When will we know the standards for the 2024 olympic marathon trials?

Standard for entry into the trials is whatever World Athletics calls it (for 2020 it was 2:11:30/2:29:30). After that, fill the field with whatever you want to get the desired numbers (100, 150 or 200).

USATF will need to make a decision on what the standard is for a half marathon, but I’d probably go with top 40-50 from the previous year, with the caveat that it comes from approved established races.

Whoever wins the bid to host the trials should have a say on the field size. Wondering if Atlanta has any regrets about financial hits they took with the nearly 500 women who got into the race.

bump

Thank you for making some sense on what the Marathon trials standards should be.

Whoever wins the bid to host the trials should have a say on the size of the field. I say go with whatever World Athletics decides the standards are, then fill the field until you get the desired number. If you want to roll the dice with a half marathon time, go top 40 on approved courses. I’d also close the loophole on these last minute races that are staged before the end of the qualifying period.

There was a lot of smug responses on this thread. A lot of people with a superiority complex, talking down to specifically semi-pro males, proposing that the male standard needs to be more competitive to get rid of blue collar runners just because they're not going to be contenders at the trials. It's not a participation award to those people, and if you think it justifies you in demeaning them, you're contributing to the toxicity of competitive running.

To respectfully answer your question:

If they change the male standard, it will probably be a +/-1minute change. It will all depend on how they handle the bigger dilemma which is the Women's qualifying B Standard. There was significant difference in the number of Women qualifiers and Men. They will need to change this if they're considering changing the Men's standard.

Hi everyone. I am a sub elite marathoner from Chile. And from a distance, I would like to tell you that you must feel lucky to have an event like the Trials. From my country I followed that race, for all the hundreds of stories of people with normal (non-professional) lives, who most likely were the heart of that event, regardless of who finally made the United States Olympic team (what's wrong how qualifying for that race is a goal or prize in itself?). This race is a great opportunity to massify and give visibility to the sport, in this case through a marathon, so limiting it to a field increasingly limited to runners with real chances of winning, I think it would be a shame. However, I think the female standard should be sub 2.40.

They should keep the standards the same as they were for 2020. Not sure what the point of changing something that is not broken.

just saying... wrote:

They should keep the standards the same as they were for 2020. Not sure what the point of changing something that is not broken.

But it is broken. It makes no sense to have over 500 women and only 200 men. That assymetry is a glaring problem. Either loosen the men's standard or tighten the women's standard. You can't let "trials qualifier" mean vastly different things for men and women.

runnER/DR wrote:

just saying... wrote:

They should keep the standards the same as they were for 2020. Not sure what the point of changing something that is not broken.

But it is broken. It makes no sense to have over 500 women and only 200 men. That assymetry is a glaring problem. Either loosen the men's standard or tighten the women's standard. You can't let "trials qualifier" mean vastly different things for men and women.

That there were a vastly different number of men’s and women’s qualifiers is far from the top of the list of things that are broken about the Trials. But the standards do need to change to reduce the overall number of qualifiers—unless USATF is willing to cover some of the costs. Because if they have this large a field again and the LOC has to foot the bill without additional financial support, USATF may not have any bidders for the Trials at all. (And, quite frankly, they might not have any bidders again even with a substantially smaller field unless USATF commits to giving the LOC additional support.)

That’s what’s broken about the system, folks.

Well the standards have been adjusted. 2:18 for Men and 2:37 Women officially starting the beginning of 2022. It’s more equatable. And if they want to make the trials feel more exclusive then hopefully they can provide a bigger budget for assisting qualifiers with traveling or hotel expenses.

There was a lot of disagreement with the standards. Especially when there was double the Women. The B standard for Women did not equate that well to the Men’s. I’m just not surprised how much they changed the standards. I was trying to hit 2:19 and got a 2:20 right before the deadline almost 2 years ago but I begrudgingly accept that they had to also make the make Men’s B standard faster by at least a minute.