wejo wrote:
If this the rule, then is this the real rulebook:
"Athletes with "A" standards automatically compete in the meet. Then the meet directory decides whoever he or she wants in the meet to make it competitive"
+1
Why even have a rulebook if it's only employed at one guy's discretion?
John MF Chaplin wrote:
You want the truth? YOU PUNKS CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! Girls, we live in a NIKE world that has preferred athletes, and those preferred athletes have to come from pre-existing programs led by men with access. Who's gonna do it? You? Or you? I have a greater responsibility than you punks could possibly fathom. You weep for a shitty B heat guy or a long hair like Shannon Butler, and you curse my name. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That my omission of certain B-level athletes from the USATF meet, while tragic, probably saved track and field in America. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves track & field in the United States of America.
You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at track meets, you want me in power on that USATF board of directors, you need me on that USATF board of directors. We use words like access, offers, qualifying standards. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent training for something. You use them as a punchline.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to some message board hacks who rise and sleep under the blanket of the stellar national track meet competitions that I lord over, and then question the manner in which I lord over them. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pay your USATF dues, pick up your tickets, go to the ice cream social and kiss my ass.
Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to. This is my world and you are just a squirrel trying to get a nut. Suck it, skinny runner bitches.
This = very funny
I am amazed that JC is still alive. I went to college nearby when he was the head coach at WSU.
Its been 30 plus years. He must be nearly 90 years old.
Why hasn't someone put poillow over his face?
Heres another one. John Minen, University of Virginia, got into the meet when he was sitting 3rd on the provisional list and was not even on the start list. But on the day of the race, there he is on the starting line! How is this possible? Don Wasinger of Kansas was told "Don't bother because we are not taking any provisionals this year. The fields have been set" This was said by our very own Mr John Chaplin. It must be fun to be here as an Oregon/Nike athlete. The rules are bent and changed for you at every turn. What a party!
Minen appears as "scratched" on the "status of entries" list (like all the other 1500m provisionals) but, yup, he somehow wound up on the start line for Heat 1.
Abdi was also listed as "scratched", didn't stop him from running.
Yes, that's good stuff.
Here is what "someone in authority" (not Chaplin) told Garry Hill of T&F News:
There were enough A-qualifiers (USATF A, not WC) to fill the field. Since that was the case, there was no need to invite any B people, and no invitations were ever issued.
Subsequently, some A-people scratched, leaving the field shy. USATF did not (says my source) then invite any B's. So nobody was left hanging.
Of course this is not true, I can see from the status of entries page that they took the first person with the USATF B standard.
I would like to know why they "scratched" the provisional, declared athletes that didn't get into the meet?? This something new, here are the status of entries from the trials in 08 where there are clearly athletes left pending
http://www.usatf.org/events/2008/OlympicTrials-TF/entry/status.asp
Where is the transparency, USATF??? It's clear to me that the scratching of provisional athletes occurred in response to the initial uproar over this men's 800 in an effort to hide the truth from the public, so it would be difficult to tell who wanted in and didn't get in.
PRETTY SKETCHY!
howsaboutit wrote:
I would like to know why they "scratched" the provisional, declared athletes that didn't get into the meet?? This something new, here are the status of entries from the trials in 08 where there are clearly athletes left pending
http://www.usatf.org/events/2008/OlympicTrials-TF/entry/status.aspWhere is the transparency, USATF??? It's clear to me that the scratching of provisional athletes occurred in response to the initial uproar over this men's 800 in an effort to hide the truth from the public, so it would be difficult to tell who wanted in and didn't get in.
PRETTY SKETCHY!
Their reasoning was: "That was done at the instruction of the committee to communicate to all "pending" athletes that they will NOT be added to the field."
Never seen that done before
Knowing a couple of the runners who were "on the bubble", some assumed that they would take 32 like the women. Would make logical sense: 3 rounds, 8 in each heat, cut the field in half in the prelims and then again down to eight in the semi's for the final. Seems logical. Then they heard from a number of coaches that they would take 30 over the weekend before. Tickets were bought and they waited for final word on Sunday and Monday - no word until Tuesday that they would only take 27 and would not replace any late self scratches even though it was somewhat widely thought that Torrance would scratch.
No explanation, no rationale, no reasonable explanation except that's the way it was going to be. Why on earth would you take 27? For what possible reason? Is consistency and common sense too much to ask for? This leaves a bad taste in many- bad for the sport, bad for motivating up and coming runners. This year's prelim or semi failure can be next years finalist. Also makes reasonable complaints of capriciousness at the very least and corruption at the worst. I fully understand the need to make sure that the top - elite runners are fully considered but does that mean creating unevenly loaded heats and restricting others who were hundreds or tenths of second behind? Can't say anything but poor, awful job by those who were responsible for putting the 800 together for this year's Nationals!
My sense is that they never intended to allow any provisional athletes into that event, and a few people were simply deluding themselves. When they planned a field size of 30, that was when there were people like Wheating with standards. When those athletes withdrew, there were so many quality athletes in the competition with "A"s, there was no need to allow lesser athletes in to fill slots. Fully understandable that they didn't let any provisional athletes in.
Want to be included? Train harder next year. This is a National Championship meet and the objective is to select the team for the World Championships. Period.
This isn't like "Gouchergate" of a few years ago, when Goucher was placed AHEAD of people with faster quals.
coach d wrote:
My sense is that they never intended to allow any provisional athletes into that event, and a few people were simply deluding themselves. When they planned a field size of 30, that was when there were people like Wheating with standards. When those athletes withdrew, there were so many quality athletes in the competition with "A"s, there was no need to allow lesser athletes in to fill slots. Fully understandable that they didn't let any provisional athletes in.
Want to be included? Train harder next year. This is a National Championship meet and the objective is to select the team for the World Championships. Period.
This isn't like "Gouchergate" of a few years ago, when Goucher was placed AHEAD of people with faster quals.
I don't agree with anything you said- and you are consistently one of the most annoying posters at letsrun.
Thanks.
Fine - if that's true why not just tell folks that's what you are going to do - rather than list that you "may" add provisionals to fill out the list and leave folks guessing until the day before races begin. Should or should not get a ticket, find housing, travel across the country. Be straight and consistent - that's all - not something extravagant to ask for. If you were treated this way Coach D you would pissed too and have a right to be.
I just don't get what the USATF was doing here with the 800's.
If the goal is simply to identify the 3 qualifiers for the Worlds teams, they could have a tighter A standard, only take 16 athletes and run only two rounds.
If the goal is replicate the three rounds of the WC's, as others have pointed out, those rounds will be full heats, so USATF should have taken 32 for the men like the did for the women.
If the goal is to make sure the races and qualified athletes are truly competitive, they went about it backwards with the men and the women. The 2:05.00 A standard for women was nearly six seconds slower the 3rd qualifier, while the men's A was just over three seconds slower than Jock's 3rd place. And yet only one B was taken for the men while six B women were taken "...for competitiveness" as the USATF says in their guidelines. I cannot see how the women's races were made more competitive but taking comparatively less accomplished athletes than the men who were sent home.
The biggest question is: Why is this subjective at all?
And I can't come up with a good reason. Our sport is about exactness and precision. You don't arrive at a meet wondering if we're going to run 750, 800, or 820 today. Our current system seems designed to the maximize arbitrary of the committee.
Here's what I'd suggest instead.
- When the A and B standards are published, publish the field size as well.
- When deciding the field size, fill all the damn lanes, in the name of both competitive equity, and in the name of getting more people into the meet. The competition in the men's 800 was not improved by having 5 empty lanes in the first round.
- Allow additional athletes to come to the national meet as alternates if there are late scratches so the lanes are full.
More people in the meet means more food sales, more ticket sales, more hotels paid for, more everything. An official was quoted earlier in the thread as saying if they accept more athletes into the meet that means more free tickets for athletes and coaches. Hey, genius official, the people you don't accept into the meet don't come anyway and buy tickets - they stay home. As do their coaches and families, and other supporters.
Come on USATF, do better. Please.
Does anyone know of any rule allowing Abdi in? Is there a special clause that states that any athletes that run for nike can enter any race they want, even if they are are running poorly and have not hit the qualifying standards? Maybe, does anyone know? Maybe is it called the Adam Goucher rule?
Shorten USATFs to a 3 hour TV meet in New York and Los Angeles every other year with finals only. Use the BCS computers and SOS software to determine the seeds. No more Nike cheating letting Goucher and Hasay sneak in.
Man this entire thread makes me want to puke. What a mess it must be to be one of the 1:47 B-standard guys. I feel really bad for them and wish we could throw out these corrupt cronies.
nomc wrote:
Can someone explain why Chaplin even cares to exclude the bottom 3 guys? Did they fail to bribe someone? Behind on membership dues? I understand special treatment for stars but this doesn't make sense.
Because he thinks they are second-rate hacks who have no business being at the USATF meet. He's equating 1:47 guys with joe jogger. Man, what a piece of sh!t.
One thing is for sure: USATF is rightfully getting a lot bad publicity for something completely avoidable. Their behavior will only erode athletes' level of commitment.
The USATF needs to change its ways. The entry process should be clear and conducted in a professional manner. For the 800 guys, it is pathetic what happened. Also, I don't see how Abdi getting in the 10k getting in the 10k when it seems he has not met the standard is acceptable.