If this is a democracy, I vote to leave it as a mile. As a fan of track, there aren't enough mile races as is, so it will be fun to watch.
If the A standard was that important to the runners, they should either get t at that race or pick another one.
It should be a 1500 and AJ Acosta with his shorter and more aerodynamic beard should grace the race with their presence.
Selleckman wrote:
If this is a democracy, I vote to leave it as a mile. As a fan of track, there aren't enough mile races as is, so it will be fun to watch.
If the A standard was that important to the runners, they should either get t at that race or pick another one.
^^^ This.
The meet directors decide the events based on what they think is best for their meet. If you don't like it, go someplace else.
You can't even work out throws or jumps in metres (or even spell it correctly) and will be unable to work out how far 1500m is.
2 No
Is this really a case with what's "wrong" with the sport or what's "wrong" with the fans and their unrealistic expectations? It seems a little myopic to think that those in charge of the meet, who are hosting an international meet (ergo, the title of the race!), should be obligated to change the race distance for a few athletes (mostly from the US, i.e. Alan Webb) to make the Olympic standard. As someone else said, this is not a time trial; this is a professional race and these athletes are being paid to run. The meet promoters have invested a lot of money in this through advertising and appearance fees and running a mile race (or two) resonates more with prospective fans- it still has mystique. Just because this is an issue of finances it does not make it wrong. If it weren't for meets like Pre you would never see such amazing foreign athletes on US soil. This is meant to be an international meet, not a meet for US athletes to make Olympic Standards.
There is nothing "wrong" with the sport just because the meet promoters don't do what you want them to do.
My theory for why Webb is running a 1500 within the mile...
He has a really hard time finishing strong when it’s a close race and his best races are ones in which he dominates the field. So, if you let him “finish” 300 before everyone else, the pressure to race is off and he can just time-trial it. It’s such a terrible mental game for Webb, and this seems like a way for Nike to put him in front of his fans, get a solid time, and remove the pressure that seems to be his albatross.
I’m a huge Alan Webb fan and wish him all the best. He’s an awesome talent. I look forward to the day he can walk to the line with a smile and calmly, joyfully race to his potential. But, so easy to say, so hard to do. For all of us.
It's 109 meters, not 300. He may fade a little but it won't be a complete disaster or anything. And he won't be trouncing the field at any point.
The reason that the B heat is also a mile is because milers sometimes want to run a mile race now and then and this is still a quality mile race.
The times from this section have wound up on the year end world list for the mile.
In an avergage week, sometimes they will run an 800m, sometimes a 3,000 and sometimes a mile. Not to chase standards but to work on their range and for variety.
If Webb or anyone else is aiming to pursue a 1500m standard they should go somehwere else to do it. There are plenty of events to do that. Not too many events to run a fast mile.
It is not the meet organizers fault if the athletes entered decide not to race the event as it is intended. The camera at the 1500m mark is just an assistance.
These guys get 14 months to run 3:35.50 for 1500m.
It's OK to have two sections of a mile race for one week.
Not you wrote:
Why?
I would like to see the mile brought back in the Olympics.
Yes, those were the best games ever.
Formica Table wrote:
It's 109 meters, not 300. He may fade a little but it won't be a complete disaster or anything. And he won't be trouncing the field at any point.
Of course. Typo. Thanks.
And I agree on your other points, as well.
Can someone please clarify, do all three of the US olympic 1500 guys need the A standard? If two of the top 3 have A's, can we send someone with a B as well?
It seems to be asked in every other thread.
In the Olympics, all 3 need the A standard if a country sends more than one athlete in an event.
ventolin^3 wrote:
rojo wrote:Now we have heard from Webb's coach himself, Jason Vigilante, that Webb's plan is to kick it in and go for the "A" at 1,500 as there will be a camera set up there, but that's ridiculous. Apparently he still has to finish the race for it to count.
i've never heard anything like that before ?!
any clarification ?
if webb crosses the 1500 line in 3'25.99 but then doesn't finish the mile, there is no way in hell the iaaf won't count that 1500 !
What is wrong with your head VentoMoron?
Of course he would finish the mile, he would (or woud like you so ridiculosly write) just jog it in.
23. For World Records set over multiple distances in the same race:
(a) A race shall be stated to be over one distance only.
(b) However, a race based on the distance covered over a given time
may be combined with a race over a fixed distance (for example,
1 Hour and 20,000m - see Rule 164.3).
(c) It is permissible for the same athlete to accomplish any number
of Records in the same race.
(d) It is permissible for several athletes to accomplish different
Records in the same race.
(e) However, it is not permissible for an athlete to be credited with
a Record at a shorter distance if he did not finish the full distance
of that race
Reading this, could they state that Friday's mile race is a 1500, but race the full mile? 23a says that you have to state a distance, but it doesn't say you have to state the longer distance. Rule 23e says you can't set the record at a shorter distance if you don't finish the "full distance of that race". Presumably, the "full distance of that race" is the stated distance of the race.
Selleckman wrote:
If this is a democracy, I vote to leave it as a mile. As a fan of track, there aren't enough mile races as is, so it will be fun to watch.
If the A standard was that important to the runners, they should either get t at that race or pick another one.
The Nike guys don't have the option of picking another race this weekend. They're usually obligated to run at Pre.
With all do respect and I love him like a brotha... Alan Webb, puh-lease...
If you want a 1500, there have been and still are plenty. Just as there are plenty of US runners in the 1500 who have already qualified with the "A" standard.
This was JV reporting at best... Why should one of our most reputable meet's change its event schedule just because poor little Alan Webb needs to qualify?
Seriously - I mean Really ??? Again, I mean no disrespect but C'Mon, can't you find something else to complain about...? You support bring back the mile, but then you criticize the mile??? You shouldn't even have fingers to type anymore... They should lock you in a room without wifi...
STEPHEN A wrote:
With all do respect and I love him like a brotha... Alan Webb, puh-lease...
If you want a 1500, there have been and still are plenty. Just as there are plenty of US runners in the 1500 who have already qualified with the "A" standard.
This was JV reporting at best... Why should one of our most reputable meet's change its event schedule just because poor little Alan Webb needs to qualify?
Seriously - I mean Really ??? Again, I mean no disrespect but C'Mon, can't you find something else to complain about...? You support bring back the mile, but then you criticize the mile??? You shouldn't even have fingers to type anymore... They should lock you in a room without wifi...
Look, I'm trying to deal with reality here.
In my mind the IAAF should certainly take mile times for the 1,500. That's just common sense. But since they don't and are two weeks out before the Trials, the B heat at Pre should accept reality and run a 1,500.
Normally I'm 100% for the mile and we are big supporters of the BBM campaign. And the Pre Classic is an amazing meet. But this is the 'B' heat.
Not to mention it is dangerous, and impedes other runners, to have someone essentially "finish" 109 m early. Imagine him leaning over an imaginary line and then slowing down while other athletes are accelerating to the finish? What a complete joke.
This bring back the mile crap is all well and good, except as long as the Olympics is 1500m, all the qualifying races need to be too. All that is happening by running the mile at this meet is hurting the chances of olympic hopefuls.
I would be SHOCKED if Alan gets the A standard enroute...the race isn't designed for it.
I have to wonder if it's contractual or because too much has been printed about it being a mile already. The Pre organizers are very good about giving the top athletes what they want in order to get them to show up and I'm certain they would have made a 1500 if they had known this would be the situation earlier. It just seems too late in the game now to change things.
I think you're right that it would make more sense, if they let them run a 1500m. But then again the promoters don't have to care for qualifying races. They want to establish a 'tradition' even if it is not long for now with two miles, the 'Bowerman Mile' and the 'International Mile' (funny title!). That was written in the preview for the IAAF by the organisers. Ryan Gregson won two Int. Miles. So, there you have a tradition...