I don't want people to misunderstand my post - there are a lot of really good female runners out there, and a lot who work just as hard as the men (Kastor, Goucher, etc). I'm not hear trying to claim that men are superior, but the truth is that womens running is not nearly as deep and competitive as mens running. There are simply A LOT less women willing to train hard and sacrifice for the trials then there are men and the standard reflects that. I coach a woman who hit the B standard this year. She's a talented athlete but not enormously so (she never broke 18 for 5k in college), and she trains hard, but not incredibly so (she rarely runs over 55 miles a week and it's not uncommon for her to cut short an especially difficult session), but yet she's going to the trials. I'm definitely happy for her and proud of her but I know she wouldn't have had a chance if she were male. And I've met and talked to dozens of other female athletes like her. Women who are close to or qualified for the trials because the standard is soft, and the standard is soft because there aren't nearly as many women racing post-collegiately competitively as men (look at competitive road race results if you don't believe me). On the mens side MOST (not all) of your trials qualifiers are guys who were pretty damn good college runners (nationals qualifers or at least sub 1430 and definitely sub 15 5k guys) and are training a hell of a lot harder than the girls are. Women care less about sports than men.