That statement from USATF could be construed about six different ways, and the fact we are here arguing about it just proves it. They better come out with something clearer or there is going to be the potential for lawsuits by somebody who gets left off the team.
LRC note. USATF has gotten back to us and told us they WILL honor the order of finish at the Trials for all who have broken 2:11:30. Details and discussion here:
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/...
Please move your discussion to that thread. This thread has been closed to new posts.
-
30
-
Jonathan Gault wrote:
Fffff wrote:
Yeah I have no clue how anyone can read it any differently. Rojo either can’t read or is trolling…
the first 3 finishers who have run a 2:11:30 are going if the US gets 3 slots.
USATF says "in the case USATF is not able to select a full team of Qualified Athletes from the Selection event...the US may earn up to 3 quota positions in each gender category...The US will fill any unfulfilled quota positions with Qualified Athletes based on their rank order on the Road to Paris list rank list following the close of the qualification period on May 5."
Well the US can't select a full team of Qualified Athletes from the selection event if the US has only unlocked two spots at the conclusion of the selection event. If their policy was, "we'll select the top three under 2:11:30 at the trials as long as we have three spots," why wouldn'd they say that? Why would they add the addendum about quota positions?
They did. A 2,:11:30 runner is a qualified athlete by the paragraphs above it. And they will pick the highest 3 qualified athletes.
why addendum? What happens if only 2 people who have run 2:11:30 to finish? It is the back up plan when everything else has failed.
23 -
Clarity wrote:
The first 3 finisher at the Olympic Trials that have run under 2:11:30 or do at the trials will be the Olympic Team. The first 2 will be announced at the trials. The 3rd may have to wait until May 8th, but will be on the team. Nothing else matters.
Please read the selection procedures document, it's all in the first two pages. "Qualified" refers to top 64/sub 2:08:10. They specifically refer to those who have run between 2:08:10 and 2:11:30 as "unqualified". We currently have only two qualified runners, possibly a third if Fauble moves up. We would need either great weather on race day or a fourth qualified runner before race day for trials to mean anything.
31 -
Pick me wrote:
Hot Takes wrote:
I highly doubt it will go down this way. I think what they meant is that the third place finisher may not be qualified, so USATF won't attempt to use them as an entry. In this scenario all three would be qualified, two by ranking and one by standard, but they are all qualified. USATF didn't come out and say "The third qualifier will be the highest ranked runner if the highest ranked runner isn't in the top 2". As long as you're third and you're qualified you will go.
No, "qualified" has a very specific definition in this case - top 64 world ranking on Jan. 30th or sub 2:08:10 which must be achieved before or at Trials. Unless Fauble somehow gets bumped up a spot in the rankings, or it's unseasonably cool at Orlando and by some miracle someone runs 2:08:10, the Trials results are completely meaningless. Mantz and Young are in, third spot is picked by next best world ranking on May 5th.
I wouldn't be surprised to Fauble, Rupp, or Chelanga run Houston and go for 2:08:10. If only one of them does it they'd automatically be on the team.
Go read the section where any 2:11:30 runner can replace a 2:08 runner at the nations discretion. And realize how wrong your idea is.
02 -
Note that any National Olympic Committee (NOC) may choose to reallocate a quota place to an unqualified athlete provided the athlete in the qualification window has achieved at least a 2:29:30 (women)/2:11:30 (men) performance.
2:11:30 is unqualified. It's just the minimum standard for NOCs to reallocate spots opened up by qualified runners.
30 -
Fffff wrote:
Jonathan Gault wrote:
USATF says "in the case USATF is not able to select a full team of Qualified Athletes from the Selection event...the US may earn up to 3 quota positions in each gender category...The US will fill any unfulfilled quota positions with Qualified Athletes based on their rank order on the Road to Paris list rank list following the close of the qualification period on May 5."
Well the US can't select a full team of Qualified Athletes from the selection event if the US has only unlocked two spots at the conclusion of the selection event. If their policy was, "we'll select the top three under 2:11:30 at the trials as long as we have three spots," why wouldn'd they say that? Why would they add the addendum about quota positions?
They did. A 2,:11:30 runner is a qualified athlete by the paragraphs above it. And they will pick the highest 3 qualified athletes.
why addendum? What happens if only 2 people who have run 2:11:30 to finish? It is the back up plan when everything else has failed.
I could see this interpretation being correct, but I don't read it that way.
I can also read the interpretation where "Qualified Athlete" only means sub-2:08:10 or in the top 64 because the selection policy is not clear on that point either.
I think what is obvious is that we need more clarification from USATF (and we at LetsRun have reached out to USATF to try to clarify the policy).
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.33 -
Fffff wrote:
Go read the section where any 2:11:30 runner can replace a 2:08 runner at the nations discretion. And realize how wrong your idea is.
It's not discretionary in our case. USATF has laid out written selection procedures to follow. Top 3 at trials doesn't get you in if you're not a 2:08:10/top 64 runner. The best a good performance at trials can do is boost your world rank before the third spot is awarded on May 5th.
01 -
You must compete at the trials. The first three finishers that have run under 2:11:30 will end up being the Olympic team. Speculate all you want but that is what will happen.
54 -
rojo wrote:
ptobin wrote:
Whatever way you slice it (or hypothesize about it), these Trials are an absolute nightmare for us fans and long-time distance runners. I was planning to travel (from NY) to watch the races in person, but why attend an Olympic Trials where none of the top 3 finishers may qualify for Paris?
That being said, anyone who is going to finish top 2 almost certainly has run under 2:11:30 so far (although did CJ Albertson's count?).
If only you had access to a journalism outfit that could interview relevant people and provide clarity rather than further muddy matters of interest.
70 -
Jonathan Gault wrote:
Fffff wrote:
They did. A 2,:11:30 runner is a qualified athlete by the paragraphs above it. And they will pick the highest 3 qualified athletes.
why addendum? What happens if only 2 people who have run 2:11:30 to finish? It is the back up plan when everything else has failed.
I could see this interpretation being correct, but I don't read it that way.
I can also read the interpretation where "Qualified Athlete" only means sub-2:08:10 or in the top 64 because the selection policy is not clear on that point either.
I think what is obvious is that we need more clarification from USATF (and we at LetsRun have reached out to USATF to try to clarify the policy).
Fair to need clarification. As a "journalist" why start all this drama before getting return comment? Don't say it didn't come fast enough while staff and committees are traveling back from the annual meeting. You guys went for the drama on purpose. You guys need to be responsible and be above fan message board level. You're not good for the sport. You're just good for clicks that make you money. Keep this up and you won't have a credibility left from those you'll need to produce real journalism.
63 -
Someone should set up a super fast marathon course in a good weather location for the day before trials. Liked some dead flat valley in California, with a start that's the legally allowed 42m higher than the finish. If Orlando weather looks warm, go for a 2:08 at the alternate course, limp across the finish at trials the next day, boom, you're in.
02 -
Clarity wrote:
The first 3 finisher at the Olympic Trials that have run under 2:11:30 or do at the trials will be the Olympic Team. The first 2 will be announced at the trials. The 3rd may have to wait until May 8th, but will be on the team. Nothing else matters.
The LetsRun triumvirate just want the ability to post a picture of the top three at the trials and declare them as the USA Olympic team for the marathon. It would be good for website traffic to cover the event with the headlines and photos of the podium and say there is our team.
WA made the standards tough for a reason. Runners from other countries have up their game and run faster times. Americans are still racing marathons like 2:10 is elite level.
02 -
More Poor Form wrote:
Fair to need clarification. As a "journalist" why start all this drama before getting return comment? Don't say it didn't come fast enough while staff and committees are traveling back from the annual meeting. You guys went for the drama on purpose. You guys need to be responsible and be above fan message board level. You're not good for the sport. You're just good for clicks that make you money. Keep this up and you won't have a credibility left from those you'll need to produce real journalism.
I don't think I need to wait 4 days for USATF to respond to our request for comment. Additionally, no one from the Orlando Trials group has ever reponded to anything Jonathan Gault has ever asked of them.
Jonathan Gault did want to wait - I overrrid him. Now it's been two days and they still haven't gotten back to us with any clarification (but have acknowledged our email). If my interpretation was obviously wrong, I would hope they would have clarified everythign to us by now.
The reality is Ed Eyestone is texting Jon saying he has no idea what it means himself. That's a problem. Stop trying to blame this on us and not USATF.
I honestly tried to make the article as drama free as possible.The title clearly says "may" and the article itself is full of disclaimers - "it appears" and "based on how we are interpreting it."
USATF's document is so poorly written in regard to what a Qualified Athletes is that some people actually are reading it as meaning Mantz and Young are automatically on the team (assuming a bunch of guys don't 2:08:10 at the Trials) and Jonathan's first draft initially had that as a possibility but I took that out as I thought that interpretation was ridiculous - clearly USATF wants the Trials to mean something. So I was trying to make the article less drama filled than it could be.
A few years ago, USATF published Pan Am selection criteria, completely ignored it and we had to pay thousands out of our own pocket to get them to enforce their original rules. I'm still irate the judge didn't make them pay our legal fees.
46 -
Pick me wrote:
Clarity wrote:
The first 3 finisher at the Olympic Trials that have run under 2:11:30 or do at the trials will be the Olympic Team. The first 2 will be announced at the trials. The 3rd may have to wait until May 8th, but will be on the team. Nothing else matters.
Please read the selection procedures document, it's all in the first two pages. "Qualified" refers to top 64/sub 2:08:10. They specifically refer to those who have run between 2:08:10 and 2:11:30 as "unqualified". We currently have only two qualified runners, possibly a third if Fauble moves up. We would need either great weather on race day or a fourth qualified runner before race day for trials to mean anything.
Here is your problem or lack of understanding.
1. 2:08:10 does NOT qualify you for the Olympics.
2. Mantz and Young (running under 2:08:10) has unlocked 2 positions for any American that has a sub 2:11:30. It does nothing for themselves personally if they do not finish in the top 2 at the trials.
3. On May 8th they will likely unlock a 3rd position if any American is ranked in the top 80. Currently several fall into this category.
4. They will not take the highest ranked athlete but instead the best finishing sub 2:11:30 at the trials that falls into the top 80.
42 -
This seems pretty clear if you read the document. We only have 2 "qualified" athletes as defined in the USATF release. If they finish the trials and less than 2 others run 2:08:10 they are both selected (regardless of whether they are top 3). If someone other than Mantz/Young runs 2:08:10 at the trials they will be the 3rd selection. If not, the highest ranking athlete on May 8th (Fauble currently) is in. It seems Mantz/Young would be guaranteed spots even if they skipped the trials unless more than 1 person runs 2:08:10 at the trials (as they'd be selected based on the May 8th list).
26 -
100% WRONG
We have 2 positions that were unlocked. The athletes that unlocked them are in no better position than any other 2:11:30.
I KNOW THIS AS FACTUAL.
73 -
Runner10287 wrote:
Clarity wrote:
The first 3 finisher at the Olympic Trials that have run under 2:11:30 or do at the trials will be the Olympic Team. The first 2 will be announced at the trials. The 3rd may have to wait until May 8th, but will be on the team. Nothing else matters.
The LetsRun triumvirate just want the ability to post a picture of the top three at the trials and declare them as the USA Olympic team for the marathon. It would be good for website traffic to cover the event with the headlines and photos of the podium and say there is our team.
WA made the standards tough for a reason. Runners from other countries have up their game and run faster times. Americans are still racing marathons like 2:10 is elite level.
I think it's the opposite. Having a confusing rule or having an uncertain / controversial outcome will drive up traffic on the message board more than posting a picture of the three top finishers.
30 -
Primate1 wrote:
Runner10287 wrote:
The LetsRun triumvirate just want the ability to post a picture of the top three at the trials and declare them as the USA Olympic team for the marathon. It would be good for website traffic to cover the event with the headlines and photos of the podium and say there is our team.
WA made the standards tough for a reason. Runners from other countries have up their game and run faster times. Americans are still racing marathons like 2:10 is elite level.
I think it's the opposite. Having a confusing rule or having an uncertain / controversial outcome will drive up traffic on the message board more than posting a picture of the three top finishers.
Agree. I think this is actually fun, now that the drama over the start time is over. It would feel too chaotic if the women's race weren't clearcut and legit, but they're fine and the men kind of deserve the sturm and drang considering our top-ranked runner is No. 55 on a list where the No. 3 Kenyan, Ethiopian and Japanese runner tapped out at No. 5, 7 and 29. Even France is done by No. 32.
The Hansons seem to think this is no big deal and I think USATF probably don't realize how unclear their language is.60 -
Much ado about nothing wrote:
Pick me wrote:
Please read the selection procedures document, it's all in the first two pages. "Qualified" refers to top 64/sub 2:08:10. They specifically refer to those who have run between 2:08:10 and 2:11:30 as "unqualified". We currently have only two qualified runners, possibly a third if Fauble moves up. We would need either great weather on race day or a fourth qualified runner before race day for trials to mean anything.
Here is your problem or lack of understanding.
1. 2:08:10 does NOT qualify you for the Olympics.
2. Mantz and Young (running under 2:08:10) has unlocked 2 positions for any American that has a sub 2:11:30. It does nothing for themselves personally if they do not finish in the top 2 at the trials.
3. On May 8th they will likely unlock a 3rd position if any American is ranked in the top 80. Currently several fall into this category.
4. They will not take the highest ranked athlete but instead the best finishing sub 2:11:30 at the trials that falls into the top 80.
In the case that USATF is not able to select a full team of Qualified Athletes from the Selection Event, or as outlined above in the case that the Selection Event does not occur or ends prematurely , the U.S. may earn up to three (3) quota positions in each gender category. The number of available quota positions will be determined after the Paris 2024 qualification period ends on May 5, 2024. The U.S. will fill any unfilled quota positions with Qualified Athletes based on their rank order on the Road to Paris rank list following the close of the qualification period on May 5, 2024.
We will likely only have two Qualified Athletes at the conclusion of Trials. The two unlocked Olympic spots at that time will go to them (Mantz and Young).
The expanded list of 80 Qualified Athletes will be announced on May 5. This will probably unlock a third spot for the US. As it says above, that spot will be awarded based on world rank. Not based on Trials results.
01 -
Much ado about nothing wrote:
100% WRONG
We have 2 positions that were unlocked. The athletes that unlocked them are in no better position than any other 2:11:30.
I KNOW THIS AS FACTUAL.
If you're so sure of this, read the document and point out where it says so. I know the document is a bit convoluted but everything is spelled out in the first two pages. And forget any preconceived or logical definition of "qualified" you have, they have a very specific definition and it's not 2:11:30 or top 3 at trials.
30
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.