Update: USATF WILL honor the order of finish at Trials for those who have broken 2:11:30

I think we can live with this. Slower than 21130 won't be a medal contender, even in bad conditions. Actually no US men will contend for a medal, barring something crazy.

“Update” meaning you didn’t bother to wait for clarifying info in the first place. More of the terrible journalism that we’ve come to expect from you, Rojo. Should’ve listened to Gault

I don't have any problem with what we wrote or how we did it. Authors don't have to wait 48+ hours for comment to publish an article. The initial article included exactly what USATF's document stated and included disclaimers like "may", "based on our interpretation" and "it appears".

I'm not in the habit of giving USATF the benefit of the doubt. I am happy the felt a little heat and an urgency to clarify this stuff ASAP. I also want every possible scenario to be discussed in detail so there is no ambiguity or lawsuits after the fact as was the case 4 years ago.

It's not my fault they published a poorly written document that is still creating questions even after they emailed us clarification.

This stuff has been going on for 20+ years. Back in 2003, they either changed the qualifying window or qualifying time for the 10,000 at USAs after it had open. Weldon wrote them and was like, "You can't change things after it's started - let me in the field. They let him in but only after one of them said something like, "Why do you want to get in, it's not like you are going to do anything." Weldon ran like the race of his life and got 4th.

USATF has consistently shown over the year whether in 2003, Pan Ams in 2019 or this that they don't really care about the guy potentially scrapping on the team. We do. It's their DREAM.

If we cannot we must be terribly frail already.

Great News, Top 3 Go, Very Simple keep subjectivity out of it, let it be dedided based on race results not decisions by people, A Meritocracy is ALWAYS better

Thanks for this update rojo. The first USATF response is very confusing (and embarassing). The second response is clear, but conflicts with the rules they published. USATF should publish an update to their rules if they expect to be taken seriously.

Of course 2:11:30 is only 23 seconds faster than the WOMEN’s world record so it seems reasonable to expect a time that fast out of MEN, as many of you trans obsessed folks are always telling us that MEN are superior athletes, and they seem to be…

I realize it's just a hypothetical, but burrito boy isn't sniffing top 3 at the Trials so no need to worry about this case.

My point is that the USATF rules don't say that at all. You can

flipsnack.com

2024 Olympic Games Men's and Women's Marathon Athlete Selection

Flipsnack

Flipsnack is a digital catalog maker that makes it easy to create, publish and share html5 flipbooks. Upload a PDF or design from scratch flyers, magazines, books and more.

Open link

if you don't believe me. It clearly states that there are two and only two ways to be a "Qualified Athlete": run 2:08:10 or be top 64 on January 30 (or top-5 at a platinum label). And it clearly states they will only select Qualified Athletes to the team.

Again, I'm just reading the USATF's own document. I'm glad they said they won't do it. If we can all just admit that these rules are incoherent and/or ridiculous, and if the USATF publishes an official correction, I'll be glad to move on. But the athletes and fans deserve clarity.

When you say "USATF has told LetsRun", exactly who from USATF? And have they spoken with the people who created the selection criteria document? Because they sure don't seem to be on the same page.

Ineptitude at USATF is expected and disappointing. It's rather astonishing that they haven't yet recognized the opportunity to improve their communication effortlessly. They could simply drop their press releases into ChatGPT, provide some additional context, and ask, "Is there anything confusing here?" This would undoubtedly result in significantly clearer and more effective communication, and it's truly baffling that they haven't seized this straightforward solution.
It's almost emblematic of the leadership under Max Siegle that even the most basic tasks, such as articulating selection criteria, become convoluted and require further clarification due to their inability to convey information clearly. The recurrent mishaps and constant blunders only underscore the need for a more competent and effective leadership within the organization.

Aarti Parekh, who is the head of communications for USATF, is the one who emailed us. I believe she coordinated with someone who created the selection document before responding.

I appreciated her/USATF's efforts to respond to us and bring clarity, and I do think it's good that USATF is trying to honor the order of finish at the Trials. But I agree that the selection document as-written is confusing at best, contradictory at worst.

i do think that the u.s. could have a runner in the top 15. i really believe this is possible.

With all the fast marathons, there’s no excuse for America to have less than 50 people under 2:11:30. The fact that finding 3 guys is difficult is pathetic. What are these guys doing? Do they just love to train and don’t like racing and competing? If someone doesn’t meet the standards, who cares about order of finish. They aren’t good enough and shouldn’t be allowed to qualify. Simple as that. It happens every year on the track in one event. Someone places top 3 and they don’t have the standard so the 4th placer goes instead. People need to plan better. If you think you can make the team, get over to Europe in one of the many 2:01:00 races. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket at some hilly US marathon and hope to run under 2:11:00.

If you run 2:11:30 or even a bit faster, you should not and cannot go to the OG!

They rules were pretty clear. You had to struggle and do mental gymnastics to come to rojo conclusions.

As far as the people who haven’t run 2:11:30, they are not qualified athletes. I don’t think they can be sent even if we wanted to. We have 2 slots right now where we can send anyone who has run 2:11:30 and we expect to get a 3rd. I don’t think we have anyway to send a 2:11:31 guy…

we can argue that these 10k/marathon qualifying times are a bit too high but I am sure they have done the math on what they need to do to limit field sizes. They don’t really need a 3rd subelite guy from a developed country.

I seem to be in the minority, but I don’t know how I feel about this. Right now, the only reason the US has two spots instead of ZERO is because of Mantz and Young. Shouldn’t that matter in some way?

Maybe the rule could be that at least one spot must go to a qualified athlete? it would still mean that trials matters (qualified athletes still have to either finish top three or beat the other qualified athletes), with the slightest hedge toward the established performers. And there would be a huge incentive for athletes to qualify. You’d better believe there would be a third spot locked up by now if doing so meant you only need to beat two other guys to make the team.

Ok, but then 2:11:30 should be the trials qualifier. Why let anyone slower in the race?