Woman runs 2:42:55 at Houston Marathon, turned down for Olympic Trials because she was in Corral B

This runner and/or her coach made a lot of boneheaded decisions leading up to the trials.

1) She didn't run ONE race that would get her a qualifying time for Houston. The standards for Corral A are SO easy that she could have went out and jogged a qualifying 10k or half, used it for a workout, etc. Most people do a few races during a training cycle in prep for a marathon anyway. The NYC area has a race every weekend - if not through NYRR, then NYCruns, elitefeats, or start2finish. Not only does NYC itself have a ton of races but the nearby counties in Long Island and Westchester have a ton. There's also New Jersey. There's no reason she shouldn't have been able to find at least one to meet Houston's standard.

2) the one race she did run was a bandit? She could have had the foresight to register for the Staten Island Half herself otherwise find a different half. Not sure what's so hard about this and why she wouldn't want credit for her 1:18.

3) when she didn't get into the corral she wanted in Houston, why didn't she find a different marathon where she could start up front?

4) she expected both Houston AND USATF to bend their rules for her that EVERY OTHER QUALIFIER followed. WHY??? It would have been so easy to follow these rules. I think she is just young and inexperienced in road racing but I hope this has been a good lesson for her. She's super talented and deserves to showcase that if she goes through the proper channels.

Sure, if ya say so! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Rather typical of an Ivy League kid, TBH.

Raggedman wrote:

Please explain how following the, very simple and easy to meet, rules harm this woman? She knew what the requirements were to get into the trials and failed to do what was necessary to meet them.

What you posted is not true.

Erin did follow the rules. She ran a gun and chip time of 2:42:55 in the Houston Marathon, which qualifies her to run in the trials.

dunes runner wrote:

Raggedman wrote:

Please explain how following the, very simple and easy to meet, rules harm this woman? She knew what the requirements were to get into the trials and failed to do what was necessary to meet them.

What you posted is not true.

Erin did follow the rules. She ran a gun and chip time of 2:42:55 in the Houston Marathon, which qualifies her to run in the trials.

The rules on the USATF site clearly state that qualifying times are based off gun time, not chip time, so no, she didn't follow the necessary rules to OTQ. Good day, sir.

I seem to have touched a nerve with some. I still don't get it. If you ran 2:18 & they denied you, you'd be upset too. I get that the rule exists. What is lost if they let her run? I feel like there is more to gain in her having that experience than just saying rules are rules.

However people want to argue it, she ran under 2:45. Yes, USATF can keep her out. But they don't have to. Show some heart.

Why did she remove this activity? Is this her way of admitting that she cheated?

so much went wrong wrote:

dunes runner wrote:

What you posted is not true.

Erin did follow the rules. She ran a gun and chip time of 2:42:55 in the Houston Marathon, which qualifies her to run in the trials.

The rules on the USATF site clearly state that qualifying times are based off gun time, not chip time, so no, she didn't follow the necessary rules to OTQ. Good day, sir.

I completely agree with your write-up concerning all that went wrong with Erin and her quest. If I were her there is NO WAY I would have left myself in the position she did. Run a qualifying time...get into corral A...dot all "i"s and cross all "t"s.

That being said...no large race in the world should have a corral that has a separately listed start time on its website for separate corrals/waves should time the race without hitting a second gun time. IT IS A SEPARATE RACE! Boston has listed times for each wave...each of those waves gets a separate gun time. Houston is a big enough race to properly time separate corrals/waves!

I time and direct many races per year. There is no way that I would list a separate starting time for corral B and not hit a new gun time for that corral.

Ultimately, Erin needed to have ensured that she followed guidelines but Houston ALSO needs to look at how they run their race and timing. Either of these folks could have prevented this. USATF did what they had to do.

dunes runner wrote:

Raggedman wrote:

Please explain how following the, very simple and easy to meet, rules harm this woman? She knew what the requirements were to get into the trials and failed to do what was necessary to meet them.

What you posted is not true.

Erin did follow the rules. She ran a gun and chip time of 2:42:55 in the Houston Marathon, which qualifies her to run in the trials.

This is pretty easy to disprove. USATF's rule is gun time.

NERunner053 wrote:

I seem to have touched a nerve with some. I still don't get it. If you ran 2:18 & they denied you, you'd be upset too. I get that the rule exists. What is lost if they let her run? I feel like there is more to gain in her having that experience than just saying rules are rules.

However people want to argue it, she ran under 2:45. Yes, USATF can keep her out. But they don't have to. Show some heart.

No, I wouldn't be because I would follow the rules and letting her in isn't fair to all those who did follow the rules. I bet a lot of other runners went out of their way to ensure that they wouldn't face this issue when selecting marathons and races.

colorunner123 wrote:

“Erin’s differential for the gun time is too much of a gap for us to overcome. It truly pains me not to be able to give her this opportunity but we can not deviate from our selection procedures by that much. All of the appeals that have been granted were under a 10 second differential from the 2:45:00 gun time...”

THIS I don't understand. It's not even true. Elizabeth Wasserman was 2:45:00 chip / 2:45:41 gun, and her appeal was granted.

Because 41 seconds starting in the mass start at Boston is closer than 13 minutes at Houston.

Feel bad this athlete didn't get in, but as some have already said, it's on the coach and the athlete. Don't blame anyone else. I do feel it is imperative that USATF clearly state for 2024....NO EXCEPTIONS"

As a side note, I had an athlete enter the half that clearly deserved an elite entry. She was denied, when I wrote back (2x) and the athlete wrote herself and didn't get a response, we decided on another race. It arguably cost her a spot on the World Half team, but that's life. We would not have even given jumping into corral A as an option in the marathon.

Ray wrote:

Feel bad this athlete didn't get in, but as some have already said, it's on the coach and the athlete. Don't blame anyone else. I do feel it is imperative that USATF clearly state for 2024....NO EXCEPTIONS"

As a side note, I had an athlete enter the half that clearly deserved an elite entry. She was denied, when I wrote back (2x) and the athlete wrote herself and didn't get a response, we decided on another race. It arguably cost her a spot on the World Half team, but that's life. We would not have even given jumping into corral A as an option in the marathon.

Agree. Coach and runner screwed up. Sorry and frankly an experienced coach would have advised the same IF an OTQ was in the cards. (I believe Louisiana Marathon was the same day if a last min late Jan marathon was needed; she would probably been allowed to be in the elite corral there-- heck, she probably could have won the race. Nevertheless, move on. She's a great runner with an 2024 OTQ in the cards if not more. (Also, fyi, please follow NYRR rules, too in the future...)

Also, See Gary Robbins' reaction to his 2017 Barkley Marathon DQ after 60 plus hours. He messed up, didn't politic and campaign but accepted all and then moved on.

Raggedman wrote:

Please explain how following the, very simple and easy to meet, rules harm this woman?

The simple rule is: run faster than 2:44.99 on a certified course.

It is 2:44.99 because 2:44.991 does not qualify.

She removed it because of all the unwanted attention and she's never cheated in her life. Look at her times. She's a fast track athlete who hadn't run road races before. Yes, she made a mistake by using the bib of a runner who was sick. She paid the price for that mistake by missing out on prize money she could've won had she entered under her own bib.

While this is an open forum it's more than disappointing to see the negative comments anonymous users will post about someone they've never met and know very little about.

The Citius story says "she was placed in Corral B on Nov. 20th and race officials stated that the proof she submitted could not be verified." This does not make sense. If you enter her name online, two clicks will take you to pages of her college results including NCAA regional and national championships with times that indicate she's a very competitive runner, if not an experienced road runner. They should have pushed harder in late November/early December to get her into the first corral instead of waiting until the week before the race.

I haven't seen a single instance of Erin whining. Have you??

Collin wrote:

colorunner123 wrote:

“Erin’s differential for the gun time is too much of a gap for us to overcome. It truly pains me not to be able to give her this opportunity but we can not deviate from our selection procedures by that much. All of the appeals that have been granted were under a 10 second differential from the 2:45:00 gun time...”

THIS I don't understand. It's not even true. Elizabeth Wasserman was 2:45:00 chip / 2:45:41 gun, and her appeal was granted.

Did they ever explain why they sometimes follow their rules and sometimes don't?