Wrong wrote:
Look at the results to see the previous standard allowed careers to continue to pursue a dream. Many of the Hanson's were between 2:20-2:21 before progressing at or under 2:18-2:19.
This about keep the Olympic flame alive and not extinguishing a dream. Sorry, you cannot understand the importance of the matter.
I also was "between 2:20-2:21 before progressing at or under 2:18-2:19." And before that, I was a 2:23-2:24 marathoner. And before that, I was a 2:30-2:31 marathoner. And before that, I was a 2:33-2:34 marathoner. And before that, I was a 2:39-2:40 marathoner.
Don't tell me that I "cannot understand the importance of the matter." I dare say that I worked a lot harder and gave up a hell of a lot more pursuing that "dream" than most of the people who are whining about this. When I suggest that some of those people might consider redirecting some of their energies to other parts of life, I'm speaking from personal knowledge and experience. I'm not saying that my own choices in pursuing athletic goals were wrong for me, but anyone who doesn't consider the trade-offs involved in pursuing such goals is doing himself a tremendous disservice. This is life, and you only get one shot at it, so make sure that you're making intelligent choices. That's all I'm saying.
I really don't care whether the trials standard is 2:18, 2:19, or 2:20. I might have chosen 2:20, just to avoid some of the criticism and hate mail. But the truth is that, no matter what the standard is, there are going to be a number of guys who would like it to be a couple of minutes slower so that they can get in, ideally without sacrificing more than they already have in pursuing that dream. That's completely understandable, but just be honest about it. Don't pretend that a 2:19 trials standard is going to undermine the future of American distance running.