in the know? me too wrote:
Patrick Euwing wrote:So Kevin says the "B" is meaningless , because of your fitness "it was just a given". So Athletics Canada will keep the B requirement because it will make the Team stronger ?
Exactly.
??? is the only logical reaction to these contradictory arguments.
Kevin and "Um, yeah" say it's nothing to pick up the repeat B once you have the A, but can't seem to explain why it should then be kept as a criteria. Can't be both "easy" for A-qualifiers and likely to improve the team beyond the A standard.
I don't know that I needed to explain why it should be kept as a criteria. I was not speaking from AC's point of view, just that of an athlete. If I am complaining about having to run 3:38:00 when I've already run 3:35.50 then I am stressing needlessly or seriously not confident in my ability. Look at Nate this year. His focus was solely on 'A' standard. He missed it the first couple times out but in the process nailed his 'B' standard. And if he had hit is 'A' standard his first time out, it's not like he be not racing the rest of the summer. Unless he ended up injured after the 'A' standard there would only a minuscule possibility of him not hitting a 'B' at some point before he needed to.
The fact of the matter is in all my years in this sport I have seen only a handful of occasions where and athlete who made 'A' standard was unable to at least put up a 'B' standard. 'A' standard athletes aren't worried about making a 'B.'