Lanni ran 2:31 and Can't run in the Olympics!

suchelitists wrote:

It's ridiculous that so many elitists are on these boards. You known you'd hit that. Let Lannie represent, both in the UK and 'down under'...She met the iaaf standard, what more do you want - a twin?

It's the OLYMPIC GAMES...it's supposed to be for elites! And don't give me any Pierre de Coubertin bs about participation and representing your country, that was a hundred years ago

Wow Unbelievable wrote:

Canada's not exactly doing anything to promote women's marathoning. Even if she's a 2:31 person, the experience will do Lanni well. And why not just have someone out there wearing the maple leaf, in London, of all places?

Oh brother! Don't go about making this into another women's issue...

The fact of the matter is, both Coolsaet and Wykes got their first international experience in the marathon by running at the World Marathon championships. Lanni and Krista have both been rewarded for their performances by being given that opportunity in 2013 by Athletics Canada. Hopefully this will aid in their development and give them incentive to keep improving and reach their Olympic dreams.

After years and years of 100+ mile weeks, three Canadian men were able to hit Canada's marathon standard (I know Coolsaet runs around 225 km/week). In a recent interview, Lanni stated that, prior to 6 months before Rotterdam, she had never run more than 60 miles in a week! If Lanni shows the kind of determination and persistence that the men have shown and keeps putting in the mileage over the next 4 years, she will be a shoe-in to hit the standard for Rio. The Olympics isn't something that you just decide you're going to qualify for 6 months in advance, they're something that you dream of your whole life and do the necessary work to qualify for and put forth your best effort. The IAAF standards for the marathon are much weaker than the track events (especially on the women's side) and I can understand Athletics Canada insisting that athletes run faster than the IAAF standard. As a percentage of the WR, the Canadian marathon standard of 2:29 is further off (more than 10%) than any other track event 'B' standard.

I'm not a fan of AC using tougher standards than the IAAF but, if ever there was a case to do this, it would be in the marathon and particularly the women's marathon. At any rate, the time to challenge the standards was when they came out, not now, after Wykes had to fly out to Japan and then to Rotterdam to hit AC's tougher standard even though he had already run 2:12 during the qualifying period.

The 3 men making the AC standard puts Lanni and Krista out of the picture. There is NO WAY that back-tracking on the published standard (2h29.55) would or should happen now. Had none of the men qualified, then an argument could have been made, but since that isn't the case it is now a moot point.

That there should be a "rising star" component for the marathon is certainly something that could be argued, but not the standard itself. Again this needed to be done before the end of the qualifying period, not in hindsight.

It should also be irrelevant as to whether either or both "deserve" to be on the team or are showing development (steep improvement curve/line), as others in different events might also have that argument. The difference is that the OG marathon standard (2h37) has been set so low (relative to other events) that AC had little choice but to basically ignore it, so the IAAF haven't really done any favours in this regard either. If the IAAF standard had been more reasonable (like 2h32) then perhaps there would have been some "wiggle" room on this issue.

The men (now going after Drayton's much overdue record) have shown that the higher standard has been incentive to get better - than the 2h15-16 the guys were running a few years ago, with the plea to be on teams then - the women need to follow suit. Gareau and Reugger were running under 2h30 a QC ago, time to join the modern age where elite women are trying (and some succeeding) to break 2h20. That isn't going to be helped if 2h32 times (or thereabouts) are rewarded with Olympic berths. The World champs next year would be a good start in preparation for 2016. Krista isn't all that young, but then look at the 38 year olds who are still in the sport (Radcliffe for one and the last Olympic champ was 38 as well, and Kastor just missed making the US team).

suchelitists wrote:

It's ridiculous that so many elitists are on these boards. You known you'd hit that. Let Lannie represent, both in the UK and 'down under'...She met the iaaf standard, what more do you want - a twin?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's the OLYMPIC GAMES...it's supposed to be for elites! And don't give me any Pierre de Coubertin bs about participation and representing your country, that was a hundred years ago

-----------------------------------------------------------

From the track and field perspective if the Olympics is to survive it has to be about each country sending their best to compete. Without this country versus country emphasis the Olympics will continue to lose stature. If it was just about the best versus the best the 10K would have only Kenyans, Ethiopians, and a Somali or two battling it out.

Akeem wrote:

suchelitists wrote:

It's ridiculous that so many elitists are on these boards. You known you'd hit that. Let Lannie represent, both in the UK and 'down under'...She met the iaaf standard, what more do you want - a twin?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's the OLYMPIC GAMES...it's supposed to be for elites! And don't give me any Pierre de Coubertin bs about participation and representing your country, that was a hundred years ago

-----------------------------------------------------------

From the track and field perspective if the Olympics is to survive it has to be about each country sending their best to compete. Without this country versus country emphasis the Olympics will continue to lose stature. If it was just about the best versus the best the 10K would have only Kenyans, Ethiopians, and a Somali or two battling it out.

That's is why the IOC/IAAF limit it to 3 per country. Next.

I think one thing that hasn't really been touched on in this thread is the precedent it sets if AC lets Lanni Marchant onto the Olympic team. In my mind she's essentially set a B standard, regardless of whether it is clearly defined as such (close but not quite A standard = B standard). If they let her in, then logic would follow that one B standard athlete should be able to go in ANY event where there isn't an A standard athlete whose met the other eligibility criteria. Suddenly AC is going to be funding what would likely be a team that is 2/3 athletes that aren't threats to clear heats let alone place well or medal.

Last time I checked, athletics funding in Canada is utter shit and we can barely afford to give our truly competitive athletes to opportunity to compete. The idea that AC should spread thinner what little it has to send essentially non-competitive athletes to London just doesn't make sense to me. As a former Canadian provinical and national team athlete myself I can greatly appreciate Lanni's desire to compete. At the end of the day though, she knew the qualifying standards well before the Olympics and failed to meet them despite her best efforts.

Not knowing anything about Ms. Marchant, myy inner cynic looks at this as a lawyer who's professionally trained to manipulate the system trying to push an accommodation to get to tourist the Olympics.

She said in an interview she was going to use her law background to do the research to present her case to AC.

Anyone know what her theory is?

She needs to stop blaming AC and just train harder. If anything the guys standard is harder and 3 guys still managed to make it by training hard for so many years. Wow, she ran 100mpw for 3 months, guess what, thats a weeks off for most serious runners.

Get over yourself, be happy about a great PB and the doors that it will open for you, and start getting ready for the world champs.

If you look at the men's standard compared to the women's standard I'd actually say it's extremely soft.

At 2:11:38, the Canadian men's standard is exactly 8 minutes off the world record while the women's standard at 2:29:55 is essentially 12:30 off (14:30 if you don't discount Paula's 2:15 as an anomaly).

If I do some napkin math, 12:30 over the women's world record at 2:17:20 (Paula's second fastest time ever) amounts to 4.9% off. The men's standard at 8:00 off of the men's world record at 2:03:38 is 3.3%. Lanni is then a full 2 minutes behind the marathon standard of 2:29:55 (5.6% off of Paula's pace).

If my numbers are correct, then Lanni protesting this matter is basically the same as a 2:17:20 guy trying to get into the men's marathon.

Another way to put it is would Lanni still be pushing for this if the women's standard was on par with the men's at around 2:25:50?

WetCoaster wrote:

If my numbers are correct, then Lanni protesting this matter is basically the same as a 2:17:20 guy trying to get into the men's marathon.

Why do people insist on using % off the WR as any kind of basis for comparison?

It's all about IAAF points (women standard is easier) and potential for top 12 placing.

WetCoaster wrote:

Another way to put it is would Lanni still be pushing for this if the women's standard was on par with the men's at around 2:25:50?

You are not equating those times correctly. 2:11:29 =1136 IAAF points and 2:29:55 = 1135 IAAF points so the standards are essentially the same.

WetCoaster wrote:

Not knowing anything about Ms. Marchant, myy inner cynic looks at this as a lawyer who's professionally trained to manipulate the system trying to push an accommodation to get to tourist the Olympics.

Is someone going to step in and point out that Lanni is not a tourist, perhaps quoting her on a long-term plan to represent Canada in 2016? That is the reasoning for asking for Rising Star/etc. type accomodations, right - to get experience for 2016?

Looks like the critics are silent now after she just ran 1:14 to win a half in vancouver and said she's "looking for 5 good years."

True Story Face wrote:

Why does Canada have such high standards when they aren't good at running???

If they were good at running the standards would not appear so high.

What's your question?