Update on the Olympic Trials Process

macker wrote:

I have no real shot at getting a Trials qualifier for the marathon. If it's in Boston, can I get in if I raise enough money for charity?

Sorry, this is really funny!

I hope he is wrong and it is in Akron

can someone please tell me how many runners can qualify for the olympic marathon team? are there selected alternates? sorry for my confusion

thanks

The NYC race would be on Friday 2 days before the NYC marathon. That part is already set in stone. the

Toivo wrote:

That NYC tip, if it proves to be true, would be unfortunate in that it sets up entirely different training/racing scenarios for men and women.

My wife, in a way, likes the Fall race because it would allow her to train throughout the summer and fall in a way that isn't possible in our harsh northern winter.

Robert too said some athletes would like a fall race for the same reason. But i doubt 90% of them would considering the men's and women's races have been in the winter/spring for as long as I've been watching. Who knows. It would have been better if they actually polled the athletes but the process is better than in years past.

Hey wejo and the letsrun gang - thanks for the information on the selection process. I also think the "powers that be" (Glenn Latimer) deserve serious kudos for sharing the information. Obviously, some people are going to be upset regardless of what the decision(s) are, but demystifying the process is a step towards (re)building confidence in the management of the sport. Plus it helps keep things honest when everyone knows who is playing what role. Nice job all round.

ok so what would the course be like? Would it be any thing like the boston course, or will the loop used miss the hills?

What course are you talking about? The course for both Boston and NYC would be loops. Of course in NYC it would be the dreadful loops in Central Park. As for Boston I am not sure and can't speculate on where the loop would be.

wejo wrote:

I don't know if it is the same process and perhaps I got it wrong. I just got an email from someone else who lives in NY and involved in the running community and all it said was "Nyc(men) and boston(women)..........end of story"

So maybe I'm wrong. I hope not because I think 90% of men marathoners would prefer to have the race in the spring and it seems like if input was solicited that would rule out NY. But if the men's and women's bids are coordinated somehow then it would seem that Boston could not get both men and women.

Thank you for the information, wejo. If you get any further details on the women's site selection process, I would greatly appreciate them. Sometimes it feels like we (women) are even further in the dark...it can be very frustrating.

I am impressed with the number of athletes and others outside the LDR Committee. I am forever confused on this board by claims of what is best or favored by the athletes - are we talking about the very best athletes (sub 2:13 or so), or all A qualifiers, all qualifiers, or those that are scrambling to cut 8 minutes to get in as a B qualifier?

In my world, it is about picking the best three for Beijing - a team where all three can be considered possible top twenty in the Olympics or maybe an outside shot at a medal. Anything done to accomodate the 2:18 guys must by a by-product of the "top 10-20 guys" approach. If Meb, Alan, etc. all said Fall was better (and they were required or incentivized to NOT run a Spring 2008 Marathon), then Fall is best.

In theory, this group has input from many (all?) of the training groups that comprise the top 10-20 guys. If their input was taken to heart, then this process is as good as it gets.

Last note: while anecdotal evidence from email surveys and message boards may help the deliberations, I worry that any "input from the masses" would be over-weighted and mis-applied.

Why woulod even the top three who have a shot at a medal at the Olympics want to run a hard course in Central Park? I am thinking regardless where you are in regards to a qualifying time you would prefer good wetather, a good course and more importantly a strategically placed race in terms of time before the marathon. I think the majority prefer a spring marathon and probably the few that prefer a fall due to bad training weather in the winter is very few.

All of our elite guys who have a chance to qualify live in locaitons where there is decent training weather or have the means to live in a location where weather is not a factor.

macker wrote:

I have no real shot at getting a Trials qualifier for the marathon. If it's in Boston, can I get in if I raise enough money for charity?

But seriously... It looks like athletes will be able to qualify with 5000 meter and 10000 meter times, not just marathon times. Should that happen, if one of the Trials races will be in NYC in November 07, some athletes will actually be making their marathon debuts at the Trials coming off of the track that summer. That could be really interesting...

Vanny

Wejo is correct on one thing...

they are delaying the announcement till next week becasue of the Boston Marathon but it's for the Women's trial.

It is all set...

Men NYC

Women Boston

Timing (like Glenn said) makes sense for the top athletes. November is perfect for the contenders and the track guys (with 5K and 10K Q's).

And with regards to 2007 World Champs...

How many Olympians participate in the WCM marathon the year before the Olympics anyways?

Was Meb or Alan going to run the marathon in Japan in 2007. I doubt it.

Take a few steps back and evalutate the entire process.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars are bding poured into just one and I repeat just one of the 20 events in athletics.

Imagine, all of this energy devoted to hosting just the trials for the 100 meter dash! Let's have cities bid for each event independently.

The process should be simplified and attach the marathon trials to an established marathon

My impression was that the Boston criterion course would involve the section of the BAA marathon from Kenmore to the finish line, then continue on Boylston to Tremont and do 3/4 of a lap of the Common and the Public Garden. The climb from Park Street T Stop to the State House would be the hill. At the State House athletes turn left and go down the hill on Beacon all the way back to Kenmore. I'm not sure that's long enough, but I think that's the gist of the course. GMap Pedometer lists the loop I've described at just about 4 miles. There would be an issue of a hairpin turn at Kenmore, however.

I agree...no one cares about the 2:20-2:22 runners. The elites would of course want a fall race (the one's who votes count). I get the feeling that the elites and USATF have the attitude of "Who cares if their are only 50-60 people in the race, the top 3 are the ones who matter."

If so, why not make the standard 2:14 and let the top 5 athletes run a marathon and see how many people go and watch.

I agree with the sentiment about a fall race. If I were a top tier runner/contender, I would certainly want the Trials in the Fall. Wouldn't 90% of the people (athlete's/coach's) want this as well? By comparison, 90% of the 2:18-2:28 runners would want it in Spring, but were the voters not from the firts group?

Downhill is fun on a bike wrote:

If so, why not make the standard 2:14 and let the top 5 athletes run a marathon and see how many people go and watch.

Thrilling, that was sarcasm.

stipe wrote:

I agree with the sentiment about a fall race. If I were a top tier runner/contender, I would certainly want the Trials in the Fall.

Why?

Marathons are risky - both the training and the event itself. I think a longer lead time would give the top runners more options for 2008. For instance, if KK pops a 2:07:30 at London, he might feel it is safer to run one rather than two in the Olympic year. Others may like to run a Spring 08 marathon (great appearance fee for someone that has already qualified for the Olympic Team), but it would be their choice.