It depends if you like watching fast races, or slow races. When you know that the only way to advance to the final, or to place, is too run the fastest time possible, it makes for faster racing and more equitable results, so 4:15 isn't sent packing.
8th place in a semi not making the final is not a problem. Luckily it’s just a silly argument because no one would ever implement your idea.
It depends if you like watching fast races, or slow races. When you know that the only way to advance to the final, or to place, is too run the fastest time possible, it makes for faster racing and more equitable results, so 4:15 isn't sent packing.
8th place in a semi not making the final is not a problem. Luckily it’s just a silly argument because no one would ever implement your idea.
Who was more deserving. 4:15 or 4:21? I'd argue 4:15. Because she ran faster. I have this crazy notion that running faster should be rewarded.
Who was more deserving. 4:15 or 4:21? I'd argue 4:15. Because she ran faster. I have this crazy notion that running faster should be rewarded.
The people who finished top 5 in their semi are more deserving than the runner that finished 8th. No question. They are races.
Yeah so your argument is literally that running slower should be rewarded. If they were run in different locations or days, that would be a fair argument. The girl with the 17th fastest time makes finals while the girl with the 8th fastest time does not. That makes absolutely zero sense in this context.
A better idea is to have all qualifiers for the final by time, and get rid of the fastest losers option. Almost all of the qualifying so far has ended up being the fastest times anyway so far this week, except for the women's 1500m prelims. It is sad that several woman who ran faster times won't be in the final.
The people who finished top 5 in their semi are more deserving than the runner that finished 8th. No question. They are races.
Yeah so your argument is literally that running slower should be rewarded. If they were run in different locations or days, that would be a fair argument. The girl with the 17th fastest time makes finals while the girl with the 8th fastest time does not. That makes absolutely zero sense in this context.
It makes all the sense in the world in a couple of semifinal races to reward beating people. Maybe you’ll get it one day. I won’t hold my breath.
A better idea is to have all qualifiers for the final by time, and get rid of the fastest losers option. Almost all of the qualifying so far has ended up being the fastest times anyway so far this week, except for the women's 1500m prelims. It is sad that several woman who ran faster times won't be in the final.
Yeah so your argument is literally that running slower should be rewarded. If they were run in different locations or days, that would be a fair argument. The girl with the 17th fastest time makes finals while the girl with the 8th fastest time does not. That makes absolutely zero sense in this context.
It makes all the sense in the world in a couple of semifinal races to reward beating people. Maybe you’ll get it one day. I won’t hold my breath.
Beating people is completely relative. Time is not relative. You fail!
Yeah so your argument is literally that running slower should be rewarded. If they were run in different locations or days, that would be a fair argument. The girl with the 17th fastest time makes finals while the girl with the 8th fastest time does not. That makes absolutely zero sense in this context.
It makes all the sense in the world in a couple of semifinal races to reward beating people. Maybe you’ll get it one day. I won’t hold my breath.
I understand there are arguments each way, but with only 12 in the heat, coming in 5th in a slow time to me might not merit being rewarded.
The people who finished top 5 in their semi are more deserving than the runner that finished 8th. No question. They are races.
Yeah so your argument is literally that running slower should be rewarded. If they were run in different locations or days, that would be a fair argument. The girl with the 17th fastest time makes finals while the girl with the 8th fastest time does not. That makes absolutely zero sense in this context.
No. Beating other runners should be rewarded. That is the point of racing.
A better idea is to have all qualifiers for the final by time, and get rid of the fastest losers option. Almost all of the qualifying so far has ended up being the fastest times anyway so far this week, except for the women's 1500m prelims. It is sad that several woman who ran faster times won't be in the final.
That's exactly what I'm saying.
Sorry, I misunderstood. In that case I completely agree with you!