Booooooooourns wrote:
Translation: Americans are whiners who can’t meet the time standards so they have to get special treatment.
I know the USA pays the bills for the Olympics. But lets call this what it is. It’s not a victory for the sport.
You beat me to it.
We’re whiners.
Remarkable that even in this thread posters still don't understand the rules for qualification for the Olympics in 2020. 3 Americans were always going to go. The question was whether the Olympic Trials would choose which 3.
Booooooooourns wrote:
Translation: Americans are whiners who can’t meet the time standards so they have to get special treatment.
I know the USA pays the bills for the Olympics. But lets call this what it is. It’s not a victory for the sport.
or for the US. Makes us look bad. No honor, transparent corruption.
USA Privilege wrote:
May as well throw out the qualifying standard if they are accepting USA Men to the Olympics that can't make the standard. Hopefully this is done for every nation that runs trials. It would be more fair to take a dozen Kenyans and Ethiopians and leave any USA male that can't make the standard at home..
U.S. Marathon Industry is corrupt. I feel ashamed for ever racing one. Back in 1960, Ethiopia sent a 11.xx 100m man to Olympics. If U.S. can send slow Marathoners, Ethiopia should be able to send their 11.xx 100m men once again to Olympics.
I second this completely. Gold Label races should be open to anyone. We would all be up in arms if there was a Gold Label race in say Morocco that was only open to those of Moroccan citizenship.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm wrote:
If this isn't the epitome of white privilege... Why isn't the Kenyan trials a Gold Label race? Or the Ethiopian trials? Eritrean trials?
Because those races don't exist.
This topic brings out the stupidest people on this website.
Great news and good job Letsrun being vocal about it.
I can't believe that people are saying this is unfair.
The Trials is extremely competitive and meets the criteria for a Gold Label event. Any country with comparable depth to the US that wants to have a trials race could surely get their race declared Gold Label.
I’m happy the iaaf allowed this status but this is where letsrun is confused. The U.S. is not competitive in the men’s marathon! We only have two guys that can hit the standard and out top guys are performance ranked way far back. The women are competitive. I’m glad they granted it to us but other countries should be pissed. Total snowflake move.
800 dude wrote:
I can't believe that people are saying this is unfair.
The Trials is extremely competitive and meets the criteria for a Gold Label event. Any country with comparable depth to the US that wants to have a trials race could surely get their race declared Gold Label.
If runners from other countries aren't allowed to compete then it's unfair to other countries. Don't give prize money and make it open for runners who can get Trials qualification to complete. That way it will be justifiable.
People who are calling USA Marathon trials as a good thing are the same people who cry when Nike athletes run in vaporfly 4% .
Letsrun is full of hypocrite people.
Westside wrote:
I’m happy the iaaf allowed this status but this is where letsrun is confused. The U.S. is not competitive in the men’s marathon! We only have two guys that can hit the standard and out top guys are performance ranked way far back. The women are competitive.
I’m glad they granted it to us but other countries should be pissed. Total snowflake move.
800 dude wrote:
I can't believe that people are saying this is unfair.
The Trials is extremely competitive and meets the criteria for a Gold Label event. Any country with comparable depth to the US that wants to have a trials race could surely get their race declared Gold Label.
Other countries have no reason to be pissed because it has no negative impact on them.
Westside wrote:
I’m happy the iaaf allowed this status but this is where letsrun is confused. The U.S. is not competitive in the men’s marathon! We only have two guys that can hit the standard and out top guys are performance ranked way far back. The women are competitive.
I’m glad they granted it to us but other countries should be pissed. Total snowflake move.
800 dude wrote:
I can't believe that people are saying this is unfair.
The Trials is extremely competitive and meets the criteria for a Gold Label event. Any country with comparable depth to the US that wants to have a trials race could surely get their race declared Gold Label.
"The US is not competitive in the men's marathon!" Perhaps you could check the most recent Top-10 Olympic marathon results for us and report back?
How much $$$ did USATF give to IAAF to get this to happen?
Is it a fair decision ? wrote:
Shouldn't the race be open to other nationalities then ?
If I'm not wrong every other race with Gold Label is open to all competitors willing validate his eligibility for the Olympics (final selection depending on his/her federation's rules).
Why couldn't an other athete claim the will to punch one of the tickets available ? (Especially if the Gold Label opens 5 spots and only 3 are used)
When everyone else toes the line of a major marathon he is against open competition.
Not only is it open in all other Gold label races, it is required
Obligations / Requirements of the Organisers
3.1 Athletes
International Field
Gold and Silver Label Races must have an ‘international elite field’ with a minimum of
five men and five women participating in the competition in the relevant Label
category as defined in §3.2 hereunder of at least 5 different nationalities (note: this
could be, for example, elite men from 3 countries and elite women from 2 countries
for mixed gender races); Bronze Label races must have an ‘international elite field’
with a minimum of five men and five women participating in the competition and a
minimum of four different nationalities must be represented.
Single gender elite invitational races shall have at least five men or five women in the
relevant elite athlete category representing at least 5 different nationalities.
To be considered as part of the international elite field for the purposes of the IAAF
Road Race Label, all elite runners must be ‘bona fide competitors’
Makes a mockery of the whole system to be honest
I betcha Bernard Lagat places third and goes back to the Olympics.
Haha this is ridiculous.
I hope they grant this exemption to every country that decides to hold a trials race.
Another example of the finisher's medal culture gaining momentum. Instead of getting a free pass, why can't the Americans actually work hard and run a fast time? It's a very sad day for American marathoning. From here on out no marathoner will need to work hard. They just need to beat the other 2:12 sub elites at the Trials.
I suppose that's what America is now. An everyone gets a trophy finishers's medal culture.
Finisher medal, my arse. You've got to go against the Top 180 marathoners in the whole country on a very hilly course and if you finish anything less than 3rd overall, you get absolutely nothing.
Money! The USATF pressed in the IAAF that the the sponsorship and television dollars will be drastically reduced if the top three are not the team. More drama. This has nothing to do with how to select the best marathon team.
olyrun wrote:
Money! The USATF pressed in the IAAF that the the sponsorship and television dollars will be drastically reduced if the top three are not the team. More drama. This has nothing to do with how to select the best marathon team.
See what I said 6 (or so) posts ago...Does anyone REALLY think that, with a bit of protesting from USATF, the IAAF just went "Oh, okay, yeah, you know what, you SHOULD be Gold Label! "? If you do, you're truly a moron.
Is it a fair decision ? wrote:
Shouldn't the race be open to other nationalities then ?
If I'm not wrong every other race with Gold Label is open to all competitors willing validate his eligibility for the Olympics (final selection depending on his/her federation's rules).
Why couldn't an other athete claim the will to punch one of the tickets available ? (Especially if the Gold Label opens 5 spots and only 3 are used)
When everyone else toes the line of a major marathon he is against open competition.
In addition, I understand the argument about IAAF trying to remove the number of "less competitive" athletes from some nations.
But in this situation (and especially with this very challenging course) it could really happen that the race becomes tactical, giving (as in other distances in track) more opportunities to "less competitive" athletes (2h13-2h14) having a strong finish (10k-HM profil).
If so it could be also embarrassing to watch part of the US team being dropped at the Olympics when the rest of the field will be only made of sub 2h11'30 runners.
Don't get we wrong, I think it is a good decision for the US athletes, US fans and US Trials organizers, as they were hostage of a late decision.
Shame should be first to the international institution not to anticipate enough such decisions.
The only hope I have would be to see a fair situation for everyone next time, and communicated enough in advance.
IAAF & IOC, your turn.
But you don't know if the Olympics will be a tactical race as well, so...
I think what they should do in the interest of fairness is to say that the Olympic Marathon Trials for each nation can give N athletes the qualifying standard, where N is the number of entered athletes who have it. So if you have 2 guys enter the race with the standard you can only send 2 to the Olympics, and only if they beat the guys in the designated trials race. That limits the number of athletes who can be sent and keeps it predictable, but also prevents nations from being able to send arbitrary people who don't have the standard (this is a contentious issue in cycling).