Los Angeles: 2016 US Olympic Trials Marathon Site Selected

Do they plan on banning car movements on that day to prevent smog from choking out the athletes?

I don't like this move from a athlete's perspective. Now that they have made the A standard more difficult many more will have to pay their own way for travel, hotel and so forth and I imagine that LA is going to be much more expensive for all of that especially for someone on the east coast who is training and just scraping by.

Not to mention that it will be much more difficult for family and friends from the east coast to make the trip out to support someone they know running with those expenses.

Houston did a amazing job last time around and it would have been nice to see them have it again or another similar centrally located city.

The Future wrote:

Aside from that it seems like the athletes feel like they were listened to as much as those recommending Houston.

Were they? I'm not being snarky... at the time of the Annual Meeting, the athletes wanted Houston. Obviously the date was a huge issue. So are all of the athletes really OK with LA now that the date is better? Or were there other reasons they wanted Houston as well?

justthinkinggg wrote:

I don't like this move from a athlete's perspective. Now that they have made the A standard more difficult many more will have to pay their own way for travel, hotel and so forth and I imagine that LA is going to be much more expensive for all of that especially for someone on the east coast who is training and just scraping by.

Not to mention that it will be much more difficult for family and friends from the east coast to make the trip out to support someone they know running with those expenses.

Houston did a amazing job last time around and it would have been nice to see them have it again or another similar centrally located city.

I think that Houston would have been the better choice for the reasons cited above, but LA isn't that expensive in February (hotel rates and plane fares plummet when tourists are not around). But Houston is definitely cheaper and easier in comparison.

I do not think that high profile cities like LA or NY add anything to the event. I went to the trials in NY and Houston. For a city with 9 million people packed into a small area, the crowds at the NY trials were pretty meager even though the weather was beautiful. And aside from seeing the occasional guy walking down the street wearing a Boston marathon jacket, you would not have known that the trials were happening in NY in the days before and after the event. The city is so big that it just swallows up an event like the trials.

I suspect that NBC probably had a hand in this. They would rather that their idiot commentators be able to talk about Hollywood and different landmarks than actually focus on the race.

The main problem in this is that it sends a message to cities making a bid that the process is a farce and might discourage Houston and others from making a bid. That might mean that future trials will be left up to NY, Boston and LA, with a potential race to the bottom as each realizes that USATF needs them more than they need USATF.

justthinkinggg wrote:

I don't like this move from a athlete's perspective. Now that they have made the A standard more difficult many more will have to pay their own way for travel, hotel and so forth and I imagine that LA is going to be much more expensive for all of that especially for someone on the east coast who is training and just scraping by.

Not to mention that it will be much more difficult for family and friends from the east coast to make the trip out to support someone they know running with those expenses.

Houston did a amazing job last time around and it would have been nice to see them have it again or another similar centrally located city.

I think that Houston would have been the better choice for the reasons cited above, but LA isn't that expensive in February (hotel rates and plane fares plummet when tourists are not around). But Houston is definitely cheaper and easier in comparison.

I do not think that high profile cities like LA or NY add anything to the event. I went to the trials in NY and Houston. For a city with 9 million people packed into a small area, the crowds at the NY trials were pretty meager even though the weather was beautiful. And aside from seeing the occasional guy walking down the street wearing a Boston marathon jacket, you would not have known that the trials were happening in NY in the days before and after the event. The city is so big that it just swallows up an event like the trials.

I suspect that NBC probably had a hand in this. They would rather that their idiot commentators be able to talk about Hollywood and different landmarks than actually focus on the race.

The main problem in this is that it sends a message to cities making a bid that the process is a farce and might discourage Houston and others from making a bid. That might mean that future trials will be left up to NY, Boston and LA, with a potential race to the bottom as each realizes that USATF needs them more than they need USATF.[/quote]

Newsflash the viewers that will watch the Marathon Trials are not marathon runners. Very small amount. So the standard "idiot announcers" holds no water. Every time NBC or ESPN puts on a former runner they are terrible and turn off the normal tv viewer. Let's all hope Tim Hutchings announces and not Craig Masback. Fine with the others.

Great choice. Getting to LAX is a cheap direct flight in February from anywhere in the US. It never snows nor gets cold in L.A. The Metro rail line goes from LAX to the downtown hotels. No wonder that a huge portion of USATF elites live and train in Southern California and the Southwest US in general.

Nothing against LA, but there are only so many bridges in this country that you can burn. Why go through the charade of bids and site selection if Max just goes where he wants. Isn't this exactly what the overwhelming majority of delegates shot down at the annual meeting? If our board and our CEO don't represent the members then either the executives have to go or the members need to find a new organization.

That's not even a close assessment. It's a takeover. A coup. Nobody asked us because we never mattered. No courtesy was nor will be afforded. That's how business is conducted in the competitive entertainment business world. Shocked and left out in the cold, we look back stunned. Now we see what happened in broad daylight, in front of our faces, while we were awake: the new L.A. Mayor and the Hollywood Entertainment Industry decided on their own that the IAAF World Championships and the Summer Olympics will be in L.A. For dress rehearsal, the Marathon Trials and Track and Field Trials were grabbed by L.A. That's the world we live in. It's a shock for the USATF volunteers and coaches, but having the attention of Hollywood is great for young NCAA student-athletes, post collegiates, and elite athletes.

Hindsight has 20/20 vision wrote:

That's not even a close assessment. It's a takeover. A coup. Nobody asked us because we never mattered. No courtesy was nor will be afforded. That's how business is conducted in the competitive entertainment business world. Shocked and left out in the cold, we look back stunned. Now we see what happened in broad daylight, in front of our faces, while we were awake: the new L.A. Mayor and the Hollywood Entertainment Industry decided on their own that the IAAF World Championships and the Summer Olympics will be in L.A. For dress rehearsal, the Marathon Trials and Track and Field Trials were grabbed by L.A. That's the world we live in. It's a shock for the USATF volunteers and coaches, but having the attention of Hollywood is great for young NCAA student-athletes, post collegiates, and elite athletes.

well...really....I understand the feeling of betrayal and impotence...but isn't LA better than Houston for the trials? Why have it in the same second tier place twice? Was the last one so wickedly successful? I remember an ugly course and no fans at all.

I haven't seen any good reasons why Houston was so much better than LA. Could you tell us the reasons everyone voted for houston?

You must have been watching a different race than me. The crowd in Houston was pretty substantial and very vocal. The course was an interesting circuit that allowed for fast times. The organization was first rate.

I raced in the old Olympic Festivals for several years. The smaller "second tier" markets (Norman, Twin Cities, San Antonio, etc.) were always well organized and the venues were often packed. In LA, the stands were empty except for athletes and a few friends. As someone else mentioned, there was too much competition in LA from other activities/sports and getting around was a pain in the rear.

I'm sure it'll be a fine race with dedicated volunteers and all, but the runners likely won't have the exceptional experience that Houston provided.

Houston was the hands down obvious choice. Hope it works out in LA.

The best option will be it doesn't work out and that will be the final nail in the coffin for Max and Stephanie.

We LOVED the Trials in Houston! I've had any number of conversations since those Trials about how great it was to watch and how we'd love to have it again.I can't speak to whether or not LA is a savvier/better choice, but we sure will miss having the Trials here. Hopefully LA's fans will be just as energized.

inhouse wrote:

You must have been watching a different race than me. The crowd in Houston was pretty substantial and very vocal. The course was an interesting circuit that allowed for fast times. The organization was first rate.

I raced in the old Olympic Festivals for several years. The smaller "second tier" markets (Norman, Twin Cities, San Antonio, etc.) were always well organized and the venues were often packed. In LA, the stands were empty except for athletes and a few friends. As someone else mentioned, there was too much competition in LA from other activities/sports and getting around was a pain in the rear.

I'm sure it'll be a fine race with dedicated volunteers and all, but the runners likely won't have the exceptional experience that Houston provided.

I read in the press release that the race is going to be a criterium style course. Does anyone have any more details? I know Houston made the course to mimic London. Is Rio supposed to be a crit as well?

I personally think a crit style course is good for fans.

LAX is the best airport for us wrote:

Great choice. Getting to LAX is a cheap direct flight in February from anywhere in the US. It never snows nor gets cold in L.A. The Metro rail line goes from LAX to the downtown hotels. No wonder that a huge portion of USATF elites live and train in Southern California and the Southwest US in general.

Randy, what is your f*cking problem? Do us all a favor and go away.

Lets be honest here- Houston was the obvious pick by the committee, but Max wanted LA so bad he tried to fix what was 'wrong' with it to get it to at least somewhat 'please' the athletes.

The only thing lacking here is EXPERIENCE. Should Houston oblige if LA asks for advice? Heck no- Houston should give them and Max the finger. LA doesn't even have the experience of hosting a US Championship. Hosting the Olympics 30 yrs ago doesn't count. This is a whole new set of people (including the CEOs, for both LA AND USATF). They now have 2+ yrs to get it together. They'd have to put on a whole other event to test out whatever course they propose (a half marathon perhaps?) and bring in a large number of elites (beyond the 10-20 they bring in for LA).

I'm not convinced that picking LA is really going to reinvigorate the sport, any more than if Houston had been picked (by Max). Did having it in NYC and Boston make a difference? Not really. So what if Beyonce is on the sideline beside Max and tweeting to her fans.

We now can make the best of the most exciting city in the world for the Oly marathon trials. Like it or not, USATF is now a top down organization operated for the good of the elites and the good of the sport. Max made the best decision for our world class marathoners.

It really wouldn't have made much diff if Hou, Nyc, or Bos was chosen instead of La. But it's what the end game is that we should be pumped about, Worlds, OTs, and the 2024 Olys that La is goin for. That's what we all want you know.

I think the bigger problem here is there's very little incentive for the host cities. Host club/cities burden nearly 100% cost, resources and effort while putting up with a lot of crap from USATF demands and get nearly 0% of financial help and not even allowed to market or promote on their own to cover expenses.

I think its very telling that Boston is a no bid since '08 New York did bid but seem less interested each time. Not you got to wonder if Houston will next time round. It a pain just to go to put up a bid. Why do it if you doubt you be giving a fair chance, if you feel the choice is predetermined. Other than big cities with big wallets that have a agenda like promotion of something bigger (LA Olympics bid) the bid pool is getting very shallow.