ING Ottawa Marathon, who will qualify for Beijing?

No one

Lioudmila and maybe NicoleS

No one...except for Wykes if he recovered from Rotterdam.

Lioudmila, maybe. None of the guys, unfortunately.

Ottawa can warm up quickly this time of year. I think that if the group of guys stick together ON PACE of 2:14:00 and there is no wind or heat, one guy might be able to do it...

Lioudmila.

I hope Nicole Stevenson is in form and AC selects her. With her Olympic A standard in 04 , and Athletics Canada

determining she would not medal( leaving her at home ) was one of the most mean spirited political acts I have ever witnessed. That being said, I will always consider her an "Olympian" as well as the 1980 boycott group as well.

Best of luck to Nicole and Lauren King , race hard.

V.

Is Wykes racing Ottawa? That's a tough double.

I read an article where he was quoted as saying" olympic dream waiting another 4 years". He is another gifted runner. Nothing but good things in his future.

I only mentioned him because he is the closest to going under along with Danny Kassap, who waits for his citizenship.

I think a comment was added by a reader making it sound like he is running Ottawa. I am pretty sure he is not.

You certainly have a liberal definition of "Olympian".

IIRC, Canada had set standards so it was not like when she qualified they said "Oh it is Nicole, let's not let her go."

Many countries with small budgets have higher standards. It is an interesting philosophy, one I think the USOC should consider.

AC has a history of vague , subjective values in the selection process. Nicole was the current National champ, and achieved her Olympic A Standard. Canada has a history of sending sprinters without any standards and not finishing in the top 3 in the trials.( I think Glenroy Gilbert comes to mind ) You are correct, I like Nicole as a person and respect her competitive spirit so my "olympic " definition of her is pretty biased.

Cheers.

V.

luv2run wrote:Many countries with small budgets have higher standards. It is an interesting philosophy, one I think the USOC should consider.

With my first post to start the thread, I thought I had sucessfully linked to the article. I guess, I hadn't...here it is nevertheless.

http://www.flocasts.org/flotrack/articles.php?id=397

She could always do what this lady is doing...and for the second time.

Now before her her little lapdog PP comes on here to defend her by telling us some sob story about how nice she is, and how it would be a great example for her children, even the one who was hurt in that car accident, let's be clear here. Noone is disputing that. Hey, I've got a question, how well does she know Memo?

http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=84820&cat=1041&fm=newsarticle,nur

I'm running. What is the time cutoff? If I have enough time in the bank on qualifying for Boston maybe I'll put in a surge at the end to get in.

Mark my words... Tara Quinn-Smith will make the team.

Yeah, you're right. Olympic Gold Medalist Glenroy Gilbert never should have gone to the Olympics...

The marathon has been a sore point for years - but to project such a biased opinion is also a joke on your part - unless you are Avery (her brother). Liking someone or not shouldn't enter into the discussion - I like Nicole (even if she thinks I don't). But this is a serious sport, not a recreation! It is NOT the reason for the marathon being poor in Canada. There is NO reason for Nicole to complain about the the standards - her plaintive response being that she would have to break the Canadian record - well the record is a joke in this day and age. Perhaps she should have taken the sport a little more seriously between the ages of 23 and 27, and tried to run faster on the track - as did her peers Kathy Butler (who has run 2h28 and NOT run well as marathoner IMO), Deena Kastor (2h19) and Paul Radcliffe (2h15) - ALL of these women are the same age BTW and not Afrcian or Russian (or whatever, and deemed somehow exceptional)!!! The difference is that they took the sport seriously, she didn't. How do I know? because I (amongst others I'm sure) convinced her (Nicole) to go to the Marathon in the first place - but I never thought that she was very serious about it. So to complain a few years later (as her coaches did as well) just sounded like sour grapes. Nicole is an example of someone whose career was poorly planned - that's what it takes these days to get to a high level. We are talking about a woman who has never broken 4.30 for 1500m, barely under 16 minutes for 5000m and 33 minutes for 10000m - all of which she was more than capable of exceeding - and her peers (see above) managed to do quite successfully. I doubt that Nicole has a chance to make it this year - based on her racing (and injuries) over the past year. I hope that T.Q-S can give it a shot - but then this will be her first marathon - but she might be able to get a "rising star" designation if it goes well. While I applaud Nicole for moving to the marathon, in part it's because she didn't want to run on the track, and she thought that NO one else was doing it - not the most noble of reasons. How do I know? because she complained to me - when Tina C. ran 2h34 and she (Nicole) bombed in her first one (3h08)- that I had said that it would be easy. Hopefully the Brooks Project will get more young women out of College (like L.King) to develop their capacities in the event - as long as they realize that the world has moved on, and that to develop contenders is now different than it was twenty years ago. The focus should be on getting the women to a sub-2h25 level, and therefore somewhat competitive on the world scene, and not to complain that wow they might have to break the now out-of-date CR. For god sakes the 5000m ladies (the late E.Mondor and C.Babcock) managed to break the Canadian 5000m record, which was about the same age, a few years ago - 2003. The depth in ALL distance events (SC to Marathon) needs to be enlarged for the women to be competitive at the world level - as the MD runners have been (Cummins and Douma-Hussar). But lowering the standards (making them easy) isn't the way. Both the men's and women's Olympic A standards (2h15 and 2h37) are a joke as compared with the track standards, IMO. The notion that more athletes can be included doesn't fly - these are championships for serious athletes - if you want to run with 40,000 people run Chicago or London (or whatever).

Vancouver V wrote:

AC has a history of vague , subjective values in the selection process. Nicole was the current National champ, and achieved her Olympic A Standard. Canada has a history of sending sprinters without any standards and not finishing in the top 3 in the trials.( I think Glenroy Gilbert comes to mind ) You are correct, I like Nicole as a person and respect her competitive spirit so my "olympic " definition of her is pretty biased.

Cheers.

V.

>>this is a serious sport<<

This is a sport taken seriously by serious people.

How important is sport? It is a recreation! Some are more recreational than others. Some are more serious than others.

To say a particular athlete did not take their sport serious enough is a fair point and I could not argue with you anyway on her situation.

However, sport is what it is. In this case, a bunch of people running to beat the clock and each other. Or to compete with their own pbs. Not THAT important in the greater scheme of things.

I beleive a governing body of sport needs to take on a role of bringing athletes forward, rather than implementing heirarchy, rules and legaleze (as barriers).

It seems the Corporate sector is stepping in like Brooks, Adidas and Nike. This, where government wants to postulate during the games. They also want to politisize the games and they do, yet they control the money and qualification standards....the people's money.

I think the mantra from the top down and throughout should be 'Everyone is Accountable,'(not just the athlete).

Because sure as heck the goverment wants to be involved in the Olympics, but not for the same reasons the buying public or the athletes do, they are quick to rule on financial matters they have the power to boycott.

Tell me it's not political!

To host the games, costs the public their money, which of course thanks to the Corporate sector, these games are very profitable now, but the government won't spend a fraction of that greater dollar on pulling the athletes along (sorta speak) but will build facilities - sometimes white elephants. They will market the games and as mentioned posture especially during the ceremonies.

As for Nicole running well enough in the past, well now she has the opportunity to 'make show'.

But as not serious as I make 'running alot' sound I also think that if she runs 2 or 5 seconds slow or it's hot and she runs 1 minute slow, this is where, the government needs to pull the athlete along.

Once the Olympic Marathon gun sounds, anything can (and often does) happen.

They are called 'the GAMES' for a reason.