From today's RWOL, Allen Steinfeld says the following:
"More importantly for American hopes at the Olympic marathon, Glusac and Runyan achieved the Olympic "A" standard - meaning they would only have to finish in the top three at the Olympic trials to run in Athens."
Is that true? Kristy Johnston had the "A" qualifier in 2000 and finished 2nd at the Olympic Trials, yet she did not go to the Olympics because the winner of the Trials did not meet the aforementioned IAAF "A" standard.
Yes, Mr Steinfeld failed to qualify his statement that the trials winner must also have met the "A" standard for the 2nd & 3rd place finishers to go to Athens. (At least I didn't see where he qualified his statement.)
DougC wrote:From today's RWOL, Allen Steinfeld says the following:"More importantly for American hopes at the Olympic marathon, Glusac and Runyan achieved the Olympic "A" standard - meaning they would only have to finish in the top three at the Olympic trials to run in Athens."Is that true? Kristy Johnston had the "A" qualifier in 2000 and finished 2nd at the Olympic Trials, yet she did not go to the Olympics because the winner of the Trials did not meet the aforementioned IAAF "A" standard.
I might be wrong about this, but aren't the three A qualifiers five to ten minutes ahead of the rest of the pack? As in: who the hell is going to beat all three of them? I know there are always anomalous performances and that's why they run the race ... but this time there are three waaaaay out in front of the rest. There, I probably just doomed them.
This is a pretty confusing issue and the worst case is what happened to both the men and women in 2000 - the winner of the trials didn't have the "A" qualifier. The trials winner always goes the the Olympics.
Now, if Deena, Marla and Milena remain the only three to have "A" qualifiers, they will all go if one of them wins the trials. So, if Deena wins, Marla is 10th and Milena is 15th and nobody else has run under 2:32, the three of them are off to the Olympics. There is a small window after the trials and before the Olympics where the 2nd and 3rd place finisher can try for another sub 2:32. Then they would secure their spot in the Olympics.
Now, if someone could answer these questions - Do you have to run the trials to go to the Olympics? If Deena, Marla and Milena have their "A" qualifiers and nobody else runs sub 2:32 before the window is closed, can they go to the Olympics if they missed the trials? Can someone that finished out of the top three at the trials run another marathon and go to the Olympics if they run a sub 2:32 after the trials? (Assuming 2nd and 3rd place don't have an "A")
Wouldn't it be easier just to have three women run really fast at the trials?
My understanding is that yes, finihing the Trial race is a pre-requisite for making the Olympic team. To answer the previous question, it is entirely possible that someone without the "A" standard could win; just look at 2000. You can also earn the standard in the Trials race itself, but conditions in 2000 were not favorable. KK, for example, may need to finish top 3 depending on who is in front of him. SB Runner posted a good summary of different scenairos. Trying to run another sub 2:12 or 2:32 after the Trials is a possibility but very difficult due to a lack of quality races in that time span.
"More importantly for American hopes at the Olympic marathon, Glusac and Runyan achieved the Olympic "A" standard - meaning they would only have to finish in the top three at the Olympic trials to run in Athens."
So, this statement is not true. They don't necessarily have to finish in the top three at the trials.
Correct?
hmmm ... that's an interesting question ... say Deena wins, Marla is 5th, and Glusac DNFs, but nobody else gets under the "A" standard. Obviously Deena goes. And Marla goes b/c she's got the A standard. The third spot would be a "freebie". No one else could use it ... I don't see why Glusac couldn't go, but i'm sure there'll be a 300 post debate over it ...
is not, is too, is not ...
SBRunner wrote:
"More importantly for American hopes at the Olympic marathon, Glusac and Runyan achieved the Olympic "A" standard - meaning they would only have to finish in the top three at the Olympic trials to run in Athens."
So, this statement is not true. They don't necessarily have to finish in the top three at the trials.
Correct?
Correct. AND, they are not assured of going to the Olympics even if the do finish in the top 3. Take Kristy Johnston's example in the 2000 Olympic Trials. She had the "A" qualifier and finished 2nd - but did not go to the Olympics because the USATF guaranteed the race organizers that the winner would go to the Olympics, no matter what.
Hypothetically, a runner without the A standard could win the Trials, and Deena could finish second, Marla third and Milena fourth. In that scenario none of our A qualifiers would be allowed to go - only the winner.
It's not so hypothetical since it happened twice in 2000.
For more than one to go to OG, all would have to have the A.
This is how I read it:
The trials winner has dibs.
- If the winner has the A, the first 3 A finishers make the team
- If the winner has the B but not the A, only the winner makes the team
- If the winner has neither the A nor the B, the first 3 As make the team
Hope this helps.