LRC post about Olympic qualifying standards is filled with misinformation

Susan Hazzard’s letter to Jon Gault indicated that USATF will not honor world rankings and will only take athletes who have hit the time standards. I think that’s the main reason for their outrage.

The thread and article are terrible reads because it is filled with poor writing and arguing about hypothetical situations, but the Brojos seem confident that USATF is saying they will take only the top 3 with the time standard, and ranking won't count.

So if they are correct in that reading (which I don't think they are), then I see their point. While it is true that top 3 at OTQs didn't always make it if they failed to have the time standard, it will be a much more frequent occurrence as the standard is much more difficult.

They have not done a good job explaining themselves.

The Brojos are not correct in their reading. USATF has not decided their qualifying procedures yet. Everyone is overreacting and thinking that USATF won’t use World Rank. That hasn’t been decided. They need to take down that thread and article until the actual selection procedures are released.

By the way the time standard and major race qualifying window opened January 1st 2019. No one has qualified via these methods, not even Rupp. If you go by World Rank, yes there’s several.

What we did in the past is irrelevant because the IAAF qualification system has changed. The question is, what if the 3rd place finisher at the trials has a high enough rank to be invited to the Olympics but doesn't have the automatic standard, but the 4th person has the auto standard? Will the USATF select the 3rd or the 4th placer? LRC's interpretation is that USATF will select the 4th even though the 3rd is qualified, which would be terrible.

colorunner123 said: Michael Stember was the third qualifier at the U.S. Olympic Trials, but had not achieved the A Standard. He spent the summer chasing the mark, achieving it at Herculis in one of the last opportunities before the Olympics.

the facts are these:

1. before the start of the 2000 season Michael Stember's best mark was 3:39.05

2. the Olympic A-Standard was 3:36.8, the B-Standard was 3:39.5

3. nations may send 3 athletes to the games only if all 3 of them have met the A-Standard

4. on 16 Jul 2000 Michael Stember finished 3rd in the US OT in 3:37.04 still without the A-Standard

5. he then raced in Palo Alto 29 Jul 3:37.43, Malmo 7 Aug 3:47.29, Zürich 11 Aug 3:37.54, Monaco 18 Aug where he finally got the A-Standard with 3:35.11

6. he didn't have a great Games.

however, it does also need to be said that since 2000 (I don't have qualifying standards any farther back than 2000) there have only been 27 occasions where a male middle distance runner did not make the Olympic A-Standard in the US OT itself. in 2012, for example, none of the first 3 in the 1500m (Centro, Manzano, Wheating) met the A-Standard (3:35.5) in the trials, but all 3 had the standard previously - Leonel Manzano and Andrew Wheating got it in the same race in Paris in 2011.

I think that number, 27 performances, is a very low number, and you will notice from the list below that they are all at 1500m or above where we would expect tactics to play a more significant part than in the shorter races. what I think this says is that the USOT is a very high quality meet, it isn't just that there is a lot at stake with both fans and athletes expectations running high, but that the meet is conducted at a very high standard precisely because of those expectations.

I do agree that the LRC reporting of this issue has been a bit overblown and hyperbolic, but it is an exceptional meet and I do agree that its meaning and value will be reduced by these recent innovations.

US male middle-distance athletes not making Olympic Qualifying A-Standard in the USOT

event / name / mark / venue / date

10,000m Abdi Abdirahman 28:19.08 Sacramento, CA 14 Jul 2000

1500m Michael Stember 3:37.04 Sacramento, CA 16 Jul 2000

5000m Nicholas Rogers 13:29.48 Sacramento, CA 21 Jul 2000

10,000m Daniel Browne 28:07.47 Sacramento, CA 09 Jul 2004

10,000m Abdi Abdirahman 27:55.00 Sacramento, CA 09 Jul 2004

5000m Bolota Asmeron 13:32.77 Sacramento, CA 16 Jul 2004

5000m Tim Broe 13:27.36 Sacramento, CA 16 Jul 2004

5000m Jonathon Riley 13:30.85 Sacramento, CA 16 Jul 2004

1500m Robert Myers 3:38.93 Sacramento, CA 18 Jul 2004

1500m Charlie Gruber 3:38.45 Sacramento, CA 18 Jul 2004

5000m Bernard Lagat 13:27.47 Eugene, OR 30 Jun 2008

5000m Ian Dobson 13:29.76 Eugene, OR 30 Jun 2008

5000m Matthew Tegenkamp 13:29.68 Eugene, OR 30 Jun 2008

1500m Bernard Lagat 3:40.37 Eugene, OR 06 Jul 2008

1500m Lopez Lomong 3:41.00 Eugene, OR 06 Jul 2008

1500m Leonel Manzano 3:40.90 Eugene, OR 06 Jul 2008

5000m Bernard Lagat 13:22.82 Eugene, OR 28 Jun 2012

5000m Galen Rupp 13:22.67 Eugene, OR 28 Jun 2012

5000m Lopez Lomong 13:24.47 Eugene, OR 28 Jun 2012

1500m Andrew Wheating 3:36.68 Eugene, OR 01 Jul 2012

1500m Matthew Centrowitz 3:35.84 Eugene, OR 01 Jul 2012

1500m Leonel Manzano 3:35.75 Eugene, OR 01 Jul 2012

10,000m Leonard Korir 28:16.97 Eugene, OR 01 Jul 2016

10,000m Shadrack Kipchirchir 28:01.52 Eugene, OR 01 Jul 2016

5000m Paul Chelimo 13:35.92 Eugene, OR 09 Jul 2016

5000m Bernard Lagat 13:35.50 Eugene, OR 09 Jul 2016

5000m Hassan Mead 13:35.70 Eugene, OR 09 Jul 2016

note: middle-distance means flat races from 400m to 10,000m

cheers.

BigTimeRetiredCoach wrote:

Susan Hazzard’s letter to Jon Gault indicated that USATF will not honor world rankings and will only take athletes who have hit the time standards. I think that’s the main reason for their outrage.

Then I guess I was the one who is misinformed! Assuming you are correct, I don't understand USATF's thinking at all. You are saying they would prefer an 8th place finisher who has run a fast time to a 3rd place finisher even if the 3rd place finisher is eligible for the Olympics based on his or her ranking? That is moronic.

BigTimeRetiredCoach wrote:

Susan Hazzard’s letter to Jon Gault indicated that USATF will not honor world rankings and will only take athletes who have hit the time standards. I think that’s the main reason for their outrage.

For a second I thought I got it wrong and I felt bad. But hold on. I reread Hazzard's statement. Here is what she said:

"USATF was aware of the proposed standard changes and made recommendations to the IAAF during the process. While we are disappointed in this initial announcement, we will enthusiastically advocate for additional changes that serve in the best interest of our sport. For the U.S., the three highest-placing finishers at the 2020 U.S. Olympic Trials, and who have the 2020 Olympic Games qualifying standard, will select themselves for the U.S. Team. For World Championships, the U.S. selection process is the same but with the IAAF marks."

There is nothing in here about not honoring world rankings. There is nothing in her statement about picking athletes only based on their times. It is just as I thought. They are going to pick the three highest-placing finishers at the trial who have met the qualifying standard for the Olympics. That is how it has always been.

I now believe the entire premise of the Letsrun column is based on a false interpretation of Hazzard's statement.

overreaction. wrote:

The Brojos are not correct in their reading. USATF has not decided their qualifying procedures yet. Everyone is overreacting and thinking that USATF won’t use World Rank. That hasn’t been decided. They need to take down that thread and article until the actual selection procedures are released.

Hazzard said the U.S. will pick the three highest finishers at the U.S. trials who are eligible to run in the Olympics. I see no reason to believe that they are going to only look at times, since most athletes will qualify for the Olympics based on their world rank. There is nothing in her statement to indicate that they will ignore world rank. Letsrun got it wrong. They should retract their article and I personally think they owe their readers an apology.

Hardloper wrote:

What we did in the past is irrelevant because the IAAF qualification system has changed. The question is, what if the 3rd place finisher at the trials has a high enough rank to be invited to the Olympics but doesn't have the automatic standard, but the 4th person has the auto standard? Will the USATF select the 3rd or the 4th placer? LRC's interpretation is that USATF will select the 4th even though the 3rd is qualified, which would be terrible.

Yes, that would be terrible. But it would not happen. LRC has it wrong. There is nothing in Hazzard's statement to suggest that USATF would bypass an Olympics-eligible third-placer.

27 times among male distance runners alone from 2000 to 2016 is actually a lot. With the standards tougher, that'll happen a lot more. And no B standard business where we might take just the winner. The Trials will not necessarily mean the top three go, so the races will be much less important. That happened frequently during this period, especially 1990s and 2000s, where we were taking a 4th or 5th place finisher sometimes. USATF decided more recently no more of that. You get the standard before the Trials or during the Trials, not after.

I take it that by "have the 2020 Olympic Games qualifying standard," she means the time standard, not a rankings standard.

zxcvzxcv wrote:

I take it that by "have the 2020 Olympic Games qualifying standard," she means the time standard, not a rankings standard.

I think you are wrong.

Most countries have selection requirements over and above IAAF minimum requirements for Olympic selection. Nothing special nor controversial about that. New Zealand, for example, has long had the selection requirement of an A Standard time, AND a realistic expectation of a top 16 finish. Athletes were refused selection in the past because they had a history of blowing up at major events. The country paying has the right to choose.

colorunner123 wrote:

Hazzard said the U.S. will pick the three highest finishers at the U.S. trials who are eligible to run in the Olympics. I see no reason to believe that they are going to only look at times, since most athletes will qualify for the Olympics based on their world rank. There is nothing in her statement to indicate that they will ignore world rank. Letsrun got it wrong. They should retract their article and I personally think they owe their readers an apology.

Agree. She said "...the three highest-placing finishers at the 2020 U.S. Olympic Trials, and who have the 2020 Olympic Games qualifying standard...". The Brojo's are overreacting and reading into it to mean they have to have hit the time standard. That is false. Athletes have to have qualified via 1 of 3 ways. Most of the men will likely qualify via the World Rankings. If a 3rd place male at the Trials doesn't meet one of the 3 criteria, then it moves down to whoever has. There's nothing wrong with that.

USATF has not released their selection procedures yet, so everyone needs to hold their horses and not be reading into anything.