Rojo
How many runners about to be lapped will move out to lane 2 as they should...but won't because they will be trying to stay in race as long as possible. When they are about to be lapped how many runners in the OLYMPIC TRIALS will move out to lane 2 to make it EASIER for their race to end?
Two heats are VETTER. As one poster pointed out recently a U.S. Championship was WON by Drew Hunter in heat 2 funning faster then Heat 1. This 10,000m will ensure the competitors in the first heat go hard from the gun or risk going home.
They did 2 heats in most events at my regional and state hs meets. It was good because you couldn't be tactical
either make it prelim- and we'll really see who can conquer the 10,000m, or let it happen. The best women will represent team usa and will make both heats fast AND tactical. I love it!
What lap will they be throwing color bombs at the runners as they pass by?
rojo wrote:
StrangelyPostCollegiate wrote:
There are two 10ks going on today that have 48 people in them, the regional qualifying 10ks.
If college kids can figure it out, the pros can.
And in reality at least 5-10 people won't show up or will be hurt by then. You're looking at field size closer to 40, which is doable.
And we have a winner. GREAT POINT. Jonathan Gault acts like it's too many people. Yet he ran in a 48 person 10k just fine in college.
Post of the week. If you are a registered user, I"d send you a free tshirt.
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. The regional 10k races with 48 are made to qualify 12 runners to the final round. 25% of the racers make it through.
And you want to run 50 to qualify 3? If you want the same ratio, there should only be 12 in the OT final so that 25% (3 runners) qualify.
Yes that may very well happen. But if I was Ednah Kurgar personal best 31:25 (May 2021). I would hope I was in the slower heat, pray the fast heat is tactical,cans go for it HARD in a faster time then the tactical fast heat.
Several women on the bubble of possibly making the team in the slower heat if they're smart. I would scope out the start list, have my coach contact other coaches and set up a partnership with other competitors to work together to ensure our heat is faster then the first if possible within their abilities. ESOECIALLY if first heat is tactical.
I'm for one heat with an exaggerated stagger that has the runners come together at somewhere around 500 to 800 meters. I also think forcing lapped runners to drop isn't necessary, but they should be required to run in lane 3 until the top five have finished...maybe even top 10.
wejo wrote:
I think either 1 section pulling people when they get lapped is way to go. Or do 2 sections with anyone who wants to run in the fast section given the option and then pulling you when you get lapped.
As you all pointed out 48 people will be running 10ks in the NCAA regionals and it happens every year right?
It is FAR more disrespectful to those athletes to yank them off the track mid-race than it would be to make a slower 10k section. Imagine achieving your life long dream of making it to the trials in the 10k and then being told you can only run 6k of the race and you must appear as a DNF in the results.
to me, making the lapped runners move to lane 2 seems like a good compromise, but i suppose it would be hard to keep track of and enforce. is that a common practice? that way you could have one giant race with no forced withdrawals, the strivers get their moment in the sun, but the top people don't have to waste energy weaving around.
just thinking about Mills running around in lane 3 to own everyone in 64. what a baller.
bad news bear wrote:
wejo wrote:
I think either 1 section pulling people when they get lapped is way to go. Or do 2 sections with anyone who wants to run in the fast section given the option and then pulling you when you get lapped.
As you all pointed out 48 people will be running 10ks in the NCAA regionals and it happens every year right?
It is FAR more disrespectful to those athletes to yank them off the track mid-race than it would be to make a slower 10k section. Imagine achieving your life long dream of making it to the trials in the 10k and then being told you can only run 6k of the race and you must appear as a DNF in the results.
Yes, but that's the brilliance of Wejo's suggestion. Put it in the hands of the athletes to decide if they want to risk that happening or just have their moment in the sun. The only problem is if most of the B section doesn't care about getting pulled off early. Even if that is the case, though, then you just run with that as the rule.
SOLUTION:
I say if they're going to split it into two heats, put the 14 athletes with the Olympic standard in the A heat and the other 36 without it in the B heat. Run the B heat first and force them to chase the standard, and their success or failure will determine whether the A heaters will need to run fast OR allow them to run a tactical race, all without extra bodies that could get in the way. This is an easy, transparent, and non-controversial method and also rewards the athletes who came into the trials having already achieved the Oly Standard. If you're going to have two heats, this is the best way to do it.
Kenneth Copeland, verified millionaire wrote:
SOLUTION:
I say if they're going to split it into two heats, put the 14 athletes with the Olympic standard in the A heat and the other 36 without it in the B heat. Run the B heat first and force them to chase the standard, and their success or failure will determine whether the A heaters will need to run fast OR allow them to run a tactical race, all without extra bodies that could get in the way. This is an easy, transparent, and non-controversial method and also rewards the athletes who came into the trials having already achieved the Oly Standard. If you're going to have two heats, this is the best way to do it.
clap-clap-clap-clap-clap-clap-clap
Well done, this is the best idea put forth yet. I which I would've thought of it.
Those without the standard are forced to hit it anyways if they want to go to the Olympics, so this would be a fair way to run two heats, with neither hear really having much of an advantage. Yes, knowing the time of the first heat helps, but if none of the first-heaters hit the standard, then those with it can truly race.
Run 2 heats, but don't seed them according to time.
Random draw to see which heat you are in.
Some fast runners in each heat, and they have to really throw down a good time to make sure that they are in.
(Ideally, run the 2 heats at the same time on different tracks, so nobody knows anyone's time.)
They DID have a second section at this meet. The first section had about 40 people and was won in 9:39. The section section, run immediately after, had the top 16 qualifiers and was won in 9:09. That’s why the first section is clearly introduced as “Section 1.” They did not have 56 women on the track in an indoor 3000m.
paul72 wrote:
hamsters wrote:
50 is way too many to run in one heat.
yup-how they had 56?! in this SEC INDOOR 3000m is beyond me (something where having a second section would only add 10-12 minutes to the meet time and avoid what happens at 1:00 of video lol)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuRr6cvwpL8
Another option is to do the qualification on a flat road course, ideally with maybe some half mile or mile loops. I know some would say but what about the shoes and that the Olympic race is on the track. Yeah but you cannot tell me that the top 3 female 10000m runners would not be selected and everyone would have a shot at it. I know it will not happen though.
It will be interesting if one is tactical and one is not. The B heat could produce a fast time if they go for it.
bad news bear wrote:
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. The regional 10k races with 48 are made to qualify 12 runners to the final round. 25% of the racers make it through.
And you want to run 50 to qualify 3? If you want the same ratio, there should only be 12 in the OT final so that 25% (3 runners) qualify.
Not relevant.
paul72 wrote:
hamsters wrote:
50 is way too many to run in one heat.
yup-how they had 56?! in this SEC INDOOR 3000m is beyond me (something where having a second section would only add 10-12 minutes to the meet time and avoid what happens at 1:00 of video lol)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuRr6cvwpL8
Someone got knocked over in the first 50 meters of that race and it had to be restarted. This video is just what USATF is trying to avoid. I think the lapped runners causing problems could be an issue, but the bigger danger of a huge field is a fall near the start. As others have said, an extended alley start seems like a good solution.
Kenneth Copeland, verified millionaire wrote:
SOLUTION:
I say if they're going to split it into two heats, put the 14 athletes with the Olympic standard in the A heat and the other 36 without it in the B heat. Run the B heat first and force them to chase the standard, and their success or failure will determine whether the A heaters will need to run fast OR allow them to run a tactical race, all without extra bodies that could get in the way. This is an easy, transparent, and non-controversial method and also rewards the athletes who came into the trials having already achieved the Oly Standard. If you're going to have two heats, this is the best way to do it.
I like this
Ultimately, very few that don’t have the standard will have the gumption to try and get it during this race. The second tier runners will be more interested in taking scalps. 2012 10k trials only Deb Maier made an attempt at the standard. No one else went with her. Natosha Rogers might have, but she had just battled back from a fall when Maier made her move. Rogers eventually finished 2nd but failed to get standard by less than 15 seconds.
There could be gamesmanship among the big names also, like Shalane did in that race to help out Uhl.
Point is, there will likely be a large pack for at least the first half of the race which can lead to collisions and such