Run5k wrote:
scotth wrote:Some have brought up media attention...don't know why and don't know what it has to do w/2:30 qualifiers.
If that's the case, you haven't been reading the thread very carefully.
Indulge me; please explain what media attention has to do w/2:30 qualifiers.
While you're at it, somewhere you've said you ran in an Oly Trials and have run at least as fast as 2:19:59. Do tell. Please provide some specifics...which Trials & what was your time? I'm calling BS on your claims.
scotth wrote:
Indulge me; please explain what media attention has to do w/2:30 qualifiers.
Scott, I have "indulged" you (and several others) at length, and I'm simply finding myself repeating the same perspective in multiple posts. Take a look at my previous posts, and you will find it.
scotth wrote:
While you're at it, somewhere you've said you ran in an Oly Trials and have run at least as fast as 2:19:59. Do tell. Please provide some specifics...which Trials & what was your time? I'm calling BS on your claims.
As Logic already stated, this has become a rather ugly thread. Now you're resorting to playground tactics (a.k.a. immature integrity checks) in order to try to discredit somebody who opposes your point of view? That's unfortunate, to say the least.
As for me, I will tell you that I have "out-ed" my background on Internet message boards before, but past experience has shown me that when people know who you really are, in the aftermath there are typically more negative consequences than anything else. I'm sorry that you feel it's necessary to call my credentials "BS." I never pretended to say I was anything special by any stretch of the imagination (and certainly no threat to be an Olympian), but the people who do know me realize what the truth is, and when I sign off the computer tonight I will sleep quite peacefully with my anonymity.
Runningart2004 wrote:
Why have track trials?
Why have gymnastic trials?
Why does any sport have a 'national championship' to pick its top athletes?
Why don't we go the way of basketball and just pick and choose at will?
Why? Performance under pressure. That's why. Holding the marathon trials in conjunction with another big race will simply water down the significance of BOTH races. If you're going that route for financial reasons then the Trials race should either be earlier/later in the day or the following or previous day NOT in conjunction with.
Alan
How will it water down the significance of both races? The way I see it, we would have a better chance of having an american win one of these great races against real competition. But maybe you don't think having a more competitive and deeper field is under pressure. Also for those 2:18-2:22 guys, they might be under a little pressure not to be beaten by a woman. What about actually getting three or more guys under the Olympic "A" standard. Yeah it really makes sense not to hold it in conjunction with another larger event. NOT. Hmm... maybe that is why all the other countries of the world don't have a trials race like the U.S.. Please Alan, wake up and realize the system is a failure.
Sorry about any problems some of you may have encountered from "kimosabi's" porn link. You should check your PC for spyware and run your antivirus program.
Please report it to wejo if it happens again.
My last .017 Euros worth
Mark wrote:
I know this topic has been beat to death, but I was thinking about this for awhile and thought I would post it.
Obviously, there is a lot of controversy over the standards and purpose of the Olympic Trials Marathon. Heck, for that matter we don't even know where the race will be yet for 2008!
Firstly, I want to say that we always hear so much about the 1970's running boom and the depth of US distance running in the marathon back then, etc. Well what a lot of people don't talk about is the fact in 1972 the US Olympic Trials marathon standard was 2:30, yes the year we went 1st, 4th and 9th in Montreal. It was from that era of runners that competed in that 1972 trials that many went on over the next 10 years to put US marathoning on the map as those guys improved.
But what is key to note is that many had to start somewhere and when you are 22-23 years old right out of college it is a proven fact that you are not going to be in your prime in the marathon, but you at least need a carrot dangling there to shoot for to keep you in the sport as you progress and a sub 2:30 marathon is very obtainable for many good college runners right after they graduate if they go for it.
As it stands now the "A" standard is 2:20 and the "B" standard is 2:22. The question is "why?", who determined these times to be the standards? What's the difference is a 2:20 and a 2:22 runner? Not a lot the next time they race, either one could beat each other.
As it stands right now, the trials marathon is suppose to serve the purpose of selecting the US marathon team first and foremost. But as everyone knows, the marathon is not like a track race with 8 lanes. You need many, many starters because there will always be a lot of DNF's. non-starters, etc. and you need a field of athletes for spectators to watch and support when you are closing down city streets for 26.2 miles. Imagine a marathon with say 8-10 starters, not going to be a lot of interest in that one.
So here's an idea for qualifying for the 2008 Men's Olympic Trials marathon:
A Standard 2:18 (or whatever the 2008 Oly B standard is)
B Standard 2:30
C Standards sub 14:00 for 5000m and sub 29:00 for 10,000m
Here's why:
In 2004 the Olympics standards were 2:15 for the "A" and 2:18 for the "B" standard. Every man who has obtained the Olympic "B" standard should get funding for the US Olympic Trials. Here's why: Because these runners have already obtained an Olympic qualifying standard to begin with and are eligible for selection as is.
Secondly, the 2:30 standard is set because of two reasons mainly. 1) As stated earlier a sub 2:30 marathon is a standard that many young guys would have a crack at even at a young age coming out of college. It deepens the field, gets more young guys involved and spreads the interest to many, many more towns across the US. And on top of this, a sub 2:30 is no joke. Yes, there are many runners who could obtain this standard, but as was mentioned earlier, this was the standard in 1972 and looked what happened as a result.
Thirdly, anyone who has run a sub 14:00 for 5000m or sub 29:00 for 10,000m on the track is obviously a proven distance runner and again would just add quality depth to the field, not too mention someone could come out of this group and actually make the team in a debut.
All of this said, you are looking about a field size of 250 guys tops and of those the governing body is probably only paying for 20-25 of those guys, the rest are paying their own own way, adding more interest to the race, more depth and all the governing body is out $-wise is a few bib numbers and gatorade, etc.
Anyways, that's my 2 cents. Fire away.
Mark you are right this topic has been beaten to with in an inch of it's life...........but instead of letting the (insert some sort of administrative group)administer the coup de grace,little pockets of resistance to our sports death pop up.......we are at it again and as usual with passion and no shortage of viewpoints.
To generalize the last few days chatter.... we know development of post college runners is on the top of the list,we know we need to put a more engaging face on our sport to garner the media support to transend the fringe sport/subset of the Olympics image,we know hard work gets you so far and talent takes you the rest of the way (or versa-visa as some posters point out)but hard work alone does not bring home the honors,we know that if it does not happen soon the marketing engine that is BIG event marathoning(as some call it Charity running) will dictate
the future of American marathoning and in that picture Americans are on the couch responding to the ads for hair in a can and Double Wopper Macs w/fries and double machatinio soy foam demi bangs.......American are just the marketing targets in that picture.
Great bunch of ideas thrown around.....if we all just step back take a moment and post THREE ideas that address developmentof A standard runners [II]of the public image of marathonon racing[III}an effective way to administer the sport, or[IV]development the sport as a whole,[V] other points you feel passionate about.
Thanks Mark for getting this little group together it renews my faith that Marathon Racing has passionate fans and a strong future.
sentential logic wrote:
What may I ask is the purpose of choosing a 3 member Olympic team? To make 3 2:14 - 2:17 guys feel good about themselves? I say it is to send guys with a legitimate chance to win. A quick glance at recent world best lists confirms what Malmo said: 2:12 sucks! The current world record is 2:04. If you're not within 2 or 3 minutes of that you have no chance. I say therefore, that we set the standard at 2:07. That way the lagards in this pitiful excuse for a country who are lollygagging around at 2:09 or 2:10 will pull themselves up by their bootstraps and run the sort of times really required to compete. Our current standards - 2:22 only molly coddle the pitifully slow and unambitious among us. Hell, let's make the standard 2:03. This will surely return the WR to the comfy confines of our shores!! And we'll be sure of sending men who take seriously the notion that only being the absolute best is good enough.
YOU ARE DEAD WRONG. 2:04 is a time trial, not a race. If 2:07 was the standard how many of the medalists in Athens wouldn't have qualified? Success is being able to run 2:10 in any conditions it has nothing to do with 2:04 to 2:07 time trial guys.
scotth wrote:
What's your point? I have run under 2:30.
That was exactly the point. You are 50 years old and never broke 2:22. Now a group of runners want to change the Trials standard to 2:30. This would mean that a whole group of runners would have a chance to do something that was never available to you. This is the reason that your against it.
To Malmo's point about a 2:30 being a training run. I didn't hear you chime in on this one Scott. What he is saying is that on your best day you were nothing but a guy out on a training run. What I love about that is you try to act like you are a part of the ELITE running community ("I have the pulse on distance running"). Meanwhile the true elite (malmo and the top guys from your day) view you as a jogger on your best days.
1. Top athletes from your period see you as a never was.
2. Todays athlete is trying to qualify for the trials with a 2:30 effort. Giving them something that you never experienced.
I am beginning to understand where your unfound arrogance comes from. You are a frustrated guy that doesn't fit in with todays athlete and never fit in with elites from your own era.
No subtlety gets by you!
Ok wineturtle I will bite. Here are 3 ideas:
1. Lobby fast food companies to sponsor running teams. A win for the runners as they pick up new sources of funding. A win for the food companies as they put a fitness face on their fat-inducing products. No more lawsuits against McDonalds for making someone fat...they can counter with Meb in a golden arches jersey and say: "He eats McDonald's, what's your excuse?" Added bonus: it doesn't really matter if Meb gets first or ninth. The message is still that McDonalds = fitness. There's even a benefit to a 2:30 guy in a McD jersey. He still represents that McDonalds = fitness.
2. An NCAA championship in the marathon. The very best guys would still be fighting it out in the 5k and 10k but some of the second tier guys would go for the marathon in hopes of getting a championship. This gets some reasonably talented people in the marathon earlier than would otherwise happen. Don't have a qualifying standard; young guys without an NCAA qualifier could show up and give it a go. Some of them might find out marathon is their event...
3. A Superbowl marathon. The start has to be timed well so that the finish occurs during the halftime show. All the major networks have lots of experience covering the marathon by showing 5 seconds of front-end action interspersed with long periods of commentary and meaningless video of the jogging masses. They could show a 5-10 second clip of action every 10 minutes of the game. An idea I like better is a World's Fastest Man competition during the halftime show. Football fans respect sprinting. It gives the top-name sprinters a chance to get household name recognition and raises awareness of the sport. You know that the commentators would spend the 3rd and 4th quarters saying dumb things like "they should sign Gatlin at fullback", or mumbling endless diatribes about how Michael Vick's 40y time extrapolates to a 9.68 100m...
OK I know I said I'm done with tis thread but I'll comment on #2 as its a subject dear to my heart.
I'm not sure a full marathon is what we need at in college given the age group (18-22) but certainly a half marathon is a good idea and doable.
The way I see it is that for a 10k guy in college, indoor track season doesn't work well. The races are too short and its doesn't lend itself well to peaking for the outdoor 10k. (Should be more base and early season intervals in Jan-Feb rather than short speed work so you can be competitive in the 3k at conference)
Given this I propose a NCAA half marathon championship to be held in conjunction with the indoor championships. In late Jan and early Feb there would be a series of regional qualifying races similar to cross country regionals, but individual only. Then the qualifiers would race the for the NCAA half marathon championship held outdoor (but at the indoor host city) but included as another event in the NCAA indooor champioships (for points). If desired each conference could be assigned to a region and the regional qualifiers could count for the indoor conference champioships. That way true distance guys in college could develop their distance talent, not be subject to over racing indoors and have a program which better leads to there development and peaking as 10k guys and potential marathoners after college.
This way a true collegiate distance guy's season could look like this.
Aug-Nov Cross Country
Dec-Mar Base/Half marathon training
Apr-June Track Work - 5k/10k.
This gives them a solid block of training from Dec to Mar with only two races. This would be very beneficial to their development. I think one major development problem of the tier 2 college runnner (good but not great) is a lack of solid blocks of training due to over racing (i.e. 6-8 xc races, 6-10 indoor races and 6-10 outdoor races).
The shorter distance 3k/5k types could still do indoor as usual if they desired.
Logic wrote:
OK I know I said I'm done with tis thread but I'll comment on #2 as its a subject dear to my heart.
I'm not sure a full marathon is what we need at in college given the age group (18-22) but certainly a half marathon is a good idea and doable.
The way I see it is that for a 10k guy in college, indoor track season doesn't work well. The races are too short and its doesn't lend itself well to peaking for the outdoor 10k. (Should be more base and early season intervals in Jan-Feb rather than short speed work so you can be competitive in the 3k at conference)
Given this I propose a NCAA half marathon championship to be held in conjunction with the indoor championships. In late Jan and early Feb there would be a series of regional qualifying races similar to cross country regionals, but individual only. Then the qualifiers would race the for the NCAA half marathon championship held outdoor (but at the indoor host city) but included as another event in the NCAA indooor champioships (for points). If desired each conference could be assigned to a region and the regional qualifiers could count for the indoor conference champioships. That way true distance guys in college could develop their distance talent, not be subject to over racing indoors and have a program which better leads to there development and peaking as 10k guys and potential marathoners after college.
This way a true collegiate distance guy's season could look like this.
Aug-Nov Cross Country
Dec-Mar Base/Half marathon training
Apr-June Track Work - 5k/10k.
This gives them a solid block of training from Dec to Mar with only two races. This would be very beneficial to their development. I think one major development problem of the tier 2 college runnner (good but not great) is a lack of solid blocks of training due to over racing (i.e. 6-8 xc races, 6-10 indoor races and 6-10 outdoor races).
The shorter distance 3k/5k types could still do indoor as usual if they desired.
Wow, something we agree upon 100%. I knew it could happen!
Unfound Arrogance wrote:
Meanwhile the true elite (malmo and the top guys from your day) view you as a jogger on your best days.
1. Top athletes from your period see you as a never was.
This is a classic case of projection. In absence of anything worthwhile to say you attempt to speak for me. Those are your words, not mine.
I cannot think of anyone from my period who views 2:30 marathoners as "joggers" or a "never were's." 2:30 marathoners (and 2:40s, 2:50s... etc) are all brothers-in-sweat. Some are faster, some are slower. Some belong in the Olympic Trials, and some do not. Some have developed their talent to the fullest, some have not. A simple and straightforward statement. Quit trying to fabricate animus, because it's not there.
Deena Kastor was not within 2-3 minutes of the World Record, and neither was Meb Keflezighi.
I will still stand for a Men's Olympic Marathon Trial that has the "A" qualifier at 2:15:00 and the "B" qualifier at 2:21:00. We should at least expect our men to be faster than the fastest female American and our elites to be faster than the world's fastest female(s).
Furthermore, create a Half Marathon standard of an "A", 1:05:00, and "B", 1:07:30, in addition to a 10,000m standard.
Best of luck to everyone out there doing what they can, the best they can. I know it is tough. Dedicate.
I lived outside of a mid-sized city in Japan named Oita that hosted a sub 2:40 invite only marathon, it was awesome. Only 80 some runners, with the winner usually clocking 2:09-2:11. japan has a couple of these races.
I figure I might as well put on one of these- find an interested city, (austin, akron, starting at the top of the alphabet and working down) just get 10 grand from a sponsor to shut down roads, a timing company more interested in the sport than the dollar, a few tables and some kegs for the afterparty, cause thats half the fun anyways. Perhaps 2:35 entry.
It'll probably be a yearly thing, or just one six months to a year before the US Oly. Trials, with the top 5 or so getting automatic entry into the Oly. Trials. The top 5 will all be under the qualifying standard anyway, if not, all the better for those lucky 5! I'll have to do some sweet talking with the USATF, but were all in it for the love of the sport and should find some common ground.
The city would hype it up, I'll get the thing on TV somewhere, if not hell I'll pay my friend $100 to tape it from the back of my truck and I'll take it to the Public Access channel.
I don't think Boston will hate me too much, it would be a pretty different race. I wouldnt need to make big bucks off it, as long as I can run it and get drunk with everyone afterwards.
Some things aside, I can see something like this flying.
Thank you to those above who have come up with ideas for discussion, bad or good, with the betterment of the sport in mind.
Waitaminute wrote:
By setting the standard at 2:22, we allow for the much faster marathoners who might have had trouble in the past few years, while still requiring them to be reasonably within striking distance of a time with a "realistic" chance.
Obviously every scenario within this thread is extremely subjective, but at the same time I don't think there should be quite so much gray area, either.
For those of you who are so vehemently against Mark's proposal for a 2:30 "B" standard, that's fine. However, the vast majority of the skeptics' rationale has emphasized that 2:30 marathon runners (compared to 2:22 runners) don't realistically stand a chance, going so far as to call them wannabes,weekend-warriors, and lesser runners.
Throughout this entire exchange, people like Malmo and Logic have made some excellent points, but as I stated a few moments ago, I believe that the standard(s) should change, and I feel that the situation is relatively "black-and-white."
Ideally, I would like to see the 2:30 "B" standard implemented, for all of the reasons that Mark and I (amongst others) have cited previously. If not, I would like to see the qualifying times changed to match the Olympic standards: 2:15 "A" and 2:18 "B". That way, every participant has already met at least the "B" standards, and quite frankly if 2:30 marathon runners don't belong in the men's Olympic Trials, then neither do 2:22 runners. I definitely don't subscribe to Waitaminute's philosophy (quoted above): the standard shouldn't be subjectively modified in order to allow for men who "might have had trouble in the past few years." Sorry gentlemen, but while I do want to send the strongest possible marathon team to Beijing, if you can't manage an OT qualifying time within a 2½-year window, then this simply isn't your Olympiad.
Why stop at 2:30? Why not 2:40 , 2:50, 3:00? Surely if you dangle that carrot for the 3 hour crowd that will motivate them to run even faster and then we'll get back to the days when we had a hundred or two guys under 2:20. That will solve everything!!!!!! While we're at it lets loosen up the 10k standard, I miss seeing heats in the trials. Let's open it up to anyone under 30:00 or how about 31:00? We can have two big heats and one final all within 7 days!!!! Brilliant!!!!!!!! Let's water down the competiton as much as we can. Those 31:00 guys really need a carrot in front of them so they don't get bored and just give up on running and lay on the couch like everyone else in America. Let's Get 'er Done!!!
Listen, anyone who's in this game for the right reasons isn't going to care whether the standard is 2:18, 2:22, or 2:30. So loosening the standard just so my slow ass (and other slow asses like me) has a more realistic chance of making it in is just plain horseshit. My fat ass has no business in a damn Olympic trials race anytime soon so slowing the standard is just making the race that more pathetic. I'd rather they just say "Here, Chicago is the trials, any yocal and show up, but we'll pay expenses for guys under the Olympic "B" standard" and just have it done that way instead of putting together some pathetic race with 2:30 local yocals like me clogging up the damn road. Piss on that.
Alan
I said this earlier in the thread....OUR AMERICAN marathoners are not getting any better...our AMERICAN CITIZENS, i.e MEBRATHOM KEFLEZHGKI, and KHALID KHANNOUCHI, ABDI ABDRIAHAM are doing just fine.
Take all the money that is wasted on the trials and spend it on AMERICAN athletes. Our country should be ebmerrassed when the only medals we will ever earn come from africans who couldn't cut it over there, and came over here to steal the glory and prize money from true AMERICANS.
If we send over three 2:10-2:12 guys to the olympics, then so-be-it, as long as they're representing the country thats sending them. The real problem is that Americans have lost their will to compete at the highest level because they know that ELITE AFRICANS can just walk over here genetically more fit and represent a country that isnt theirs.
##A Standard**2:15:25** full funding Hospitality&Air for race and period of time b4 after for press/promo?Mosest per diem above supplied hospitality(4-6 days)comp Race entry
##B Standard**2:19:12** full funding hospitality Air even more modest per diem (2 days)Comp race Entry
##C Standard**2:21:16**Comp Race entry deep air hospitality discounts thru race sponsor Comp race entry
##D Standard**2:26:26**For fee of Non refundable $500 entry to race on provisional basis. Race Committee will post number of athletes course can hold,and admit by shorter time.Ya take your chances with your $500 bet. D standard runners get catagory of results posted as ran "AT" the Trials race vrs C and better Ran "IN".(D guys get pulled off course if do not hit x time for 15K, 1/2M ,30K)
Top 5 Americans in 10 K &1/2M get spot in ##D standard race if they want it for same fees and they WILL count against Allowed numbers only difference they pay IF they run) Former or current AR/WR holders OG/WC medalist ANY EVENT Can come to the line and be granted entry.Props always to the proven.
Notice to the ant and the rubber tree set!!
If you never ran raster than Julie Brown did 20+ years ago
and you get a spot on the team we'll move your time on to the ran IN the trials listLOL!!!!!Could happen after all it's a MARATHON.
You want to develop marathoners and gain attention.
Every two years put on a National Championship.
Prize money 1rst place $500,00
only 25 guys in the race.
qualifying:
anyone that finishes in the top ten at Boston, NY, London, Chicago. and the remainder of the field the next fastest times on legit courses.
I would watch that.
We would develop some faster marathoners.