25 Americans now have the Olympic standard in marathon but won't be at the Trials. Should USATF let them in?

If they change to 2:19/2:45, expect bigger crowds at Houston.

wineturtle wrote:

My position:

Adjust the standard for the Trials marathon to reflect the OG standard and leave the existing standard as is for entry via a 1/2 marathon time.

a tangent thought:

That 57% of the field will be testing themselves to find out if they can actually run a competitive marathon seems a bit high for a race that primarily is designed to select our OG Marathon Team.

Agree - let them run the OT marathon, where a couple dozen more people with the standard being there have no negative effect whatsoever on the contenders, but will bring more energy to the event and will perhaps be back in 4 years as contenders. Anyone remember Brian Sell? Not a superstar in college or on the track, but made a lot of US teams. Or Desi Davila? She was not a household name as an NCAA runner, but with a few years of marathon training we all know the story now.

Interesting tanget thought, but I don't think is is negative to let a bunch of people run the OT marathon on the basis of a HM time, given that a lot of those people have to decide whether to go up or down. Let them run the marathon trials now, and they have more data to decide about focussing on the 10 for track trials.

Weldon is looking to find the arbitration decision from 2011/12. I have emailed USATF for comment. We'll update the article if we hear anything.

I'd have to say no.

1)- I think the marathon standard is a lot more easy to obtain than the ones on the track

Wasn't there over75 people who hit the 2012 trials qualifier?

People say the track is limited on lanes but in swimming they almost let everyone who is decent swim in the trials. I'm serious. Go look how many people swim in a certain event in the trials its crazy.

I can name female runners who were just 35min 10k runners in college and 6 months later hit the marathon trials.

The standards need to be more difficult because it's because more and more of a participation race.

I'm sorry If anyone is offended but ... come on.

I understand they hit the Olympic time...but maybe the Olympic time should be more difficult

twotimer wrote:

I'd have to say no.

1)- I think the marathon standard is a lot more easy to obtain than the ones on the track

Wasn't there over75 people who hit the 2012 trials qualifier?

People say the track is limited on lanes but in swimming they almost let everyone who is decent swim in the trials. I'm serious. Go look how many people swim in a certain event in the trials its crazy.

I can name female runners who were just 35min 10k runners in college and 6 months later hit the marathon trials.

The standards need to be more difficult because it's because more and more of a participation race.

I'm sorry If anyone is offended but ... come on.

I understand they hit the Olympic time...but maybe the Olympic time should be more difficult

You argument might carry some weight if the Olympic standards weren't relaxed. They were. Sorry, but 75 people isn't a Mass participation race by any standards.

USATF has responded to my inquiry with the following statement:

"As you know, the Olympic standards were just changed. We are looking into whether USATF Olympic Trials standards will need to be adjusted."

Jonathan Gault wrote:

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

Also the article didn't mention the guys between 2:17 and 2:18 who are qualified for the trials but now also have the olympic standard.

That's a good point too and I've updated the article. Originally I assumed that the OT standard and the old Olympic standard were the same, but the Olympic standard was actually a minute faster, as you said. So that change affects three guys.

Looking at the trials site this is the complete list of guys between 2:17 and 2:18.

Sean Brown 2:17:02 B Grandma's Marathon Duluth MN USA 6/21/2014

Matt Pelletier 2:17:02 B NU Hartford Marathon Hartford CT USA 10/11/2014

David Laney 2:17:02 B California International Marathon Sacramento CA USA 12/11/2014

Scott Wietecha 2:17:02 B Bank of America Chicago Marathon Chicago IL USA 10/11/2015

Andrew Huebner 2:17:05 B Grandma's Marathon Duluth MN USA 6/21/2014

Brian Harvey 2:17:05 B Medtronic Twin Cities Marathon/USA Championships Minneapolis MN USA 10/5/2014

Eric Ashe 2:17:06 B Grandma's Marathon Duluth MN USA 6/20/2015

Chris Chavez 2:17:07 B California International Marathon Sacramento CA USA 12/12/2014

Daniel Tapia 2:17:14 B ASICS LA Marathon Los Angeles CA USA 3/15/2015

Brett Gotcher 2:17:16 B 118th B.A.A. Boston Marathon Boston MA USA 4/21/2014

Drew Polley 2:17:23 B California International Marathon Sacramento CA USA 12/8/2013

Ethan Shaw 2:17:26 B Medtronic Twin Cities Marathon/USA Championships Minneapolis MN USA 10/6/2013

Tony Migliozzi 2:17:27 B Chevron Houston Marathon Houston TX USA 1/18/2015

Dan Vassallo 2:17:28 B Gore-Tex Philadelphia Marathon Philadelphia PA USA 11/23/2014

Jason Witt 2:17:31 B Bank of America Chicago Marathon Chicago IL USA 10/12/2014

Max King 2:17:32 B ASICS LA Marathon Los Angeles CA USA 3/15/2015

Curtis Begley 2:17:37 B California International Marathon Sacramento CA USA 12/14/2014

Bret Fransen 2:17:38 B Grandma's Marathon Duluth MN USA 6/21/2014

John Dewitt 2:17:38 B Bank of America Chicago Marathon Chicago IL USA 10/12/2014

Anthony Costales 2:17:48 B California International Marathon Sacramento CA USA 12/15/2014

Ryan Hall 2:17:50 B 118th B.A.A. Boston Marathon Boston MA USA 4/21/2014

Paul Petersen 2:17:54 B Grandma's Marathon Duluth MN USA 6/21/2014

Ryan Cosens 2:17:55 B Grandma's Marathon Duluth MN USA 6/20/2015

Chris Lemon 2:18:00 B Bank of America Chicago Marathon Chicago IL USA 10/11/2015

Jesse Davis 2:18:00 B Indianapolis Monumental Marathon Indianapolis IN USA 11/7/2015

A lot more than 3 guys.

yes, for the marathon let anyone run who makes the OG standard

I can't think of a single serious reason why not.

Plus, the tiny field they have for the men just looks lame on tv - like a little local race.

rojo wrote:

USATF has responded to my inquiry with the following statement:

"As you know, the Olympic standards were just changed. We are looking into whether USATF Olympic Trials standards will need to be adjusted."

Thanks, that makes the language in the arbitration decision important. I've wasted far too much time today trying to find it, with no luck. Hoping Weldon or somebody else comes up with it.

One more. (I am sure there are more out there, but this is the one I just realized since I've met her a couple of times)Connie Teague - 2:44:47- 2013 CIM

Jonathan Gault wrote:

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

Also the article didn't mention the guys between 2:17 and 2:18 who are qualified for the trials but now also have the olympic standard.

That's a good point too and I've updated the article. Originally I assumed that the OT standard and the old Olympic standard were the same, but the Olympic standard was actually a minute faster, as you said. So that change affects three guys.

There are already over 150 qualified for each gender. I feel like that is plenty.

You're right. The list I was using was missing a few guys.Worth noting, though: the Olympic qualifying window opened January 1. So anyone who hasn't broken 2:19 since then doesn't have the Olympic standard.

[quote]Jonathan Gault wrote:

You're right. The list I was using was missing a few guys.

Worth noting, though: the Olympic qualifying window opened January 1. So anyone who hasn't broken 2:19 since then doesn't have the Olympic standard.[quote]

So should USATF only have to let in guys between 2:18 and 2:19 who have run that time since Jan 1st?

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

[quote]Jonathan Gault wrote:

You're right. The list I was using was missing a few guys.

Worth noting, though: the Olympic qualifying window opened January 1. So anyone who hasn't broken 2:19 since then doesn't have the Olympic standard.[quote]

So should USATF only have to let in guys between 2:18 and 2:19 who have run that time since Jan 1st?

That is another question we are trying to figure out. We had a guy who ran 2:18:xx last year email us because he's wondering if he's going to be able to get in now. Hopefully USATF can decide on this quickly because it's going to affect a bunch of people's training plans one way or another.

TheGarbageDisposal wrote:

One more. (I am sure there are more out there, but this is the one I just realized since I've met her a couple of times)

Connie Teague - 2:44:47- 2013 CIM

Emma Lee - 2:43:18 - 2014 Grandma's

Lisa Baumert - 2:43:38 - 2014 CIM

In the past, several point-to-point courses were not IAAF/Olympic qualifying races--most notably CIM, Grandma's, and LA Marathon. If that is still the case, someone could have run under the Olympic time standard but at a non-qualifying course/race. Man this is getting complicated!

Also, does anyone know if times from Rock N Roll San Diego 1/2 were accepted for the Trials? I seem to recall some debate on that topic due to the amount of net drop back in the spring.

trials fan16 wrote:

In the past, several point-to-point courses were not IAAF/Olympic qualifying races--most notably CIM, Grandma's, and LA Marathon. If that is still the case, someone could have run under the Olympic time standard but at a non-qualifying course/race. Man this is getting complicated!

Also, does anyone know if times from Rock N Roll San Diego 1/2 were accepted for the Trials? I seem to recall some debate on that topic due to the amount of net drop back in the spring.

Yeah, when I originally updated the list I didn't include those races but after my most recent update, those races are included. If that's still the case, then those last four guys (Ashe, Tapia, King and Cosens) don't have the Olympic standard after all.

rojo wrote:

Weldon is looking to find the arbitration decision from 2011/12. I have emailed USATF for comment. We'll update the article if we hear anything.

I think it is older than that. They tend to copy and paste language from year to year. Bill Roe told me years ago (definitely before 2012) that USATF could not have an A standard tougher than the IAAF A standard because of the Amateur Sports Act. It's not just Olympic Trials, it applies to the World Championships too.

So yes, I'm confident that they will HAVE to accept any marathoner that hit the new IAAF standard, but I do not think they have any obligation to adjust the 1/2 marathon standard.

The better question is did our IAAF Council member say anything about this at the Annual Meeting? I'll admit, I was tied up in L&L and missed the standards sub-committee meeting and the first half of Women's Track & Field, but I never heard anyone mention anything about this. This question should not be catching the National Office off guard.

Weldon or Rojo, you should email Duffy and ask him. They've had a lot of turnover in staff, but I'm sure he knows all of the details about the history of this issue/the Amateur Sports Act.

andicamp wrote:

I don't have a problem with letting more people run the marathon trials, but it's a little late to be changing the standard. I know a number of women that would very likely have been able to run the 2:45, but instead chased the 2:43, blew up in the last few miles and came in between 2:45 and 2:47. That's a rough break for them.

This exact scenario happened. I've been coaching a woman for a few years who was borderline for 2:43. In her recent effort to achieve the standard, we set a race plan to target that time. Unfortunately, she wasn't able to quite hold that pace and finished 2:47. No doubt in my mind that she runs under 2:45 if we were more conservative. She previously ran 2:46.

At the end of the day, this isn't life and death. But it makes for a great story for those that make the Trials.