Terrible commentators obscured the fact that Drew Hunter had no chance of making the 10K team

Informative post

I am admittedly not as informed on this as I should be… Is this something mandated by World Athletics? Or is it possible that a country like the US can do whatever with their “unlocked” spots?

For example, if the US had 3 guys with the 10k standard, would USATF be allowed to say, “Ok, we have 3 spots unlocked by X, Y, and Z runner. Now whoever comes 1st, 2nd, and 3rd at trials will go”?

No. It works that way in the marathon, but not in track events. An athlete either has to run a qualifying time or get in based on world ranking.

One problem is that it is not always clear who will get in via world ranking. For example, if Parker Valby finishes second in the 10,000 meters but does not hit the qualifying time, it is unclear to me whether she can run in the Olympics.

I’ve only been a fan of the sport for the past 10 years or so. Has the qualifying process always been this confusing? Or is this relatively new? It does make the trials less enjoyable to watch, feeling like some of the races are glorified fun runs if the pace isn’t extremely quick from the get-go

Oh it used to be way more confusing. They had A and B standards and the team could only be composed of some subset of them depending on finish at USAs. So it was always a question of who was going depending on the order of finish and who had which standard. It was like you could only have one B standard athlete on the team or something like that.

That’s funny. I knew this system was super confusing and was wondering if there was ever a time in “the good ol’ days” where top 3 just went. Nope! Glad it’s more sensical now. I think the more clear commentators can make it at the beginning of each race the better

So, in the marathon Morocco could send their best athlete, El Aaraby, in place of a young guy who hit the standard?

Can a runner not run the standard after the trials? I thought there were always runners in that situation.. or is that just for qualifying for Worlds?

Valby is easily in on world ranking right now even though her 14:52 outdoor NCAA win apparently isn’t being counted, and a Trials top three will boost her even higher. Many if not most of the others will also be boosted high enough with a Trials top three.

I don’t think this is true, that is was “more confusing” before. For the US Olympic team at least, USATF used to ignore the B standard and send the first three with the A standard. For Worlds you could send up to three A’s or two A’s and a B, so you still knew what was going on as the race unfolded. After 2004 USATF said no more chasing standards after the national meet, so we knew who the team was as soon as each race ended. The current system is absurd because we could end up waiting a while to know whether someone makes it on ranking, and because World Athletics wants to promote its rankings system, it has made the standard times ridiculously fast. That’s why we had all of three guys in the 10k with the standard, and luckily they went 1-2-3 so the selection process was simple. Before there was more drama because we’d have 6-8 guys with the standard. This 10k was a fun race for the three standard holders, but ultimately free of drama as to who would qualify.

Which one was the long haired fellow?

Can athletes chase a qualifying time after the trials? Maybe this has been discussed and I missed it, but if so a quick trip to europe for a fast race could solve this issue.

LRC note: Chasing is NOT allowed. The qualifying window ends at the end of the Trials.

The deadline is June 30 in this instance. So in this case, there is no chasing. The 1500 is frustrating because the NCAA guys are probably out unless they run the standard.

Chelimo is still smooth as silk, beautiful mechanics, fun to watch, but is seems like he is not the same runner anymore.....has Father Time finally grabbed him?

In general, I thought that the commentary was poor. There were no lap times given on the screen/broadcast (that I saw) and often the video angle obscured when they actually crossed the start finish line so it was impossible to even take your own splits. And at lest for me, the USATF page for the 10,000 went down/blank and so also no splits there...

Oh and it is 2024. Doing good commentary should be a no briner. Axe Kara and bring back Dwight Stonnes of the British guys who do the Diamond League...

Parker's 14:52 at NCAAs should be included in the world rankings data relatively soon. As I understand, there is a process underway that is verifying the validity of NCAA marks as they relate to shoe protocols. Once Valby (and others) are verified to have worn legal footwear (which she did for the 5k), those performances should be included.

if what you are saying is true, this is exactly the sort of information that the commentators should have provided. For what it's worth I don't think Jonathan Gault would agree with you that many or most of these athletes will make it with a Trials top three. Maybe you are right; I just don't know.

If the deadline is June 30, couldn’t people in the women’s 5k and men’s 1500 and 10000 set up a time trial next Saturday?

hard to run without good competition but not impossible. Money and/or fast teammates could get descent pacing

Honestly, with that crew I was amazed that they even knew who he was, or told the viewers. They don't seem to bother with lots of details.

Yes, I can handle bad commentating, but bad commentating that also insults my intelligence - well, that’s not cricket.