re the rules, the first 3 go if they have standard or rank. the 4th is the first alternate and goes if one of the first 3 don't have it and they have standard or rank. they then go down the order of finish at trials looking for standard or rank. until they have 3 and an alternate.
at some point they switch to a mix of trials order and road to paris. i think it happens if someone accepts then can't go. but i thought road to paris was basically rank, with the part that matters being rank high enough to get in. so, same diff?
but at least for valby, in on time if ESP turns it down, and technically eligible as alternate standing by. and for jager, if corrigan doesn't get in somehow, he's next in line, and has it on rank.
anyone can turn it down. ESP could say she wants to focus on 1500, jager could decline. but this wouldn't revive someone above them not meeting selection criteria-- say, corrigan -- it just moves the discussion to the alternate, #5, #6, etc.
a lot of the jager criticism strikes me as a logic mess. "he should turn it down," as though much of anyone who goes to the trials is operating on the basis of getting it then saying no. he can't revive corrigan by being noble. he can only offer it down to someone else who would have the same "i didn't really make top 3" asterix, only worse. it's really a beef with the olympic standards, which you either make or not, or that we shouldn't send alternates instead, should operate like the british -- which is ironically saying standards are everything and we don't even care about rank. at this point we're pretzeling on theory just to diss jager and it's pointless.
Well, in the past, there seems to have been some changes in interpretation of their own rules. For example (check me on this), Adam Goucher was allowed to run the Trials when there were candidate(s) ahead of him. It seemed shady (but I’m fuzzy on the details, without going back and researching it.).
But as I said from the front, I’m not 100% positive on the USATF selection process for alternates.
But I think actually possessing the standard greatly improves the credentials of a potential alternate candidate, but that’s just my opinion, since I haven’t found the rules.
You could've literally searched for something like "usatf olympic selection procedure" on google and look up the actual rules before writing such uninformed bullsh*t. Takes like two minutes. You are totally wrong obviously:
USA TRACK & FIELD ATHLETE SELECTION PROCEDURES wrote:
• The fourth (4th) place finisher in the Selection Event will select himself or herself via head-to head competition for an alternate position on the 2024 Olympic Games Team, provided they have met the 2024 Olympic Games qualifying standard during the prescribed period or qualified via their World Athletics Ranking Position. • In each event, if an athlete declines to participate on the Team, USATF will offer that position to the next highest placing individual meeting all criteria, continuing in this order until the three (3) positions plus the alternate position for each event are filled. • If, after the close of the Selection Event, there is a position or are positions in an event(s) on the 2024 Olympic Games Team that have not been filled, USATF will enter an athlete(s) or designate an athlete as an alternate, based upon their rank order of place finish at the Selection Event, and by virtue of their inclusion on the last edition of the Road to Paris list (WA list of all athletes qualified by Entry Standard and World Rankings) to be published July 7, 2024.
a lot of the jager criticism strikes me as a logic mess. "he should turn it down," as though much of anyone who goes to the trials is operating on the basis of getting it then saying no. he can't revive corrigan by being noble. he can only offer it down to someone else who would have the same "i didn't really make top 3" asterix, only worse. it's really a beef with the olympic standards, which you either make or not, or that we shouldn't send alternates instead, should operate like the british -- which is ironically saying standards are everything and we don't even care about rank. at this point we're pretzeling on theory just to diss jager and it's pointless.
Well, the thing about the Jaeger situation which makes it especially unique, is that one of the races in his ranking is from two years ago due to a WA ‘loophole’ rule, in which he got a huge number of bonus points to pad that ranking, by finishing first in a relatively weak field. The guy that finished third, based upon recent race times, is fitter than current Jaeger.
Nothing like her NCAA interviews. She comes off very snappy and like the people interviewing her were asking wrong questions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Well, the thing about the Jaeger situation which makes it especially unique, is that one of the races in his ranking is from two years ago due to a WA ‘loophole’ rule, in which he got a huge number of bonus points to pad that ranking, by finishing first in a relatively weak field. The guy that finished third, based upon recent race times, is fitter than current Jaeger.
Just sayin', something is either unique or it is not unique. There are no degrees of unique.
Anyway, it is not a WA 'loophole' rule, it is a WA rule.
I thought it was an excellent interview. She said that she was so nervous before the race that she was in tears, but she maintained her composure while answering some difficult questions after missing out on her dream. A Galen Rupp or Athing Mu would have stormed past the journalists to go sulk and pout. She only finished 4th this time, but Parker Valby is a true champion!
I didn't see it that way. I saw a disappointed young woman trying to keep it together and say all the right things. I'm sure she had a good cry once she was safely alone.
I just watched the video and she gave great answers, not sure what is being even pointed out by the OP. The first question to me is a silly assumption that she rebuffs...her fastest race is right near the Olympic standard in sub-ideal conditions (no pacer, somewhat warm). She was in qualifying position, and just did what she always does. I think she will get into the Olympic team, so I think all the intrigue over whether she loses money because of not signing before the Trials is somewhat shallow.
Just watched that whole thing and it was perfectly vanilla. A little bit short with the dumb questions, but otherwise totally reasonable.
Just watched it, too, and I had the same feeling. For a fairly young runner, I thought she did a perfectly serviceable job of fielding the questions. And when she didn't have an answer (such as to the question, "when do you think you might get a professional deal?") she said as much without seeming snappy or irritated.
It feels like her story will proceed the way of so many others who've come before: if she can stay healthy and motivated, we'll see more of her at big events.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.