Women now better than men at OT Trials

Or one standard is relatively easier than the other.

Women's Standards are a joke.

What are the ratios of half qualifiers versus full qualifiers for both sexes. Just curious.

This has been the case for decades. Going back to the early 80s the women's standards (2:50, 2:48, 2:46, now 2:45 have always been easier than the men's (2:21, 2:19, 2:20, 2:22, 2:20, 2:18). No big deal.

WX Y and Z wrote:

Going back to the early 80s the women's standards (2:50, 2:48, 2:46, now 2:45 have always been easier than the men's (2:21, 2:19, 2:20, 2:22, 2:20, 2:18). No big deal.

They're not easier. Yes, they're slower than the mens standards but relatively speaking they're about equal. Therefore you can say that women "wanted it more" this year.

Xenostreams wrote:

WX Y and Z wrote:

Going back to the early 80s the women's standards (2:50, 2:48, 2:46, now 2:45 have always been easier than the men's (2:21, 2:19, 2:20, 2:22, 2:20, 2:18). No big deal.

They're not easier. Yes, they're slower than the mens standards but relatively speaking they're about equal. Therefore you can say that women "wanted it more" this year.

Yes they are. The women's standards are ridiculously easier.

From the USATF website:

Total number of qualified men: 211

By marathon: 86

By half marathon: 125

Attained "A" standard: 27

Attained "B" standard: 184

Total number of qualified women: 246

By marathon: 198

By half marathon: 48

Attained "A" standard: 42

Attained "B" standard: 204

Statistically, the B standard was pretty close between men and women. The men's A was more difficult than the women's. The men's half standard is clearly too easy, but might help give an unknown a shot at jumping on to the national stage which is exciting. Overall, the women's marathon standard is still a bit more lenient than the men's but the gap is closing compared to past years.

Xenostreams wrote:

Therefore you can say that women "wanted it more" this year.

Oh, they definitely did. ;)

4/10

The women's standards are much easier than the men's standards. They have to make them easier because there is much less depth on the women's side. There is 22 minute difference between the A standards & 26 minutes between the B standards.Now look at the time difference between the top American male vs female time at recent major marathons.2015 Boston: Dathan Ritzenhein 2:11:20 & Desiree Linden 2:25:39. Difference of 14:19.2015 Chicago: Luke Puskedra 2:10:24 & Deena Kastor 2:27:47. Difference of 17:37.2015 NYC Marathon: Meb Keflezighi 2:13:32 & Laura Thweatt 2:28:23. Difference of 14:51.If there was equal depeth in men's & women's running there would be a difference of more like 15-16 minutes for the A standard and 18-20 minutes for the B standard. There are a bunch of American men who can run sub 2:15 but only a handful of American women that can run sub 2:30. Who knows why, but there are just a lot more men interested in running competitively.

Xenostreams wrote:

WX Y and Z wrote:

Going back to the early 80s the women's standards (2:50, 2:48, 2:46, now 2:45 have always been easier than the men's (2:21, 2:19, 2:20, 2:22, 2:20, 2:18). No big deal.

They're not easier. Yes, they're slower than the mens standards but relatively speaking they're about equal. Therefore you can say that women "wanted it more" this year.

Xenostreams wrote:

This just in:

http://www.runnersworld.com/olympic-trials/the-2016-olympic-marathon-trials-whos-in-and-whos-out

Women: 246

Men: 210

What do you think: Women wanted it more or men were not trying hard enough?

Anyway, nice job, ladies.

Everyone should be encouraged to try their best in the sport and congratulations to all who have qualified but none of the women in the trials have ran faster than any of the men in the trials. The women are just lucky enough to have a protected subcategory that allows them to compete for medals etc.

If the men had the same entry standards as the women then you would probably have over 1000 men qualified to enter.

Its tiring to hear America's best runners being constantly bashed for no valid reason.

Precious Roy wrote:

Total number of qualified men: 211

By marathon: 86

By half marathon: 125

Attained "A" standard: 27

Attained "B" standard: 184

Total number of qualified women: 246

By marathon: 198

By half marathon: 48

Attained "A" standard: 42

Attained "B" standard: 204

The women are more than 2 times better this year, and their field is much more competitive.

the women's standard is easier but 3 athletes from each gender still make the olys. Anyone who gets into the trials is a good athlete.

The USATF should just adopt the olympic standards as the trials qualifying times.

Which is what they did this year, eventually.

Or if timing is difficult, use the prior OG olympic standard.

it's still easier for the women that way (of course) but at least it has something to do with the olympics and takes the politics and gender politics out of the equation.

If men's and women's qualifying times were equivalent then it would take about 2:32 for men to qualify.

Xenostreams wrote:

WX Y and Z wrote:

Going back to the early 80s the women's standards (2:50, 2:48, 2:46, now 2:45 have always been easier than the men's (2:21, 2:19, 2:20, 2:22, 2:20, 2:18). No big deal.

They're not easier. Yes, they're slower than the mens standards but relatively speaking they're about equal. Therefore you can say that women "wanted it more" this year.

They're not relatively equal. 2:45 is 30 minutes off the women's WR and 2:18 is 16 minutes off the men's WR. If we were to plot the distribution of male performance, we'd see a big hump at the sub- and sub-sub-elite level. For females, it's 99% distributed in the hobby jogger ability and 1% at the elite ability. So if a competition accepts the top 5% of male and female entrants, it's easier for a motivated female to make the cut.

Who cares about any of this US only data? What are the IAAF Olympic standards? 2:19 & 2:45 - Entries administered by Entry Standard

only – no invitation by rankings.

End of thread.

what about entry with a half marathon? I think that is valid

jamin wrote:

They're not relatively equal. 2:45 is 30 minutes off the women's WR and 2:18 is 16 minutes off the men's WR.

1. Paula's WR is an outlier and worth sub 2h when compared to men

2. When comparing times you should work with % not absolute times

You must have failed hard in Math class