If Felix's issue with giving up the 100 spot is extra sponsorship $, wouldn't putting her on the 4x100 in addition to the 200 be sufficient?
If Felix's issue with giving up the 100 spot is extra sponsorship $, wouldn't putting her on the 4x100 in addition to the 200 be sufficient?
Starter wrote:
What happens if a runner false starts in the run-off? Another situation would be a DQ in a hurdle run-off. There is no provision in the new rule for this situation. Are they DQed from the event or do they maintain alternate status?
I agree with employee 1.1 that this "rule" needs more work. Hard to believe that after the 2008 Olympics and Swimming situations that they couldn't predict this was coming.
Yeah, even though they worked really hard to descibe the coin toss procedure ( makes you wonder why) this won't be the final design for the tie-breaker.
Naked mud wrestling is the only answer.
They should wait 15 years, pick a time, and then have one of them call it off.
Plmkijhu wrote:
Didn't you already post this?
The twins are the product of in breeding so you have to forgive them if they are forgetful.
First: The one with the slowest reaction time at the start obviously has the biggest chance of improvement at the Olympics, and did as a matter of fact run faster than the other.
Second: Once the blood analysises comes back we might have to go down to fifth and sixth placers etc anyway...
DOM wrote:
Naked mud wrestling is the only answer.
Though you posted this in jest, it actually makes more sense than a coin toss. When I saw that flipping a penny is truly a USATF means of resolving this, it made me want to tear my phallus clear off its moorings and mail it to the organization along with a stern rebuke. What the damn hell.
I'm in the camp (seems like a small one) that if Felix makes the 200 team (which she should), she will give up her spot.
I just wonder if she'll be compensated for it from her sponsors.
At the end of the day, she will meet with her agent and they will discuss what makes more sense from a $$ perspective. Her marketability (already very high) would likely go through the roof if she gave up her spot.
What is the $$ benefit of that versus running a 4th event in the Olympics?
The other thing I'm sure she will be thinking about is whether she can realistically medal in the 100. I could understand if she was a favorite, but Jeter is going to smoke her in London. Best case scenario is she wins silver with the likely scenario that she is a finalist but finishes 5th or 6th.
What if the 3rd place tie occurs during the decathlon or heptathlon?
Prediction contest should be decided by a coin toss. No wait, a runoff.
Track on field is dumb if they don't have a run off. Oh the missed opportunity for drama and increased interest.
Sam Wood wrote:
I wanna see a run off!
decathlon is best of 10 coin tosses.
The final solution.
EGG NOG CHALLENGE.
I would love to see these ladies on all fours throwing up and blowing undigested egg nog out their noses. Soo hot!
"If ties exist in any grouping except (2) above, such ties shall be broken by strength-of-schedule. If any ties cannot be broken by strength-of-schedule, the divisional or conference tie-breakers, if applicable, shall be applied. Any ties that still exist shall be broken by a coin flip."
A coin toss is the final tie-breaker to decide on NFL teams making the playoffs.
So it is not an amateur thing.
Though, I think it has never happned.
It happens in soccer, too.
The American women won their group after a tie after a coin toss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/28/sports/soccer-coin-flip-goes-in-us-team-s-favor.htmlWhy can't both go? Sorry if someone already suggested it but it seems obvious to me based on not having a procedure that addresses this situation.
Speaking of swimming, they've already got their first swim-off of the meet set to go in session 1 of their Olympic Trials. Last spot in the semifinals of the women's 100M butterfly is up for grabs at the end of the session unless someone else scratches for the semis. (in which case, the swim-off wouldn't be needed because both would go through.)
It really isn't that hard of a solution, USATF. Heck, I know od a number of 400M/500 yard swim offs (1500M track rough equivalent) there have probably been swim-offs for the 1500M (track rough equivalent- 5K run) and it's seem as an ordinary part of the process.
I wish ppl would stop bringing up swimming as a template for running. Michael Phelps won 8 swimming gold medals in ONE Olympics. And if Phelps was a one-off, then Spitz was right behind him. Nobody will ever do that in track, barring some massive boycott. Swimming is different, for some reason multiple events in one meet is just more do-able. And, therefore, swim-offs are less of a burden (risk?!) than run-offs.
The IOC will only allow 3 athletes per country.
They can't both go along with the 1 and 2 placers.
Can't USATF just petition the USOC to let three athletes compete, since they can't decide what to do?
Seriously, it's amazing to me that USATF had no prior procedure in place to settle a dead heat, particularly since they do occur from time to time in other sports like swimming and horse racing.
ifififi wrote:
The athlete with the highest world ranking according to the IAAF rankings as of 8 am PST on the date of the coin toss shall declare his or her choice of "heads" for the obverse hub or "tails" for the reverse hub.
In case of a three-way tie, the athlete with the lowest IAAF ranking has to choose "edge".