Star wrote:
The issue is designing a qualifying system that ever allowed 50 qualifiers.
Make a hard auto standard.
Then a provisional standard that allows up to 30 participants and no more.
Run one heat.
I hate two heat finals but they have to in this situation.
This is exactly what should have been done, standard way too easy.
I think either 1 section pulling people when they get lapped is way to go. Or do 2 sections with anyone who wants to run in the fast section given the option and then pulling you when you get lapped.
As you all pointed out 48 people will be running 10ks in the NCAA regionals and it happens every year right?
highhoppingworm wrote:
I don’t get this thread. Rojo is manufacturing a crisis. It is literally meaningless given nobody in the B heat has the standard. Why is this even a topic worth discussing?
I'm not manufacturing anything. Memo to you, people are perfectly allowed to get the stnanrd in the race.
Keira D'Amato's marathon pb (2:22:56) is better than mine and I could have easily run 31:25 in peak fitness.
StrangelyPostCollegiate wrote:
There are two 10ks going on today that have 48 people in them, the regional qualifying 10ks.
If college kids can figure it out, the pros can.
And in reality at least 5-10 people won't show up or will be hurt by then. You're looking at field size closer to 40, which is doable.
And we have a winner. GREAT POINT. Jonathan Gault acts like it's too many people. Yet he ran in a 48 person 10k just fine in college.
Post of the week. If you are a registered user, I"d send you a free tshirt.
Grassrunner wrote:
All 50 in the same race, staggered start, 25 in lanes 1-4, the other 25 stay in lanes 4-8 until 3K, then remove runners when about to be lapped.
I like this idea.
By 3k they should be spread out enough for 50 runners as they merge to lane one.
Maybe stagger them for 9600 meters with the slower seeds on the outside.
All together for the last lap.
"USATF consistently shows they don't care about the dreamers. They really only care about the 2-3 medal contenders"
Isn't this the case in most countries? The goal is to send medal contenders to the Olympics, the greatest athletic event in human history. It's not about feel good stories who made it to the Olympic Trials.
yes do one final with all 50 .Runners about to be lapped have to either drop out or run the rest of their race in lane 2. If there are groups of runners (2 or more) on their last lap about to catch and lap slower runners, those slower runners need to move to lane 3.
hamsters wrote:
50 is way too many to run in one heat.
yup-how they had 56?! in this SEC INDOOR 3000m is beyond me (something where having a second section would only add 10-12 minutes to the meet time and avoid what happens at 1:00 of video lol)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuRr6cvwpL8paul72 wrote:
yup-how they had 56?! in this SEC INDOOR 3000m is beyond me (something where having a second section would only add 10-12 minutes to the meet time and avoid what happens at 1:00 of video lol)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuRr6cvwpL8
Jesus, I was gonna say the 5k that Hocker and Teare ran a week or so ago had 55 people in it I believe, but 56 people in an indoor 3000 is absurd!
Anyway, the easiest and best solution is just throw them all in the same heat. Tell them they need to get into lane 2 or 3 if they're getting lapped.
Peach Pit wrote:
paul72 wrote:
yup-how they had 56?! in this SEC INDOOR 3000m is beyond me (something where having a second section would only add 10-12 minutes to the meet time and avoid what happens at 1:00 of video lol)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuRr6cvwpL8Jesus, I was gonna say the 5k that Hocker and Teare ran a week or so ago had 55 people in it I believe, but 56 people in an indoor 3000 is absurd!
Anyway, the easiest and best solution is just throw them all in the same heat. Tell them they need to get into lane 2 or 3 if they're getting lapped.
No one has mentioned that there is one major women's 10k left on the schedule: the PTF 10k this Friday evening with 35 entrants. Roughly 25 are US citizens, no big names other than Molly Seidel, so most/all are using this race as their last chance to get the Trials standard.
Weather conditions for the 7:30 pm Friday start time are 65 deg, 44% hum, 8 mph breeze -- pretty near perfect for a distance race.
Not likely, but possible, we could see another 15 or so "new" women make the Trials standard . . . so now we would have approx 65 Trials qualifiers of which maybe 55-60 will actually declare for the 10k race.
Would it be wise to put 55-60 in one race . . . or would this extra-supersized field tilt thinking towards a 2-section final?
Jonathan Gault wrote:
So there's a few things worth noting here:
1. In the women's 10k, you NEED the Olympic standard to make the team. World Athletics wants a 27-person field, yet 29 athletes already have the Olympic standard (even accounting for the 3-athletes-per-country limit). So no one is getting in off of their world ranking.
2. There are 14 Americans with the standard right now, and all of them are going to be in the fast heat.
3. That said, there are some women projected to be in the slow heat (Vanessa Fraser, Keira D'Amato, to name two) who could potentially hit the standard at the Trials and make the team. Obviously that's not an ideal situation.
But I think it makes more sense to run a two-section final than to have 50 women on the track at once. I don't want a bunch of lapped runners in the way over the final laps. And if you didn't have the Olympic standard going in, you probably weren't going to make it anyway. In the last 10 years, the winning time at USAs has been sub-31:25 just twice, and I think it's going to be tough to do it in the sun in Eugene (6:44 p.m. start for the 10k).
Is this a perfect solution? Of course not. The bigger problem is the Olympic Trials standard (32:25) was too slow to begin with, and that was exacerbated with the super shoes and extended qualifying window. But now that we're in this situation, I don't have an issue with the two heats. I think it's the best option.
Also I do enjoy chaos and I think there is chaos potential if D'Amato, Fraser, and some others in the slow heat hatch a plan to work together to make it fast and really put the pressure on the women in the fast heat.
I actually think this is good for D'amato, and Fraser, as John just said. If they can work together to throw down something reasonably quick, say low 31s, that means the fast heat will need to run really fast, and if it goes out slow, like tactical races often do, the winner of the B heat has a shot.
Bower Man wrote:
No one has mentioned that there is one major women's 10k left on the schedule: the PTF 10k this Friday evening with 35 entrants. Roughly 25 are US citizens, no big names other than Molly Seidel, so most/all are using this race as their last chance to get the Trials standard.
Weather conditions for the 7:30 pm Friday start time are 65 deg, 44% hum, 8 mph breeze -- pretty near perfect for a distance race.
Not likely, but possible, we could see another 15 or so "new" women make the Trials standard . . . so now we would have approx 65 Trials qualifiers of which maybe 55-60 will actually declare for the 10k race.
Would it be wise to put 55-60 in one race . . . or would this extra-supersized field tilt thinking towards a 2-section final?
Dude 60 people in a track race wouldn't be wise but oh my god it would be so dope to watch. Gotta grow the sport
Rojo for once I agree with the madness. Lately the women's 10,000m in Worlds and Olympics have been ultra fast. We need a team that's ready to run fast and bravely compete. 2 heats forces the athletes who want a spot to run fast or take a chance of someone performing a nice personal best and taking the spot.
There are so many foreign runners who could go out and solo a sub 31. Why can't the the top 3 women representing the U.S. and if they can then do it and show the other competitors who the best American 10,000m female athletes.
I don’t mean to harken back to the idiocy of a 10,000m championships with heats, but if we’re concerned about the outcomes a two section final is implemented to avoid, then concern towards those which are even p o s i b l e in a two sectional final has all but been forgotten.
Drew Hunter 2019 USATF indoors. He won and earned it within the rules that existed but c’mon. Heats are better and always provide a fairer chance for people to compete for a victory in which if, ands, or buts are confined to the audience and not the competitors. Make them run a 7k XC in or something next week and let the top 28 in the 10k final but because you made the final you have the Olympic standard. Just something sensible that lets people compete fairly for a huge part of the running career experience. I rarely find myself in agreement with RoJo but this is just silly and USATF needs to rescind this scheduling, acknowledge how unfair it is, and put out a plan to change it between now and the 1st day of the Olympic Trials (once again; a LIFETIME experience for every athlete who gets the chance to compete) that athletes are given a decisive seat at the table in determining and implementing.
wejo wrote:
I think either 1 section pulling people when they get lapped is way to go. Or do 2 sections with anyone who wants to run in the fast section given the option and then pulling you when you get lapped.
As you all pointed out 48 people will be running 10ks in the NCAA regionals and it happens every year right?
I don't think the second idea works.
If I was a "grinder" (say, a Paula Radcliffe type) in contention for the team - I would go for the B-race. You can run as hard as you want with no-one able to tag onto you for a free ride. In the A-race they can sit on your free pace-making and then kick past you.
It needs to be a single race - pulling any lapped runners.
El nino jameamin wrote:
It's a 10k.. who cares? It's like having the NIT tournament along with March madness. Complaining that the 40th runner in a 10k doesn't get the chance to run against the top in a championship race is like complaining UC Irvine didn't have a fair shot at winning the NCAA men's basketball title because they weren't allowed to play in March madness despite finishing 2nd in the big west. Who cares?
Agree with this completely. The purpose of the race is to select the Olympic team and it's doesn't have the purpose of providing the second-tier trials qualifiers a moment in the sun.
It needs to be asked why USATF adopted a trials standard that is a full minute slower than the Olympic standard. You want a good sized field for the 10k but 32:25 is a joke. They should have revised it last summer - by the end of July 2020 there were already 28 people with the Olympic standard so it was pretty obvious no one would get in on the rankings.
But, I think splitting the field gives some of those in the B heat a better chance than in a single race. A large field will result in a tactical race which is no use to people like Fraser and D'Amato. In a B race they can try and control things a lot more, work together, they might even have Molly Seidel join them after this weekend. I can see someone making the team from the B heat
Grassrunner wrote:
All 50 in the same race, staggered start, 25 in lanes 1-4, the other 25 stay in lanes 4-8 until 3K, then remove runners when about to be lapped.
+1
Put Brenda Martinez in the race and she can take out half the field. Problem solved. The Kyle Busch of running.
Peach Pit wrote:
paul72 wrote:
yup-how they had 56?! in this SEC INDOOR 3000m is beyond me (something where having a second section would only add 10-12 minutes to the meet time and avoid what happens at 1:00 of video lol)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuRr6cvwpL8Jesus, I was gonna say the 5k that Hocker and Teare ran a week or so ago had 55 people in it I believe, but 56 people in an indoor 3000 is absurd!
Anyway, the easiest and best solution is just throw them all in the same heat. Tell them they need to get into lane 2 or 3 if they're getting lapped.
yeah-at least that 5k race, being outdoors it was doable with a solid pace and room for separation-i had no idea what the SEC was thinking with this race!