Honest Question do Texas A & M and Lsu give thier women Athletes Roids more then half of them look like shebeast on Roids :( Nasty and nappy womem.
Honest Question do Texas A & M and Lsu give thier women Athletes Roids more then half of them look like shebeast on Roids :( Nasty and nappy womem.
Ex-AA Swimmer wrote:
Similar thing happened last year in swimming. Cullen Jones and Josh Schneider (teammates) tied for second place in 50 Free at US Championships. The top two qualified for World Champs. They had a swim-off in a Grand Prix meet in Charlotte several months later.
Interestingly, basically the same thing happened to Jones in 2009. He tied for second with Garrett Weber-Gale in the 50 Free with the top two qualifying for the WCs in Rome. They had a swim-off two days later.
(Jones won both swim-offs)
I was originally against a run-off sense both athletes are probably scheduled to head over to Europe every soon to continue there season. Making them run off a few days after the 200m final will most likely make them miss there next competition (or worse risk injury). But if they could set up a race at a meet in Europe (I say in Europe because I am assuming that is where both athletes already plan to be) in the next couple of weeks, then a run-off will work.
Otherwise I would vote for taking the athlete with the best time to date in 2012. Simple and justifiable for qualification purposes.
honest answer: you are totally without class.
pac12fan wrote:
Honest Question do Texas A & M and Lsu give thier women Athletes Roids more then half of them look like shebeast on Roids :( Nasty and nappy womem.
turkeybacon wrote:
I was originally against a run-off sense both athletes are probably scheduled to head over to Europe every soon to continue there season. Making them run off a few days after the 200m final will most likely make them miss there next competition (or worse risk injury). But if they could set up a race at a meet in Europe (I say in Europe because I am assuming that is where both athletes already plan to be) in the next couple of weeks, then a run-off will work.
Otherwise I would vote for taking the athlete with the best time to date in 2012. Simple and justifiable for qualification purposes.
I'll correct myself... Very not every... their not there. Probably some more typos.
Try 'since', not 'sense'.
Dang it.
Deadspin gives LRC a mention and video of race....
http://deadspin.com/5920857/amateur-hour-at-the-us-track-and-field-olympic-trials
Quote from a recent article on NbcOlympics.com:
"Kersee said he understood USA Track and Field (USATF) officials were talking about Olympic 200m silver medallist Felix and Tarmoh doing a runoff by Monday."
Kersee argues he wants to wait until after the 200 m, as others have recommended here.
If two people are tied for 3rd place, the next finisher after them is in fifth place, not fourth. How many fingers do you have? You can always use your toes if you need to.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
The one who finishes next after the tie for third place.
If there is absolutely no way to decide, and the athletes themselves cannot decide, then the default should be that neither go. A coin toss won't resolve anything in the long run, it will just create lasting pain and controversy.
In this case, it would be Knight who would go. She's a good performer.
But I want to emphasize that there is essentially NO WAY it would ever come to that, especially if people knew that's what the ultimate decision would be, they would find a way to resolve the issue.
I haven't read this whole thread, but two classic posts by two letsrun regs deserve special mention:
1) sagarin stating that the tie breaker should go to Felix, because since she had a bad start, she actually ran the race faster! yes, because starts don't matter in a 100.
2) sprintgeezer stating that both felix and tarmoh should be denied a spot on the team because it is too hard to settle who won/deserves to go. In essence, they should BOTH be disqualified from the olympics for tying!
Thank you letsrun.
Real honest answer.Yes.
pac12fan wrote:
Honest Question do Texas A & M and Lsu give thier women Athletes Roids more then half of them look like shebeast on Roids :( Nasty and nappy womem.
Can't wait to see the run off!!!
Greedy Allyson Felix wants to grab the 3rd spot in the 100m, despite having no chance for a medal; while she is a co-favorite for the 200m and leave her 'friend' and training partner out of the Olympic experience? Shame on her.
I challenge you to a rock off!!!
Felix should give up the spot since it would mean less to her.
She's not winning a medal in the 100 and could use the energy in the 200.
Of course she has medal ability in the 400 but chose not to run it.
At least they are both going in the relay.
An ideal schedule at the Olympics for Felix would be:
400
200
4 X 100
4 X 400
She misses out on two attainable medals by not choosing the 400, though they may still place her on the 4X400 since she is Allyson Felix.
turkeybacon wrote:
Otherwise I would vote for taking the athlete with the best time to date in 2012. Simple and justifiable for qualification purposes.
At face value, this seems smart, and often face value is a good barometer of what makes sense.
But I don't think seasonal best is the way to go. Even thought they've got to perform on the day at trials, athletes are at different places in their seasons and best early season time often won't reflect who's best for August. Especially when injuries come into play.
Let's say the men's 100 had gone Gatlin 9.80, Dix, 9.89, Gay 9.90, Ryan Bailey 9.90. (Instead of Gatlin 9.80, Gay 9.86, Bailey 9.93 ... so it's possible.)
Bailey might have the fastest pre-trials seasonal best, but who's got more upside for the games - Gay or Bailey? Bailey is an incredible sprinter and I'm glad he's on the team, but I'd take Gay here.
Ties in horizontal field events go to second-best performance. Since the US system is based on performance over a set number of days, I feel that the rule should state what their second-best performance was(heats). Give third place to whomever ran faster in the heats. I think having a runoff or coinflip is insulting to the sport.
runasfastasucanforaslongasucan wrote:
Ties in horizontal field events go to second-best performance. Since the US system is based on performance over a set number of days, I feel that the rule should state what their second-best performance was(heats). Give third place to whomever ran faster in the heats. I think having a runoff or coinflip is insulting to the sport.
This would be a great idea for the FUTURE, but you can't change the rules during a competition. What if one of these runners in their heat slowed down towards the end because the lead was big enough already?
Flipping a coin is a stupid idea, I would go with season best ...
runasfastasucanforaslongasucan wrote:
Ties in horizontal field events go to second-best performance. Since the US system is based on performance over a set number of days, I feel that the rule should state what their second-best performance was(heats). Give third place to whomever ran faster in the heats. I think having a runoff or coinflip is insulting to the sport.
The sprinters are cruising to the finish of the prelims many times. Not certain, this would be the way to go.
This look different from the other photo with the red and black lines... found on CBS sports:
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/trackandfield/story/2012/06/24/sp-us-olympic-trials.html
zoom in and it appears Felix's bib is being counted as her Torso and Tarmoh still looks to be across first... very generous placement of the line