Anyone else think this standard attempt by Hasay and Erdmann is a little pathetic?

Pretty Easy wrote:

I can see why track purists wouldn't love it, but bottom line it's legal (for now, not that I am positive IAAF will ban it in the future).

You just summed up the Nike Oregon Project.

Andy Trouard

Mile 4:08

2 mile 8:51

It doesn't help that Colorado got 3 sub 9 guys this year including Ben Saarel.

Dedicated Runner wrote:

As long as it's legal, no problem.

Exactly, it is kind of cool, fresh, new, different. When was the last time you heard of something like this?

And it has drummed up a lot of interest.

Both the young women are super class acts and I am wishing them the best.

ijenns318 wrote:

Nothing wrong with them doing what they have to do to get to Moscow.

Agreed. Mostly.

One could say that if such elaborate means need to be cooked up, the athlete is so marginally qualified that they (and the funder - USATF) maybe be better served not going.

This is why many countries require two Bs for Olympic qualifying. If you're marginal you need to at least show some consistency (which hitting it once in a male-paced time trials does not show).

I think it will be a great experience for them and good for US track to send a full time. They should do what they have to to go ^^^

Dedicated Runner wrote:

As long as it's legal, no problem.

I'm sure the Nike legal team has got the o.k. and it's within the letter of rule 147.

But is it within the spirit of the rules?

====

The intent of this Rule is to facilitate the conduct of Field Events and in races of 5000m or longer,

when small numbers of athletes only are entered in one or both genders or where in the case of

longer events (i.e. a track race walk of 10,000m or more), timetabling constraints make it difficult

to program separate races. The intent of the Rule is not to provide opportunity for women to compete

in races against men to achieve potentially better performance conditions

====

The rule was changed to allow runners in countries/areas without many (if any) women's 5k and 10k races, to run a qualifying time. Have Hasay and Erdmann had no opportunity to run in a women's 10k this year, so that their only chance is to run in a mixed race?

Or are they "in races against men to achieve potentially better performance conditions"?

More here:

Pretty Easy wrote:

I can see why track purists wouldn't love it, but bottom line it's legal (for now, not that I am positive IAAF will ban it in the future).

greatly concerned wrote:

You just summed up the Nike Oregon Project.

POD

Everything about AlSal's group is pathetic.

The person who said there's nothing else going on nailed it. I think this is great. We're getting a glimpse of Alberto's insanity. Just imagine the things going on that we don't know about like blood tests, thyroid exams, and visits to the sport psychologist.

Yes, I find it a little pathetic.

One issue is that the Diamond League should have one good 10,000 over the summer for an opportunity to run fast.

There were two races on the same day that went fast, but a week after USATF so not ideal for the Americans.

But here is what I think USATF really should do:

Hold their men's and women's 10,000 trials at a separate time and place from the rest of the meet and set it up with rabbits to run a qualifying pace.

You would likely have your top three all get the standard and set your team up in one shot.

far beyond driven wrote:

They are the haves in the have/have not scenario.

You can sign up here:

, It will cost you $10 to enter.

A Duck wrote:

Exactly, it is kind of cool, fresh, new, different. When was the last time you heard of something like this?

And it has drummed up a lot of interest.

Both the young women are super class acts and I am wishing them the best.

If you haven't heard of something fresh, new and different, you need to pay more attention to world track. European meets have guys throwing the hammer out into rivers and doing the shot in train stations. It is US athletics that is becoming a dinosaur.

Agreed about these two being class acts. Hope they make it.

Who and who?

http://www.usatf.org/groups/officials/files/resources/rules/2012-IAAF-The-Referee.pdf

====

The intent of the Rule is not to provide opportunity for women to compete

in races against men to achieve potentially better performance conditions

====

... are they "in races against men to achieve potentially better performance conditions"?

Looks like this is breaking the rules. Wow.

* wrote:

But here is what I think USATF really should do:

Hold their men's and women's 10,000 trials at a separate time and place from the rest of the meet and set it up with rabbits to run a qualifying pace.

You would likely have your top three all get the standard and set your team up in one shot.

Makes WAY to much sense for USATF :)

Also, not many of the men (TRUE being an exception) have shown that they would have the gonadism to get after it. Most likely result is Rupp sits and kicks for the win and the B minus one second, while nobody else makes it.

This could actually work for the women, though.

ryan foreman wrote:

On first glance I would think it a little pathetic. But then I think of two things.

1. Its a 10000M race. That distance is simply not run much at an elite level. In that context I have no problem with them creating a fast race of their own.

2. This sort of thing is actually kind of traditional. Bowerman did this back in the day. That is why the Oregon twilight meet exists.

Yep.

rupp-certified saladbar wrote:

[quote]

Looks like this is breaking the rules. Wow.

So is this event still going down? The rule book interpretation pretty much blatantly states that the rule is NOT intended for exactly what Alberto is planning to do.

As a couple of people have pointed out, it's an open race and the entry fee is $10. So here's a plan of action for the anonymous 'suck it up and race' posters on this thread:

1. Post your name.

2. Go race Hasay and Erdmann.

Then we'll all have a look at the results next week and decide who's pathetic.

It would be more pathetic if they didnt race and try to get the standard.

You have this completely backwards.

far beyond driven wrote:

They are the haves in the have/have not scenario.

There are lots of reasons to have this opinion about the Salazar group, but this race is not one of them. Finding a group of guys to run 32:00 in a 10k and setting up a meet is not difficult and doesn't require resources that are unavailable to the average professional runner.