So....why not ask about 10k? Np kick usually means a runner will be better at the longer distance. Seems like a great chance since 2 women who beat her are not in 10k. Odd that they didn't spend time asking about it.
I just watched the interview and legitimately have no idea what the criticism is for. She was appropriately respectful and repeatedly used words like grateful/thankful/proud of myself/happy to be here. The only response that could possibly be construed as “snappy” or like the reporter was asking the wrong question was the first one where the interviewer assumed she’d been targeting the Olympic standard, and I believe her when she says she wasn’t, she was just giving herself her best shot and that means running 14:50ish from the front in her current shape. She got the same question after the NCAA 5k and answered that she wasn’t targeting the standard, so that may be where the “again”comes from, though in fairness the interviewer may not have seen that.
Aren't the questions about targeting the standard kind of stupid anyway? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought her world ranking was high enough in the 5K that she'd get in with or without the standard.
My understanding (and I may not be 100% accurate on this) is that if one of the top three gives up their spot (e.g., they don’t want to double), then USATF can go down the list when assessing whether a replacement is warranted. This is where Valby now having the standard is HUGE, because she came in fourth (next on list) and has checked the box for having the standard.
She would have made it on ranking. Running 14:51 or 15:00 didn't matter.
Read what I just wrote. If she had come in top three, then yes, her ranking would have been sufficient. But ranking alone while not having the standard, can be deemed insufficient when considering the credentials of the replacement. So if a replacement actually is to be selected, and if Valby did not have the standard, they could have passed on her, and gone down further in the list to consider the next person that actually had the standard. There happens to be another candidate down the list that finished the final and posses the standard.
I believe St Pierre intends to focus on the 1500m in Paris, assuming all goes well for her in the back half of the American trials. With the first round of the 1500m in Paris going off right about 13 hours after the 5000m final, it would be a trying double to say the least.
She would have made it on ranking. Running 14:51 or 15:00 didn't matter.
Read what I just wrote. If she had come in top three, then yes, her ranking would have been sufficient. But ranking alone while not having the standard, can be deemed insufficient when considering the credentials of the replacement. So if a replacement actually is to be selected, and if Valby did not have the standard, they could have passed on her, and gone down further in the list to consider the next person that actually had the standard. There happens to be another candidate down the list that finished the final and posses the standard.
That person is Andrews, so if Valby had not gotten the Standard, they may have selected Andrews as the alternate.
"Do you think the NCAAs and the rounds took something out of you tonight?"
Uh - she just ran her PR in the event and finished 4th against three of the best 5000m runners in the world, but yeah, she was so exhausted I can't believe she even finished the race. /s
Seriously dumb question - they're lucky she isn't even more dismissive of that kind of interrogative.
And how are the situations different? Jager was 4th and has world rank. Valby would have been 4th with world rank but you said they could go to somebody with the standard. Seems like it would be exactly the same.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.