Lanni ran 2:31 and Can't run in the Olympics!

Amy Hastings ran 2:27 and she can't run in the Olympic marathon

Leonard Shivolitz wrote:

Amy Hastings ran 2:27 and she can't run in the Olympic marathon

^ That comment makes you sound a little ignorant to the American system verses the Canadian System and also the problem in general...everyone who runs our standard before the qualifier at least has a SHOT of running in the Oympics...

The point is the US sends their best 3...and Canada wont even send their best. Maybe if Goucher gets pregnant again and decides not to run Hastings can run, seeing as she is technically the alternate...which she deserves seeing as she came in 4th.

Not ignorant at all. I just don't understand why we should feel bad for a 2:21 marathoner not being included in the Olympic Games.

Standard is 2;29.55 .. she isn't fast enough... oh well?

Leonard Shivolitz wrote:

Not ignorant at all. I just don't understand why we should feel bad for a 2:21 marathoner not being included in the Olympic Games.

Yes, we get it, the USA has lots of good athletes.

I never understand why some countries set higher standards than the official qualifying.

There's a similar issue going on in the UK with Lee Merrien.

At this Rotterdam race, didn't a European woman run 2:27-high and miss her countries standard? Seems a common theme amongst many countries nowadays.

Four years ago we had a similar situation with Eric Gillis. He had run a 10,000 time close to the Canadian Olympic qualifying time, but not quite there. There was quite a bit of debate at the time, and Dave Scott-Thomas, his coach, made a successful appeal to have him selected as a "rising star." I emailed Martin Goulet at the time, because it seemed like the initial decision to leave him off the team was done behind closed doors in a process that wasn't transparent to AC members.

In Eric's case, there was wiggle room. AC had the ability to select him as a rising star, they just chose not to, until being pressed on appeal.

In Lanni's case, I believe the qualifying criteria have no "rising star" for the marathon (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong), which reads like an oversight to me. I don't know all the details of Lanni's career, but I think if there were room for rising stars in the marathon she would likely meet most of the criteria. Her performance profile has improved steadily since finishing undergrad stateside (she was running 16:30-45 for 5k 3-4 years ago), and I don't believe she has represented Canada at major international competitions.

If I'm not mistaken, Lanni and her coach have already submitted an appeal to AC. I don't know what the basis of that appeal would be - the citeria are black and white, and were set well in advance - unless they're trying to get her in as a rising star, working the angle that there should be an opening for the marathon for consistency across the board.

With Gillis' rising star selection, he bombed in the OG 10,000, nearly DFLing, but he has proven the potential to continue to improve, snagging an A+ marathon qualifier this time around. I guess I don't see any reason we shouldn't expect similar from Lanni. Best of luck to her.

SupportLanni! wrote:

For the good of future distance runners, the Canadian Olympic Committee should lower their standards, and give Canadian women something to train for that is on par with the Olympic standard

Agreed, and many people said this back in 2010 when the standards were first released. At that time, top Canadians (most notably Dayna P) made the decision not to pursue the Olympic marathon, as it was very clear what the criteria was: 2:29:55 with no rising star option. The past 2 years would have been very different if the selection criteria was 'sub-2:37 and fill the inbox of AC staff'. This campaign has a very different 'feel' to it compared to what Gillis did in 2008.

Pete wrote:

Four years ago we had a similar situation with Eric Gillis.

Similar, but not the same.

Eric had met the published criteria to be in the 'rising star' pool. From there it was a subjective decision whether to select him.

For the female marathoners, there is no 'rising star' pool and according to the published criteria, they have not met any of the standards.

Whether there should be a marathon rising star is a valid question, although one that would have been more relevant to ask way back when the criteria were first released, not once the qualifying window has closed (April 22/12).

Whether one agrees with the philosophy or not, it appears that AC very explicitly made the decision to write the criteria so that they would not select 2:32 marathoners.

Um, yeah wrote:Similar, but not the same.

True, I wasn't suggesting otherwise. I've gone on the record many times supporting the tough standards AC sets, and I don't think the ladies' marathon standard is any tougher than the men's (maybe the opposite, if just by a hair). AC and Martin Goulet are in a tight spot.... you let her in, you piss off a lot of people who've been left off in the past in similar circumstances, plus you start down the slippery slope of turning criteria into "suggestions." You don't let her in, you piss off a lot of people who think the standards are too tough, and everyone should get to play if they happen to be fastest Canadian, whether or not they are competitive on the world stage. Glad I'm not in AC's shoes...

Leonard Shivolitz wrote:

Not ignorant at all. I just don't understand why we should feel bad for a 2:21 marathoner not being included in the Olympic Games.

Again, I think you are missing the point. No one is saying we should feel bad for Lanni, or anyone else in Canada who does not make the standard, a lot of people feel it hurts distance running to have the standard set like that. So, let's say the US sets the standard at 2:25, and no one runs 2:25, and Hastings runs 2:27...as an American distance runner, I would be upset that we didn't send Hastings, seeing as she is the best marathoner we have, and could finish in the top 20 -- of course, looks like we have 3 better people than her, seeing as they beat her when it counted.

And yeah, this is getting to be a problem in other countries too. Also, if I were going to the Olympics...I would want to know I competed against the best from each country...that just seems like the point of the Olympics to see the best people in each country.

Okay.? wrote:

And yeah, this is getting to be a problem in other countries too. Also, if I were going to the Olympics...I would want to know I competed against the best from each country...that just seems like the point of the Olympics to see the best people in each country.

Unfortunately in this case, Canada hasn't even determined who that is. Giving an Olympic spot to somebody who has consistently lost in head-to-head matchups with other Canadian women over the last 2 years doesn't seem like the correct answer.

good stuff first wrote:Giving an Olympic spot to somebody who has consistently lost in head-to-head matchups with other Canadian women over the last 2 years doesn't seem like the correct answer.

Who has beat her, head to head, in the marathon???

Nobody, that's who. No other event, even the half, compares directly with the marathon, so that point has no particular value in this discussion.

I'm not in favour of easing the standards, but you're coming across like you've got an axe to grind, which I don't think helps anybody particularly.

Pete wrote:

Who has beat her, head to head, in the marathon???

Ummm... Emily Kroshus, less than a year ago, trounced Marchant by nearly seven minutes at the Ottawa Marathon.

As a Canadian, and a fan of Canadian distance running, I am thrilled by the recent results of both Lanni and Krista in Rotterdam. However Athletics Canada has established a given standard for the marathon (sub 2:29:55). That standard has long been known by all athletes and AC should stick by it. They have certain goals in mind with regards to performances and if they feel like they only want to send athletes capable of a "potential top 12" then that is their choice.

Of course I see the value in sending athletes to events like the Olympics for the experience gained but I also see the point in establishing fairly rigorous standards that challenge our athletes and produce excellent (by world standards) results.

Any luck finding Lanni's marathon results prior to the Ottawa Marathon last year? Nope, because that was her debut.

In three races in less than 1 year she has dropped from 2:49 range down to 2:31 range.

Why does Canada have such high standards when they aren't good at running???

SupportLanni! wrote:

Recently, Lanni Marchant ran 2:31 at the Rotterdam marathon (thats five minutes below the olympic standard!), but Canada's standards are set at 2:29 for the women.

Show your support for Lanni - Email Martin Goulet

mgoulet@athletics.ca

Chief High Performance Officer and let him know you want him to let Lanni Run!

_________________________________________________________

Good luck with that, this has been happening since at least Athens (where Canada had 2 women that made the "A" standard but AC decided that 2:28 (under the National Record) was the bar. Goulet is not what you would call flexible on this and it stems from a conscious decision by the COC before Athens to only send "medal potential" athletes with the warped idea that making it "easy" to get on the Olympic team hurt development because athletes would only try to reach the qualifying time and no more. It was a flawed decision then and remains so. There are two ways to get an Olympic caliber athlete - one is hope you get the supremely talented athlete that is revealed early on and providing support for them (think Sheila Reid or Cam Levins.)This is the current model - the other is to provide incentives (such as letting those that qualify on the Olympic team) to a wide swath of good athletes with the idea that one or a few will eventually develop into competitive Olympic athletes (think what ZAP, Hansons, etc are doing and Brian Sell as an example). Ideally you do both, Canada has focused on the former and I don't think anybody can argue it has done anything to help development and depth (college scholarships, another incentive to this athlete, have done far more). Too bad because it leads to deserving people like Ms Marchant to miss out on exceptional experiences like the Olympics with few if any positives to balance that out.

Why should a 2:31 woman be allowed in the Olympics? Should a guy who can only run 1:53 in the 800 compete in the Olympics (besides Semenya)?

I don't see the problem.