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

Dan's win in TC was not in 99? I think it was 2001.

Eddy Hellebuyck's performance enhanced Twin Cities in 2003

Putting on a race is expensive, especially a Marathon. Now add all the runners which you need to provide Air travel, Housing and meals...it gets very pricey. Then add the marketing/ PR and promotional dollars...

"$500K is for the USOC registration fee to be Olympic Sponsor as any formal bid for the Olympic Trials has to have an Olympic Games Sponsor and the cost at the lowest level for this sponsorship is $500K that goes to the USOC, not the US runners, period."

1. "USOC registration fee to the Olympic sponsors", what does that mean?

2. "..as any formal bid for the Olympic Trials has to have an Olympic Games Sponsor"...please clarify your point.

3. "..that goes to the USOC, not the US runners, period"...do you know what you're talking about? The USOC is a not-for-profit. THE USOC provides funding to the National Governing Bodies (i.e. USATF, USA Swimming and other sports that are in the Olympics and the Pan Am Games). Like all not-for-profit companies, money is spent on staffing and overhead, but the rest of the funding raised by the USOC goes to the NGBs to develop and maintain American athletes.

- Brooklyn Dude

I think Eddy Hellybuck's 2003 Twin Cities win is tainted now?

Ask Birmingham (Val) or St. Louis (Nancy) why they are not bidding this time around and find out the truth. These are two fine ladies that will both tell you that USATF is ridiculous to deal with (not USOC or IOC or anyone else). These USATF volunteers want to act like the host cities in some way dropped the ball. Both Val and Nancy will tell you that there were ridiculous demands from USATF and their representatives that were put on the host cities months after the bids were accepted. Now USATF is going to try to tell everyone that there are no real strong bids so we were forced to accept THE BIG THREE proposal. If that is the case then maybe we need to seriously look at what USATF has done to discourage bidders. First on the list would have to be how they have dealt with HOST cities in the past.

I have questions. Say the big three scenario does happen. If one runs the qualifying standard(2:22,2:47) does it means anything? Can one just enter Chicago,New York,or Boston run a 2:0something and make the team? Or will they have seperate starts for the qualifed entrants and the rest of the field. What if say Adam Goucher decides he is going to make his marathon debut and runs 2:08 in the open race would he still be on the team?

What kind of a course is the China one going to be? Temp/humid expected? Altitude? Any US course like it?

Bejing for the most part will be like Boston with less hills and a criterium type course. Just the rumor! Back to the Process and the response to his speaking. I think this guy means that the 3 races puts USATF money in the USATF athletes pocket not USOC (marathon running and road racing make money by the way that Archery and Modern Pen will never make for 100 years)! So you rather the LDR money go to the USOC so it can trickle down to the NGBs and later atheltes, whatever! So US Marathoners get 10-15% while the USOC gets funding for Badmiton, GREAT IDEA PAL!

Turtle Head

The Badass wrote:

I have questions. Say the big three scenario does happen. If one runs the qualifying standard(2:22,2:47) does it means anything? Can one just enter Chicago,New York,or Boston run a 2:0something and make the team? Or will they have seperate starts for the qualifed entrants and the rest of the field. What if say Adam Goucher decides he is going to make his marathon debut and runs 2:08 in the open race would he still be on the team?

An Oly trials qualifying mark will mean nothing. Yes Adam or anyone else could make the Team in their DEBUT. How else could the "powers at be" justify putting their "best three athletes" on the team theory.

I found the article written by Eric Heinon (linked on the front page) about NCAA qualifying standards very relevant when discussing this issue. The addition of the "REGIONAL STANDARD" (a standard that is based on the 100th time in that event in the previous year) has greatly increased the depth in the distance events and in turn made the front end of those events better than ever. Many arguments say that a 14:15 5k guy will never win a National Championship (or be an all american) and therefore is unimportant when making decisions effecting the National Meet. We have learned through the past few years of using a Regional System that that thinking is incorrect. By instituting a 14:15 standard you have increased the pool of athletes and made the entire event better. Now our top guys (who would have always been our top guys) are running faster than ever.

If you want to see Meb and Culpepper and Browne and Sell and Abdi and Ritz all running faster in the marathon it is important to increase the depth in the Event. As seen in the NCAA that is by having a trials race (the regional NCAA MEET)where folks that have no chance of becoming all american are involved in the meet. This is how a 14:15 5k guy effects the amount of 13:20 guys. The marathon is no different. You must create a special event that includes the 2:22 guy. This will inturn create a larger number of 2:22 guys (or 14:15 guys for comparison sake). Will these 2:22 guys make the Olympic Team? Probably Not (just like the 14:15 guy will not be an all american). But it will make the 2:10 guys better.

There is no system that can be set up that will allow a 2:22 guy to feel anymore special than a Team in Training Athlete at Chicago, Boston or New York. It will also create less news stories for the local papers for these 2:22 athletes. The guy that lost 250 lbs. and will be running 6 hours in any of these three marathons is a more interesting story. THIS MEANS THAT WE WILL BE LOSING 2:22 GUYS FROM THE SPORT. This also means that are top guys will not be pushed (like we have seen in the NCAA example) and we will not be sending the best possible marathon team to the Olympic Games.

You know not of what you speak. I attended both events and saw it very differently. In B'ham, USATF officials were not given access to the athletes, not even allowed in the elite hospitality area. This was Val's event and no interlopers were gaining access to "her boys". Maternal and barely tolerable.

Nancy on the other hand was just a megalomaniac despot. The only thing that saved her conceited ass was the one good move she did make, hiring Dave Mc as the director of operations.

The two races knew going in that there are protocols to be worked through with USATF, but when called to task, bristled about outside intervention. In that sense, at least, the big three would probably be more accustomed to working with the ngb for the sport.

Really quite silly of you to post such drivel.

A few thoughts and questions.

1. Would the Big 3 races be Chicago and New York in the fall of 2007 then Boston in the spring of 2008? Assuming so then any drama for the Olympic spots would come down to the irregular Boston course and Chicago and New York would just be the set up players. No way Bostons course compares to either of the others.

2. Why those three marathons? Why couldn't someone go to London and run a fast one there? If Meb signs a contract for, say $200,000, to run their race then hits a 2:09, how would that affect his Olympic quest?

3. I like the point about running in an international field for a genuine race, but the Olympics is almost always tactical and not fast, just like the OT. If our OT has been slow in the last few years it has been because of a lack of true depth like the late 70's and early 80's. Also, the weather at the last 2 trials was absolutely horrific.

4. Trent Briney was a 2:20 guy who got to 2:12's in one race (my response to someones much earlier thread).

5. Wasn't it Reese Hoffa that lead the world last year in the shot but didn't make the Olympic Team (it was either him or Cantwell)? Could you imagine telling Godina "you can't go, Hoffa through better at a different meet"???

6. Please stop bashing Latimer, Estes, and the others at USATF. They are good people who put in way too much work for way to little pay (if any at all) to help us out.

The Badass wrote:

I have questions. Say the big three scenario does happen. If one runs the qualifying standard(2:22,2:47) does it means anything? Can one just enter Chicago,New York,or Boston run a 2:0something and make the team? Or will they have seperate starts for the qualifed entrants and the rest of the field. What if say Adam Goucher decides he is going to make his marathon debut and runs 2:08 in the open race would he still be on the team?

Those are questions that no one can answer right now. People think that they know the answers, but it's obvious that nothing is known at this point. Anonomous people want people to think they know something, but nothing is final.

I hope your second scenerio is the one that happens and there is a seperate starts for qualified entrants.

I'm not sure I am qualified enough to have an opinion on this one, but here goes. I totally respect all involved in the decision making process, especially Glenn Latimer whom I met on his visit out to Hanson's recently. One thing that comes to mind when we speak of events to qualify one for higher competition in this sport goes all the way back to my first year of running, my junior year of high school. I found out that in our state (Michigan) if you wanted to run at the State Championships, you had to qualify. How was this done? Our state had regional qualifying. It did not matter if you had set a world record at a dual meet or invitational, if you were not top 2 at regionals (or hit an additional qualifying stanard AT regionals) you did not qualify for the state meet. It did not matter if you were a 1:49 800meter guy, if you were sick, injured, tired, or if a dog jumped on your leg with 200 meters to go. If you were not top 2 or under the additional time THAT day, no state meet. It taught us that this soprt, as hard as it may seem and as unfair as it might seem, is about one day. Once you qualified that one day, you could go forward. Only those who were ready that day had earned it. We admired those higher up in the sport, all the way up to Olympic Trials and Olympic Games caliber athletes. Hell, at least we had a state meet every year (ok, only 2 for me). These atletes had to wait 4 long years in between Olympic Games/Trials.

I know an athlete who was the top US discus thrower from 2003 and had gone unbeaten by Americans through 2004, through the prelim of the US Olympic Trials. Then in the finals he was 4th. One of the hardest days of my life recently. The guy is a former college teammate and good friend of mine. His first words to me? "Hey, those guys earned it that day, I wasn't ready when it counted". I'm sure when Dan O'Brien missed qualifying in 1992 he might have wished he was on the team, but knew he wasn't ready that day. The Olympic Trials mimick the games themselves in that you have to be ready THAT day, not "pick one of these 3 days" so we can send the "best team". Sometimes it ain't fair. Sometimes during the Olympic Games themselves an idiot jumps out at the 20 mile mark of the Olympic Marathon and tackles you and you lose a chance at a Gold Medal. But it is set up as fairly as possible to give people the chance to say "On THAT day, I was the best" or "On THAT day, I made the US team" in heads up competition. There are no second chances at the Olympics when they hand out the medals.

It's just not possible to always have the "best" person win or make the team. If that were the case give Paula Radcliff and Paul Tergat the Olympic Marathon gold medals. No disrespect to those athletes, but they weren't for whatever reason as ready as others ON THAT DAY. And I thought the object of the Olympic Trials was to pick the individuals most ready to do well under Olympic type competition in a one shot deal just like the Olimpics? If we are just going to pick the best team, screw the Trials races, just pick your faves. I have often wondered if we want to pefectly simulate the Olympic schedule at the Trials, why no 10k prelims? I know why, tha's just a random thought. I just don't see how this possibility to do away with one site heads up competition is fair to all of the athletes. The athletes are the most important in all of this, right?

I don't even want to get into any of the "what if" scenarios, I just think it would be a slap in the face to all who have been left off of Olympic teams even though they were "better", but just were not ready that day of the trials. It would also be an insult to those who shocked people and made those teams (reguardless of how they competed at the Games themselves, hey they won the right by being ready THAT day).

Long story short, with all due respect, count my invisible no-name vote as a "no".

Don Jackson

The original poster is incorrect. There is no fee to the USOC nor is a local organizer able to become a USOC sponsor. The reality is the rings (and the use of the word "Olympic") is governed by Federal law and the USOC. Those marks are coveted by sponsors, so the USOc requires the local organizers (and USOC) to follow their sponsor rules. In a nutshell, the locals cannot use the word Olympic, Road to Athens, the rings, or any other phrase that could be confused with the USOC. Thus, their own sponsors are either already USOC sponsors (Coke, Visa, Bank of America, An-Busch, etc.) or they have stay far away from most activities.

The $500k is $250k in prize money, $100-150k in athlete travel and local ops. Historically, the leaders (which includes current and recent elite athletes) take the prize money over location, course, weather, etc. Given the inability of B-ham (Mercedes Marathon) and St Louis (at least they had some A-B support) to raise serious sponsor dollars, I doubt serious single city bids will come to bear.

Re past cities. The race directors have known about the severe sponsor restricitons for years - I assume they hoped to bring in sponsors already in the USOC family, but did not. I am sure the RDs will blame USATF and the USOC, but that is a cover for not being able to sell the event.

Very well put Don.

Oh Boo Hoo! wrote:

Certainly. As for the 1980 Olympians, the marathoners knew before the race that they weren't going to Moscow.

What, a few weeks before the race? A couple months? I did not say marathoners, I referenced everyone involved. Once the rules are put in place and plans set in motion, major changes should not be made.

Personally, I think it is dumb that the Trials location and date was not established when the qualifying times were announced. If they chose a fall race like Twin Cities it would effectively cut the window by 6 months and change some people's qualifying strategy.

Oh Boo Hoo! wrote:

According to Durden, he had a pretty solid idea that's how it would come down very early on, well before any official announcement.

Miles and Miles wrote:

How could anyone know when the bids have yet to be submitted? WE KNOW NOTHING. The USATF doesn't even have the details yet.

WTF?!

I would just like to point out that the 2004 Women's Olympic Trials Marathon in St. Louis was actually a wonderfully organized event.

Since St. Louis isn't necessarily a city of running nuts, I was pleasantly surprised to see Forest Park packed with spectators. The course was laid out to perfection, allowing fans to get many, many glimpses of the elite athletes. Not to mention, the start at Washington University was inspired and exceptionally cool to watch. Perhaps, the best part of the entire course was the finish, which was packed with spectators for nearly a mile.

If there is only one reason for St. Louis to be considered once again for the Olympic Trials, it would be the incredible spectator support. All competitors were giving rousing cheers throughout the course, and the accessibility of Forest Park allowed fans (including myself) to stand literally inches from some of the sport's distance icons. St. Louis fans are known for their professional conduct at Cardinals, Rams, and Blues (when they aren't locked out) games. Apparently, St. Louisians treat marathons no differently.

bump, this is crap. and so many will stop running if this happens.