MatthewXCountry wrote:
BOHICA wrote:
Exactly ?
1. No that is wrong. A 2:42:55 marathon translates to a 4:22.56 1500m using Purdy, a 4:34.67 using V02 max and 4:29.02 using the Cameron method.
2. The field size is limited to a very small nnumber of participants on the track which makes qualifying to these events harder.
And the Olympic trials qualifying standard for the 1500 is 4:06
CaptainRunnerPants wrote:
acookrunner wrote:
The Staten Island half does not sell out months in advance.
It actually did sell out towards the last week of July, 2019 (race is in Oct.) but NYC competitive teams get a few spots a week before if any race is sold out.
Then pick another race. NYCRuns has races every weekend.
She ran in the Nike next shoes. Thus ran a non assisted effort time of 2:54.
Why does this story have to be controversial at all? We don't have to blame her, her coach, USATF, or Houston. We don't have to be sticklers for the rules. It's 2020. There is an appeals process for reasons like this. It looks like she made a good attempt to be moved up. USATF can be the hero here & avoid this PR mess. She ran 2:42, comfortably under 2:45:00. There will be people lining up with times slower than what she ran. I just don't get the strong opinions against letting her run. The sport is better with USATF getting out of its own way & giving this runner a chance to compete at the Trials. It would have been a lot better if they made that choice earlier.
Lauren Fleshman has done absolutely nothing as acc rep on USATF . Women, not helping women again.
Ignorant fool wrote:
dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:
They went to the line knowing that they would require an exception to qualify and they didn't at least talk to USATF to ask what will happen with a gun time 10+ mins off.
You must be an idiot, to presume and post such nonsensical rubbish.
I presume
a) they knew gun time was used for qualification. it is right on the site. Would any athlete trying to qualify not look up the requirements?
b) that they knew the second wave gun time was 10 mins slower than the first. You would see that by looking up prior years results. Again given the explicit mention of qualification being based on gun time, how can you be confused.
I am assuming that if they called USATF and had someone go on record saying she would be ok, they would mention that.
Which one of those assumptions do you think isn't reasonable?
NERunner053 wrote:
Why does this story have to be controversial at all? We don't have to blame her, her coach, USATF, or Houston. We don't have to be sticklers for the rules. It's 2020. There is an appeals process for reasons like this. It looks like she made a good attempt to be moved up. USATF can be the hero here & avoid this PR mess. She ran 2:42, comfortably under 2:45:00. There will be people lining up with times slower than what she ran. I just don't get the strong opinions against letting her run. The sport is better with USATF getting out of its own way & giving this runner a chance to compete at the Trials. It would have been a lot better if they made that choice earlier.
Yeah, no, she ran a 2:42+13 minutes.
acookrunner wrote:
Yeah, no, she ran a 2:42+13 minutes.
Wrong. She ran a gun time of 2:42:55, and the Houston Marathon added 11:59 to that time.
How can you know she ran using someone else's bib? How on earth could somebody find this sort of information?
to be more specific wrote:
Is this girl trying to break every major road racing rule as a newbie road racer... while expecting everything to be handed to her? She needs to learn some etiquette and hard lessons.
Racing with someone else's bib? Congratulations Linda, aka Erin:
https://results.nyrr.org/event/19SIH/finishers#g=F&page=1Erin's Strava:
https://www.strava.com/activities/2785846603This result would have qualified her for the elite/A corral at Houston, but she stupidly ran with someone else's bib.
Trying to get into the elite/coral A, 2 months out, when Houston has clearly stated procedures? Does she not read? She could have easily run a sub 1:25 half to get bumped up.
Then, does her and her coach not process what "extremely close" in the USATF guidelines means? 13 minutes isn't extremely close. The rules shouldn't be bent for her.
This whole thing is stupid. This athlete and her coach are learning some hard lessons.
Er... wrote:
How can you know she ran using someone else's bib? How on earth could somebody find this sort of information?
She posted public Strava results of the Staten Island Half, but her name doesn't show up in the results. However, the woman who came in first for all women and 3rd overall is a picture of this girl, wearing someone else's bib.
NYRR's troglyditic race management doesn't permit official bib transfers to their sold-out (Staten Island Half) event, which clearly encourages the sort of bib swaps they prohibit.
But to run with someone else's bib and strongly affect the competitive result - NOT COOL.
Linda Blanken ( 1:18:53, 3rd OALL ) has now been removed from the 2019 NYRR Staten Island Half results and Erin's corresponding Strava run also appears deleted.
Her missing out on the OT is a comedy of preventable, self-inflicted errors. She didn't need to have this come down to either relying on the generous seeding or a precedent-setting appeal.
NERunner053 wrote:
I just don't get the strong opinions against letting her run. The sport is better with USATF getting out of its own way & giving this runner a chance to compete at the Trials. It would have been a lot better if they made that choice earlier.
You overstate, as well. The few people paying attention will have forgotten all about this by March 1. It makes zero difference to "the sport," sport.
Those 229 women followed the rules. Those 229 women didnt go into their qualifier race expecting USATF to bend the rules for them. The story changed when she knew beforehand she would have to appeal. They didnt submit strava times in a race they wore another runners bib at.
agree and disagree wrote:
I agree whole heartedly that she was not going to make the team. But there are 229 women in the field that also are NOT going to make the team. Those 229 women all have a slower marathon time than her. As a timer of races, Houston absolutely should have pushed the button on a second gun time for the B corral...it IS a separate race.
This is crazy
There have been women who ran the trials standard, on legal, certified courses, at races that were not USATF sanctioned, and did not get into the trials for that reason.
This seems to fall in a similar category. It's not enough to run the time; you have to do it in the prescribed fashion.
Ernest wrote:
Linda Blanken ( 1:18:53, 3rd OALL ) has now been removed from the 2019 NYRR Staten Island Half results and Erin's corresponding Strava run also appears deleted.
Her missing out on the OT is a comedy of preventable, self-inflicted errors. She didn't need to have this come down to either relying on the generous seeding or a precedent-setting appeal.
Although Linda Blanken has apparently now been removed from the list of individual finishers, she continues to be listed as the first-place award winner of the 25-29 age group, with the time of 1:18:53:
https://results.nyrr.org/event/19SIH/runnerAwardsThere's much about this story that's troubling to me, but not because of any allegedly improper decisions by anyone acting on behalf of the Houston organization or USATF.
NERunner053 wrote:
She ran 2:42, comfortably under 2:45:00. There will be people lining up with times slower than what she ran. I just don't get the strong opinions against letting her run.
There's a certain type of moral midget who thinks that following the rules, even in situations where the rules are doing harm rather than good, is a sign of character.
BraveyNation brought to you by Champion wrote:
800 dude wrote:
How exactly does chip timing facilitate course cutting?
Happens in lower levels all the time, that's how Marathon Investigations came to be, sussing out people who cut the course between timing mats to get a BQ. You are aware that this isn't exactly a rare occurrence, no?
Yeah, at "lower levels" where you're also finishing deep in the pack and where nobody has any incentive to look at your intermediate splits. Most people get caught because they accidentally run so fast that they garner a little attention. OTQs all get attention.
BraveyNation brought to you by Champion wrote:
Basically because it's easier to game chip timing from deep in my the pack than it is to game gun time up front.
I don't see how there's much of a difference. The reason course cutters mostly get caught is because they record weird intermediate splits and don't appear in race photos, not because someone sees them step on or off a course. It would be exceedingly difficult to cheat your way to an OTQ from anywhere in the field. Not only will your splits in the race get scrutinized, but your other race times, your Strava, etc. And USATF doesn't have to bother doing this. The running public will notice a suspicious OTQ.
800 dude wrote:
NERunner053 wrote:
She ran 2:42, comfortably under 2:45:00. There will be people lining up with times slower than what she ran. I just don't get the strong opinions against letting her run.
There's a certain type of moral midget who thinks that following the rules, even in situations where the rules are doing harm rather than good, is a sign of character.
Please explain how following the, very simple and easy to meet, rules harm this woman? She knew what the requirements were to get into the trials and failed to do what was necessary to meet them. I doubt that she just woke up one day two weeks out from Houston and suddenly realized that she had an OTQ time in her and it was a mad scramble to try to get into the first coral at a qualified event.
Even if she was a 2:20-something instead of 2:43 marathoner with a chance of making the team, would we really want somebody who takes such an attitude toward getting things right on the Olympic team?
Raggedman wrote:
800 dude wrote:
There's a certain type of moral midget who thinks that following the rules, even in situations where the rules are doing harm rather than good, is a sign of character.
Please explain how following the, very simple and easy to meet, rules harm this woman? She knew what the requirements were to get into the trials and failed to do what was necessary to meet them. I doubt that she just woke up one day two weeks out from Houston and suddenly realized that she had an OTQ time in her and it was a mad scramble to try to get into the first coral at a qualified event.
Even if she was a 2:20-something instead of 2:43 marathoner with a chance of making the team, would we really want somebody who takes such an attitude toward getting things right on the Olympic team?
A review of the USA 4x1 results might say, yes.