Charlotte Purdue explains why British Athletics "threw her under the bus," lawyers up

Disko Eric wrote:

I didn’t read any of that, but I do recall her raising a stink about the 2019 Doha Marathon. She started finger pointing after she dropped out. It was tough conditions for anyone. Then she started blaming other people. Bad form.

I’m a massive Purdue fan, but I agree, her comments after Doha were very ordinary.

interesting https://www.google.com/

Multiple athletes were given medical exemptions not to run the trials, so there is no reason this means she would be selected off the back of this.

She told BA she was not healthy enough to run the trials.. then after not being selected states she is fit and just completed one of her best workouts! Obviously some bending of the truth here.

If she was so fit she should have run the trials. She made the gamble of not running the trials, assuming she'd be selected.. but with a DNF rate like her's, including at Doha WC, this must have worked against her.

Twell has started 3 marathons and completed 2. PR =2:26:40

Purdue has started 9 marathons and completed 6. PR = 2:25:38

Yea I'm trying to figure out how upset to be. So she's a minute faster, didn't run the Trials (with an exemption which doesn't guarantee team selection), but wasn't picked. That's the problem with having a selection committee that doesn't have to go by the Trials, PB, or world rankings. They seem close enough that picking either would have made sense.

What do you do now? A lot of pros seem to be flocking to Purdue but do you tell the other woman she is out now after telling her she's an Olympian? This is all sorts of awkward.

I think they, and other countries, just need to revamp how they choose the team. Take away committees who make arbitrary decisions. Send full teams to events even if they might not be medal threats. BA is a joke in a lot of ways. I'm just not sure this is their most glaring miss. It's not like Purdue is an obvious medal threat. A 2:25 marathoner coming off of an injury might not be in 2:25 shape. That's something that factors in with this decision making process.

Stephanie TWELL

ATHLETE PROFILE

800 Metres 2:02.58 Watford (GBR) 15 JUN 2016 1117

1500 Metres 4:02.54 Letzigrund, Zürich (SUI) 19 AUG 2010 1185

One Mile 4:25.39 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 09 JUL 2017 1153

3000 Metres 8:40.98 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 15 JUL 2016 1170

5000 Metres 14:54.08 Boudewijnstadion, Bruxelles (BEL) 27 AUG 2010 1175

10,000 Metres 31:08.13 London (GBR) 06 JUL 2019 1185

5 Kilometres 15:32 London (GBR) 05 SEP 2010 1129

10 Kilometres 31:55 London (GBR) 27 MAY 2019 1164

10 Miles Road 53:52 Portsmouth (GBR) 24 OCT 2010 1114

Half Marathon 1:08:55 Houston, TX (USA) 19 JAN 2020 1173

Marathon 2:26:40 Frankfurt (GER) 27 OCT 2019 1166

Charlotte PURDUE

COUNTRY

Great Britain & N.I. Great Britain & N.I.

DATE OF BIRTH

10 JUN 1991

800 Metres 2:14.52 St. Peter Port (GBR) 28 AUG 2006 917

1500 Metres 4:19.13 Bedford (GBR) 28 JUN 2009 1057

One Mile 5:10.44 London (GBR) 06 AUG 2005 846

3000 Metres 9:11.54 Cork (IRL) 17 JUL 2012 1067

5000 Metres 15:23.40 Cardiff (GBR) 28 AUG 2010 1118

10,000 Metres 32:03.55 Palo Alto, CA (USA) 29 APR 2012 1136

5 Kilometres 16:17 London (GBR) 13 SEP 2009 1044

10 Kilometres 32:10 Dublin (IRL) 15 APR 2012 1150

15 Kilometres 52:18 Nijmegen (NED) 15 NOV 2015 1038

10 Miles Road 53:45 Portsmouth (GBR) 30 OCT 2011 1118

Half Marathon 1:08:23 Marugame (JPN) 02 FEB 2020 1186

Half Marathon 1:08:10 * South Shields (GBR) 08 SEP 2019 1183

Marathon 2:25:38 London (GBR) 28 APR 2019 1176

Personally I prefer Twell, despite being slightly older, for her far more impressive track credentials but some people may think that’s the wrong assessment.

Wake me up when team GB has some world class distance runners.

Coe must go wrote:

Wake me up when team GB has some world class distance runners.

This.

I don't know what's going on with uk athletics but really 2.25 and 2.26 in 2021... really who cares? Where is the talent identification. How is this newsworthy?

There actually is very good evidence that Piasecki has never run a full marathon.

On the race website, there is a course map and a list of the streets that make up the course. By comparing those with the Strava posts from top 10 finishers in the race, you can clearly see that everyone missed out the loop around Mercato Di Sant'Ambrogio that they were due to take in at around 36.5 km. That leaves the course ~120m short, which equates to around 26 secs at 2.26 pace

If you don't believe me, check for yourself:

https://www.strava.com/activities/2887502110

http://www.firenzemarathon.it/en/marathon/course/

So all things being equal, Purdue should have been the fastest of the three athletes vying for election, not the 2nd fastest.

Hey Crying,

Not to speak on her behalf and I don't know if you listened or watched the entire interview, granted it is long, she said that British Athletics medical staff told her not to run the Trials. And she also said that she was planning to run it up until one week before.

So, I don't think she said, "I am not healthy enough." It appears that they said, "you are not healthy enough."

With the medical exemption and being told not to run it and having incorrect information supposedly about current training volumes. I see that they made the decision with the wrong information. I don't think she sees Twell and I don't see Twell as a poor choice, but if you tell an athlete, "don't run" and they continue to work on her for recovery then you have an issue.

Exemption from the trials does not mean you are selected.

It just means you are not ruled.

She has not raced for over a year.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Exemption from the trials does not mean you are selected.

It just means you are not ruled out

She has not raced for over a year.

I don't think anyone (or I missed it) suggested that she is an automatic or guaranteed entry to the team with the exemption.

Maybe it sounds like that, as you are not the first person to respond in this way.

What I see is BA medical staff telling her not to compete as they help her to get over her injury to prepare for Tokyo as well as her having the exemption, meaning that they can't hold the non-participation against her.

Her position didn't change after the trials, she was still the second-fastest qualifier and besides the auto qualifier who ran the trials, Purdue based on the written criteria, et al should have been selected. However, who knows, right?

We will however apparently find out tomorrow (Tuesday) as that will be the five days that BA has allowed themselves to respond as to why......

One oddity of this: Purdue is funded by British Athletics on the "podium potential" track. Piasecki isn't. You might have thought that BA would back the athlete they've invested money in

I’m curious about what, if anything the BA selectors did re checking Piasecki’s 2nd half Florence splits, linked somewhere else on Letsrun MB, which included a PB HM by about 40 secs (even though Kms 21 to 25 were slower than her HM PB pace); a split from 30k to 40k of 33.05, and a split from 35 to 40k of 16.15 – which is the same pace as her 10k PB and extrapolates to mid 2.17 marathon pace. I realise this may have been her first race in carbon plate shoes but it’s still a major change of gear.

I love Charlotte Purdue. She is the best teammate and training partner I have ever experienced.

I will personally guarantee that they did not consider in the slightest random message board comments about whether a race from 2 years ago was slightly short or not.

The splits themselves, which are the official race data from a WA Bronze label road race. Not what anonymous people on a poisonous MB might say about the splits.

Coe must go wrote:

Purdue ran 2:25:38. She is the fourth-fastest British marathon runner all-time.

If that is true, the standard in uk atletics is weak, let's be honest.

Just as fast as everyone the US is sending to the Olympics, with PBs of 2:25, 2:26, and 2:28!