Hocker needs a 3:40 race to guarantee selection

I'm sure the olympics are just desperate for the viewership that cole hocker will bring. But while we're at it, since the point of the games is entertainment and viewership lets put DK metcalf in the 100 and maybe megan thee stallion in the 400h.

portsea57 wrote:

fada tyme wrote:

The person who needs to concentrate is yourself because you're making no sense. That is unless spreading your tears on the board is making sense to you.

Oh dear! Is it tunnel vision or simply stupidity! Something isn't right here! 1) The US college system works against their athletes in certain events gaining qualifying times because of no pace-making which CLEARLY favours non-college athletes who compete in paced races. That is a fact! 2) Why are the trials held so close to the qualifying cut off date? Why not arrange things so an athlete like Hocker has time to run in paced races after the trials.

It is all so badly thought through.

Right. There was never any time to plan to run a race in which he could get the standard. It's not as if the schedule hasn't been known for a couple of years or something like that.

It feels a bit disrespectful to Nuguse to say this - he has the NCAA record, not Cole. But: I think what Nuguse did (solo 3:34, picked up the standard) shows what would have been possible for Hocker to do at some point in the last few months if he truly couldn't find a rabbited race (probably could've).

But, but, BUT! The college system, in certain tactical events - does work against fast times- or the really fast times. That cannot be denied. And, of course because of college team commitments, athletes have to be a lot more careful of their racing activities than non-college athletes. For a start, how often on Letsrun. have there been comments stating that Hocker wouldn't perform well at the trials because of his college racing work load.

So, without doubt, the college system in the States does disadvantage athletes and it works against athletes in certain events more than others i.e. the events where tactical running produces slowish times.

I'm saying that this is a problem for the States producing the best possible teams for the major championships. Now, it is probably true that. because the Olympics are pretty early this year, there is less time to produce fast times. For a start, say Hocker had been a UK college student - with a light racing schedule - he would have had lots and lots of opportunities to compete in paced races all over Europe. Some posters seem to be happy with a system that is not fit for purpose.

The system needs overhauling.

BTW, I'm from the UK and I love middle-distance running and I want to see the best runners in the big championships, and we need a system that actively works towards making that happen. As i mentioned before, "wild cards" would be a great idea to ensure that athletes who "fall through the net" are picked up and allowed to compete at the games. For example, if Timothy Cheruiyot were to regain his best form in the next few weeks, I'd love there to be system where he was given a "wild card" to the games. Such a system would be a win/win situation for fans, and would ensure that "the best of the best" are present at the games.

wejo wrote:

If he wins the Trials he should be in the Olympics with the season he had. (WA should let the US pick its 3 people in any event where they hvae more than 3 people qualified).

National athletics federations can already pick their Olympic team members -- some countries don't have Olympic Trials. Committees pick the team. USATF could do away with self-selection but even if they did, athletes not meeting the Olympic standard still wouldn't be allowed to run. Abbey D'Agostino finished fifth in the 2016 Trials and made the team because two people ahead of her didn't have the standard.

I really can’t see why so many of you are so outraged.

The only reason Hocker is in the position he is has to do with not running fast enough earlier in the process. If you are only ranked 40+ in the world and have a PB 8 seconds slower than the World Record then in global terms you not making the cut is no big loss to the event. This is vastly different to Cheriyot missing out.

Converting mile times is a decent academic exercise but a complete nonsense to argue for using it for official qualification purposes.

If you want to qualify for the Olympics dedicate your season to running lots of 1500 metre races instead of miles.

portsea57 wrote:

Well, if Hocker wins, or is in the first three, and does not go to the Olympics, then something is very wrong! It's the same old story of the people who run the sport don't live in the real world. Fans want to see the best. and if anything interfers with that happening it must be sorted out! And, I could sort it in out now!

Very few people who will be watching the Olympics (i.e. tons of casuals) have any idea who Hocker is. If he doesn't make the team, hardly anyone outside of track circles will know or care.

hocker ran the standard en route with the 350 mile.

like an 880 y does not convert to an 800m?

anyway hocker can run a time trial and get the mark.

in champ races you usually get a 339,

but sometimes it is real slow,

the field has to think they are NOT going to out sprint centro and hocker, so it figures that someone will ramp up the pace.

that is if they have something called balls.

we shall see.

arcticchris wrote:

I really can’t see why so many of you are so outraged.

The only reason Hocker is in the position he is has to do with not running fast enough earlier in the process. If you are only ranked 40+ in the world and have a PB 8 seconds slower than the World Record then in global terms you not making the cut is no big loss to the event. This is vastly different to Cheriyot missing out.

Converting mile times is a decent academic exercise but a complete nonsense to argue for using it for official qualification purposes.

If you want to qualify for the Olympics dedicate your season to running lots of 1500 metre races instead of miles.

Are you really following this discussion? It seems not!

arcticchris wrote:

I really can’t see why so many of you are so outraged.

The only reason Hocker is in the position he is has to do with not running fast enough earlier in the process. If you are only ranked 40+ in the world and have a PB 8 seconds slower than the World Record then in global terms you not making the cut is no big loss to the event. This is vastly different to Cheriyot missing out.

Converting mile times is a decent academic exercise but a complete nonsense to argue for using it for official qualification purposes.

If you want to qualify for the Olympics dedicate your season to running lots of 1500 metre races instead of miles.

+1

Maybe the rules should be changed, but they are currently the rules and everyone knows them. Nuguse is an NCAA runner and figured out how to be in a position to qualify. Hocker could have as well, but didn’t.

Hocker has moved into the WR ranking quota and is now eligible for selection - can run any time he likes as long as he is top 3.

So, beating Centro will take care of this thread, yeah?

Why not just go to a track with Wavelight tech and a few fast AF pacers he can draft off of for a few laps?

dont care wrote:

I'm sure the olympics are just desperate for the viewership that cole hocker will bring. But while we're at it, since the point of the games is entertainment and viewership lets put DK metcalf in the 100 and maybe megan thee stallion in the 400h.

Possibly the best post of the thread.