Does this make sense to anyone?
With that reasoning, why not allow 800m or 1500m times qualify you for 5000m or 10,000m standards? Or 100m times earn you a spot on the 200m line?
It undermines the marathon as an event. USATF needs to wake up and get this ridiculous rule changed.
I forget exactly what the standards are but I think that it is around 13:20 for 5k and sub 28 10k and this only gives you a Bstandard too.I guess this is to encourage the best distance runners in the country to give the marathon a shot, Although most people that are running under 13:20 like Goucher, Teg and Etc are probablly going to stick to that.
actually its 13.40 and 28.45
allowing quite a few more runners the opportunity to choose which trials distance they would prefer.
USA distance runner wrote:
It undermines the marathon as an event. USATF needs to wake up and get this ridiculous rule changed.
How exactly does it do that?
This is not the start of some mass, alterative qualification program for all events. None of the other situations you listed are about to happen. The marathon is unlike all the other running events in that it is a mass start, with no heats so there are few (if any) logistical problems with this rule
So what's wrong with it? Very often we have seen great 5000 and 10000 meter guys go on to great debut marathons. Is it so far fetched to believe it might happen again? It's not like the 5k and 10k standards are easy.
Besides, it's not the Olympics we're talking about, it's the trials.
why not? the marginal cost of adding another runner to the olympic marathon trials is almost zero - not true in other events
USA distance runner wrote:
Does this make sense to anyone?
With that reasoning, why not allow 800m or 1500m times qualify you for 5000m or 10,000m standards? Or 100m times earn you a spot on the 200m line?
It undermines the marathon as an event. USATF needs to wake up and get this ridiculous rule changed.
It is probably a good rule but it came about for the wrong reasons.
THE NYRR WANTS IT.
The NYRR demanded that it happen so that they could have guys like Hall and Torres and Ritz (who had not run a marathon at the time) run in "their Olympic Trials". They then refused to move "their trials" from November to March because March would make it difficult for these same runners to run a track season.
They're letting me in because of my long jump skills...
I fancy myself to be a pretty good Halo player, and I hope to get good enough by the end of this spring to qualify for the Olympic Trials in the marathon based on that. If I can get 4 Killimanjaro's in a row right now, do you think that kind of improvement in that time span is reasonable? I picked it up recreationally 4 ago, but really only started training seriously in the last year. I'm a 22 year old male, about 5'6 and 130 lbs if that helps.
If Mary Wittenberg see's it as beneficial to the NYRR, then you are in.
I think it is fine to allow someone to qualify for the marathon trials with a 5k or a 10k (or a Half for that matter) so long as the standard is obviously much harder than a 2;22 marathon. I don't think an alleged "equivalent performance" should do it but one that so far exceeds a 2:22 that it seems obvious the aspirant could run a 2:22 without much effort. I don't think the stiff standards are really going to increase the marathon field by much.
They had the same standards in 2004. Are the people that are complaining, just mad because they're not talented enough to qualify off a 5k or 10k? Scared some track guy is going to come in & beat you in his debut?
Obviously the Birmingham people were forced to implement this provision by Mary Wittenberg.
jois wrote:
I fancy myself to be a pretty good Halo player, and I hope to get good enough by the end of this spring to qualify for the Olympic Trials in the marathon based on that. If I can get 4 Killimanjaro's in a row right now, do you think that kind of improvement in that time span is reasonable? I picked it up recreationally 4 ago, but really only started training seriously in the last year. I'm a 22 year old male, about 5'6 and 130 lbs if that helps.
That makes sense since the correlation between being a good Halo player and a good marathoner are about the same as being a good 5k/10k runner and a good marathoner are. If you are going to try and be "cute" or "funny" on a message board, at least have some logic behind your post.
Sad Sack wrote:
Obviously the Birmingham people were forced to implement this provision by Mary Wittenberg.
There was no 5k or 10k standard in Birmingham. That was created by Mary and the NYRR.
Find us a 13:40 or 28:45 runner who can't run 2:22, then get back to us on that.
USA distance runner wrote:
Does this make sense to anyone?
With that reasoning, why not allow 800m or 1500m times qualify you for 5000m or 10,000m standards? Or 100m times earn you a spot on the 200m line?
It undermines the marathon as an event. USATF needs to wake up and get this ridiculous rule changed.
USA distance runner wrote:
Does this make sense to anyone?
With that reasoning, why not allow 800m or 1500m times qualify you for 5000m or 10,000m standards? Or 100m times earn you a spot on the 200m line?
It undermines the marathon as an event. USATF needs to wake up and get this ridiculous rule changed.
Perfect sense on several fronts.
A good 10K runner might be willing to run the Trials marathon but not want to mess up his/her training for the 10,000m. This gives them another avenue to run the marathon where he/she could be successful.
Also, it could make for a faster race so that 3 runners get the "A" standard and the US does not send 1 marathoner to the Games.
I think it is a good change to open it up a bit. Zatopek's first marathon was the Olympic marathon---the rules most certainly were different in those days. It could be a boon to getting faster runners into the marathon.
Although I have no issue with allowing people to qualify off a 5k or 10k, people who do have enough of a point to not make the complaint unreasonable. Without even looking it up I could think of at least one person who has run the 10k standard but when he tried did not run 2:22. There is a big difference from physically being capable of 2:22 and actually doing it.
Patrick Gildea - 28:38 (2005)
Now I guess that will not get him in because it was 2005, and I think he will EASILY run 2:22 in plenty of time before the trials - BUT the marathon is a creature unlike any other race and for some reason many people just never get it.
I really like that USATF is letting people qualify on the track. I personally would really rather a spring trials but I think a fall one will allow a lot of track guys to run the race and help us get the best team possible while not forceing guys to sacrifice there chances at making the team in the 5k or 10k. I do think we are screwing any chance of an american running well at the 07 worlds in the marathon.
As to the NYRR, ya this totally benifits them but that doesn't mean it screws anyone else. They have more money then God, but they pump it into running. Maybe if I or you had the money we would do different things with it but thats the choice you get to make when you have the money. They really do a lot for american distance runners and they basically just get shit for it.
I think by haveing the fall marathon trials and allowing track times they are going to get a lot of runners who might otherwise not try a marathon for five or six years or maybe wouldn't ever. I think drawing better guys into the marathon is a good thing and maybe a few will find they have a talant for it. That said this will be a brutal course to debut but you can't have everything.
It makes plenty of sense.
The Trials are in fall 2007.
You let proven talented distance runners debut at the marathon Trials completely oustide of their track season.
This allows them to develop on the track in 2007, have a crack at making the marathon team and then focus on the 2008 track season if they don't make the marathon team.
If they make the marathon team then that certainly proves their marathon ability and allows them time to train for the marathon for The Games.
There is no need to do this for track events since you can frequently race the other events without really bothering your training/racing scheduling.
I don't see how this undermines the marathon as an event. If you want the qualifying for the marathon Trials to be so precious then lower the standard to 2:15 to be in line with the other events.
I am in favor of the current set up that allows greater participation but still has some level of difficulty to get in.
Just a thought, but what of the track runner that actually makes the marathon team and then keeps everybody hanging for another 9 months while he decides which (if any) events he decides to do in Beijing? Probably the least of our problems.