Argument against Houston trials shows US elites are wussies

So, an elite distance runner can't make money on smaller 15ks or even 5ks?

I don't grasp the logic of the Houston defenders here. If the trials are held in the spring or the fall, then what's the difference in preparation? Holding them in January rules out either spring or fall marathons. Now if you want to limit the marathons our qualifiers have in the tank prior to the Olympics, that is one thing, but the bottom line is that our elites have only so many years in which they can run good marathons and most of them need more money to concentrate on training and not waste time working. So, what serves the athletes best? The Times, obviously a national forum, devotes an entire section of the paper to the NYC marathon, both before and after the race. Meb was on all the talk shows for winning New York.

jjjjjjj wrote:

If the trials are held in the spring or the fall, then what's the difference in preparation? Holding them in January rules out either spring or fall marathons.

Whooptifucckingdoo! How did running a fall and/or spring marathon help our marathoners in 2008?

Now if you want to limit the marathons our qualifiers have in the tank prior to the Olympics, that is one thing, but the bottom line is that our elites have only so many years in which they can run good marathons and most of them need more money to concentrate on training and not waste time working.

Says you.

So, what serves the athletes best? The Times, obviously a national forum, devotes an entire section of the paper to the NYC marathon, both before and after the race. Meb was on all the talk shows for winning New York.

Oh.

jjjjjjj wrote:

I don't grasp the logic of the Houston defenders here. If the trials are held in the spring or the fall, then what's the difference in preparation? Holding them in January rules out either spring or fall marathons. Now if you want to limit the marathons our qualifiers have in the tank prior to the Olympics, that is one thing, but the bottom line is that our elites have only so many years in which they can run good marathons and most of them need more money to concentrate on training and not waste time working. So, what serves the athletes best? The Times, obviously a national forum, devotes an entire section of the paper to the NYC marathon, both before and after the race. Meb was on all the talk shows for winning New York.

If the trials are in January, we are helping the Olympic qualifiers by having them run the marathon at an optimal time, but hurting the rest because they'll miss out on some cash money.

If the trials are in the Fall or Spring, we are helping those who don't make it by giving them an extra chance to make money, but hurting those who do qualify by making them peak at the wrong times. (New York, London, Beijing was not a good sequence to have)

So you either help the runners who do make the Olympics, or help the ones who don't.

jjjjjjj wrote:

I don't grasp the logic of the Houston defenders here. If the trials are held in the spring or the fall, then what's the difference in preparation? Holding them in January rules out either spring or fall marathons. Now if you want to limit the marathons our qualifiers have in the tank prior to the Olympics, that is one thing, but the bottom line is that our elites have only so many years in which they can run good marathons and most of them need more money to concentrate on training and not waste time working. So, what serves the athletes best? The Times, obviously a national forum, devotes an entire section of the paper to the NYC marathon, both before and after the race. Meb was on all the talk shows for winning New York.

The prize money argument is a total red herring. These are all college educated people who will have well paying careers after running. The top athletes have plenty of cash to keep them going during training. There are plenty of elite development groups out there. And for the rest, just look at Wesley Korir. He works fulltime and wins the LA marathon. Any US runner crying poverty should take a trip to Iten and get a good look at what poverty really is.

The real point is that everyone assumes that anyone running Houston will have no chance at a spring marathon (assuming they do not make the team, which will be the lion share of the trialists). But, the Ethopians have run world class times in Houston (2:07 m/2:24 f) and then went on to win handily against a strong international field, arguably copmarable to an Olympic field given the unlimited number of E. Africans, in Boston in the same year. So, any US runner who doesn't make the team should not be crying about not being able to run in the spring. That is just being a wussie.

duckshirt wrote:

If the trials are in January, we are helping the Olympic qualifiers by having them run the marathon at an optimal time, but hurting the rest because they'll miss out on some cash money.

If the trials are in the Fall or Spring, we are helping those who don't make it by giving them an extra chance to make money, but hurting those who do qualify by making them peak at the wrong times. (New York, London, Beijing was not a good sequence to have)

So you either help the runners who do make the Olympics, or help the ones who don't.

This response is logical and reasonable, the others aren't.

I like Houston for the trials, the media issue isn't so much location as the NYRR's contacts, but to be honest the trials is the easiest sell in our sport short of the Olympics so that isn't much of an issue. Boston and NYC made huge promises about live national tv and the like and couldn't produce.

What I find funny is that the same people on here bitching about US elites are the ones who will be on here complaining that there are no US runners in the top ten at Chicago and NYC in 2011 and Boston and London in 2012.

jjjjjjj wrote:

duckshirt wrote:

If the trials are in January, we are helping the Olympic qualifiers by having them run the marathon at an optimal time, but hurting the rest because they'll miss out on some cash money.

If the trials are in the Fall or Spring, we are helping those who don't make it by giving them an extra chance to make money, but hurting those who do qualify by making them peak at the wrong times. (New York, London, Beijing was not a good sequence to have)

So you either help the runners who do make the Olympics, or help the ones who don't.

This response is logical and reasonable, the others aren't.

Not so much. "The rest" still get prize money, it extends plenty deep for those who would have received similar amounts elsewhere.

trials qualifier wrote:

What I find funny is that the same people on here bitching about US elites are the ones who will be on here complaining that there are no US runners in the top ten at Chicago and NYC in 2011 and Boston and London in 2012.

I'll be okay with that, the OT (especially having both genders run in the same place at the same time) will more than make up for it.

Time to nut up wrote:

Deriba Merga won Houston and won Boston three months later (smoking Ryan Hall who had not run a marathon since Beijing).

How did Merga do at Worlds this past summer in Berlin? DNF. Textbook case of over racing.

And to the person who asked "How much does Adam Goucher know about marathoning?" More than you. He could retire tomorrow and make a good living coaching marathoners. You couldn't. So don't quit your day job.

orbitboy wrote:

And to the person who asked "How much does Adam Goucher know about marathoning?" More than you. He could retire tomorrow and make a good living coaching marathoners.

Maybe for TiT, stupid fanboy. There are a LOT of people reading and posting here who know a LOT more about marathoning than Adam Goucher does or likely ever will.

jjjjjjj wrote:

I don't grasp the logic of the Houston defenders here. If the trials are held in the spring or the fall, then what's the difference in preparation? Holding them in January rules out either spring or fall marathons. Now if you want to limit the marathons our qualifiers have in the tank prior to the Olympics, that is one thing, but the bottom line is that our elites have only so many years in which they can run good marathons and most of them need more money to concentrate on training and not waste time working. So, what serves the athletes best? The Times, obviously a national forum, devotes an entire section of the paper to the NYC marathon, both before and after the race. Meb was on all the talk shows for winning New York.

Perhaps, the 2011 World Championships Marathon would be an option instead of a fall marathon, although it is a few weeks later that usual.T

There are 2 criteria for the Trials being discussed here, running of the Trials to maximize the performance of the team at the Olympics, and scheduling of the Trials to optimize competitive opportunities and money for the runners. You have to remember that a 3rd criteria (maybe #1 for the committee) is money. Houston seemed to have won in that regard, and many are arguing that Houston is the best of the 3 in regards to maximizing the performance at the Olympics. Clearly, New York and Boston would be better for maximizing money for the athletes.

I can't believe anyone would advocate mimicking Merga's racing schedule. Sure he did well at Houston and had the race of his life at Boston. How's he doing now?

Sure his Juice kept him going for a while but it seems like now his time in the sun is over.

asdefjh wrote:

Perhaps, the 2011 World Championships Marathon would be an option instead of a fall marathon, although it is a few weeks later that usual.T

There are 2 criteria for the Trials being discussed here, running of the Trials to maximize the performance of the team at the Olympics, and scheduling of the Trials to optimize competitive opportunities and money for the runners. You have to remember that a 3rd criteria (maybe #1 for the committee) is money. Houston seemed to have won in that regard, and many are arguing that Houston is the best of the 3 in regards to maximizing the performance at the Olympics. Clearly, New York and Boston would be better for maximizing money for the athletes.

There's no appearance money at the World Championships, so it's still a huge hit on a top marathoner's income.

I don't know if this has already been pointed out, but the US is the only country in the world (that I know of) that holds a separate and distinct marathon trial. Every other country's team either has their trial run as part of an established major marathon or there's no trial at all. So when people bring up Deriba Merga's racing schedule or Sammy Wanjiru's, keep in mind they don't have the same trial commitments as the Americans.

ciego no más wrote:

There's no appearance money at the World Championships, so it's still a huge hit on a top marathoner's income.

USATF pays runners for going to the WC and the runners' sponsors pay them for making the team and competing at the WC, plus bonuses for placing in the top x. So, yeah, in essence there actually is "appearance money" at the WC for US runners.

Any money paid by USATF wouldn't approach the hundreds of thousands of dollars someone like Hall could guarantee from a major marathon.

When has Hall ever run the WC marathon?

I bet Asics and Nissan could make up the difference, if they really wanted to see him compete there. Hall's days of max appearance fees are probably behind him now, anyway, unless he gets on the podium of a WMM event, and WC is probably his best shot at that outside of the Olympics, unless Boston or NYC artificially restricts the field for him.

ciego no más wrote:

Any money paid by USATF wouldn't approach the hundreds of thousands of dollars someone like Hall could guarantee from a major marathon.