ed entry and maybe a free double-occupancy room at the host hotel? Comp'ing expenses for slow men is not what the "trials format" is about.

Another idea would be to just find some random race in the spring (Cincinatti, Louisville, Boston, Cleveland) and have it serve as the trials. Comp anyone under a set time (2:20, :22?). Hold both the men's and women's trails there.

You really should read the whole thread before spouting off. None of those marathons would be able to come up with the prize structure required, on top of what they already dole out in the open races.

Uh, I know but, um, this thread is about the marathon, you know, and the trials for that event were held in May, and if the marathoners knew (well) before the race that they were not going to Moscow, it's safe to assume that the T&F folks knew as well. Just read:

Yes, there are some things in this world that ARE irrefutably more important than sport.

All those fragile egos will be irreparably damaged.

That sums it up right there. A bunch of post-collegians with no other reason to get out of bed each morning will have their last Peter Pan fantasy stripped away. Nevermind the potential gains of a new system, we have to keep the status quo so that second tier talent and unimaginative old men will have some pathetic meaning in their lives.

USATF is a direct reflection of all who have a genuine interest in the sport. If you want it to go more in the direction you envision, then get involved and drag all your friends who think the same as you along. I'd bet dollars to donuts that there are no more posters on this thread who take an active role in USATF (i.e. doing much more than paying annual membership dues) than can be counted on one hand. If you just give money (or don't even do that!) and nothing more, then it will always be other people with other agendas who decide how the budget is spent. It's always easier to talk tough on a message board with your gripes and 'stand behind' what you say, but when the rubber meets the road I'd wager that you're not to be heard from. I also have a real hard time feeling sorry for someone who would have been the 24th seed in a race. Chaplin may have been technically in the wrong, but this isn't enough to tarnish everything he's ever done. Why is he still on-board if he cost the USATF any sizable sum of money? For an organization with such a shoestring budget, he'd be gone on fiscal liability terms alone if that were truly the case.

I guess that I am not familiar with "The College of Nike", but that was on more than one cap (I just went back to the tape). Speedo was on others. There was even an athlete that pulled of a solid colored cap and replaced it with a sponsors baseball cap as he was getting out of the pool and wore it for his entire interview. Riddle me that. I hate when USATF officials try to justify their unwillingness to help their own athletes. Face it, Masback is chicken shit when it comes to USOC. Why is that? Because his office has done such a poor job of marketting themselves that they are totally dependant on $$$ from the USOC. If USATF did it right they would be big enough to tell USOC how things are going to be handled instead of begging for permission.

Actually, this has little at all to do with USOC and more to do with their own principal sponsors. Look at all the shithead rules about logos on racing attire for even the US XC champs!