Should USATF Let Webb into the OT 5000?

First, as long as there are standards, they only work if the system is followed. Second, if this is open for discussion then make Webb a true Cinderella story (you know, if TV ratings are more important than competition). If the USATF is willing to entertain letting a provisional candidate in over others with better seeds then give them all a shot...here is a way how. This is not about making London but rather Webb making the 5,000.

There are 17 athletes declared for the 5000 with OT "A" standards right now and 4 athletes with OT "A" standards lacking current declarations (plus one OT "B" scratch making the total in question 39 (with 17 provisionals pending with OT "B" standards). Say those 4 athletes declare that leaves 21 with +3 "B"'s for the Qualifying round on June 24th leaving Hassan Mead 13:33.42, Yosef Ghebray 13:34.34,and Dan Lowry 13:34.49 as the likely picks. If all 4 unheards don't declare and it goes to +7 "B"'s add Girma Mecheso 13:34.83, George Alex 13:35.27, Trevor Dunbar 13:36.86, and Forest Braden 13:37.90 as well. Bash all you want but this is the most likely circumstance right now assuming 24 in the field on the 24th(If you go by the numbers).

Now lets say all that means little right now, the point is it leaves from 14 to 10 provisional athletes left out (with Webb being the slowest at 13:49.70, over six seconds from the second slowest provisional qualifying standard).

It the USATF thinks Webb is the real deal, feel he deserves to be in the field, and want to give him a shot, add a provisional race on Day 1 (June 21st) and despite if 10-14 (after completing the field of 24) are in the running take whatever number puts the qualifying round field on day 4 (June 24th) at 30(+6 assuming at least that many provisionals are game). The USATF can then decide who makes the final on day 7 (June 27th) which they say the target is 12-16 athletes from the race of 30 at this point.

If Webb wants to drop the 1500 to add the 5000 make it fair to the guys he is trying to skip, if it was me I would want to race it out(this is for the Olympics for Pete's sake). If he can handle the impressive doubles make him handle 3x5000 over 7 days if this is what he wants to do, plus it give those other guys a shot without the USATF picking favorites. If he can't make it out of the provisional race how is he supposed to make the London 5000 team. I personally like Webb and support him but make him earn it, if not stay in the 1500(which still has 3 races in 4 days on days 7,8, and 10). And of course add +1 to the 1500 first round assuming Webb would drop out.

Or they could save all this trouble(and future trouble when this starts happening more)and not allow it, could get rid of the standards, or Webb could stay in the 1500 which most people would rather see anyways. ONCE AGAIN, this does not concern making London, just the USOT 5000. Dont start in on Olympic standards or race predictions( we all have our opinions, that is why we are here and not what I care about, start a new thread on race predictions if you want). This is just a suggestion on meet format ONLY to make both sides happy.

status of entries:

http://www.usatf.org/events/2012/OlympicTrials-TF/entry/status.asp

OT schedule:

http://www.usatf.org/Events---Calendar/2012/U-S--Olympic-Team-Trials-TF/Schedule.aspx

Yams wrote:

Another important point that everyone has failed to bring up is whether its the USATF's job to find the fastest team for the Olympics. I think this is what they should do.

Um, you might want to read the original post, which said "To me, this depends on the deeper question of whether the goal is for the USA to select the best Olympic team OR select our Olympic team in the fairest way possible. "

Personally, I disagree that their job is to assemble the best possible Olympic team - if so, you'd have provisions for top people who got sick the week of trials, or had short-term injuries, and probably automatic selection in some events. For example, if you wanted to assemble the best US decathlon team, you'd just tell Clay, Hardee, and Eaton, "okay, you're on the team" and spare them the stress of the trials and the possibility that a no-height could knock one of them off the team, when they are clearly the top 3 US guys.

But do you really want to hand more power to the USATF administrators? That kind of power? I sure don't. We can see from the example of other countries how messy it gets, and how politics take over. Settle it on the track. Injuries and illness may not be "fair" but they are definitely part of the sport. As is, everyone knows what they have to do to make the team - top 3 at Trials plus Olympic A standard.

So like I said in my original post, I would prefer to see the most fairness in team selection even if that means fewer medals. Personally, I think it fits better with the (intended) spirit of the USA to be able to say that we have the most objective and "equal opportunity" method of team selection possible, even if that costs us a few medals. But I see how others could feel differently, which is why I thought it might make for an interesting thread.

Thus far, it looks like they are not promoting ANY B qualifiers (provisional). In that case, Webb is SOL.

Two words: Adam Goucher

When those people become a national champ and American record holder, than they should be admitted as well. Last I checked, no one else on the provisional list have the past accomplishments of Webb and therefore, should not be allowed in. They aren't getting screwed over. If they would be upset it would be because they are jealous that an exception was not made for them too.

There is a big difference between being screwed over and being jealous that an exception was made for another, more exceptional, athlete who has done far more for this sport than they have to date.

Its called an exception for a reason. Nothing anyone else has done on the provisional list would warrant an exception.

I'm not sure how that is not clear.

I do believe he should be let in, but at the same time he had plenty of opportunity to run sub 13:33, so nobody should shed any tears if it doesn't happen.

I'm shocked by how many people think Webb should be let in because of his past accomplishments. His last significant past accomplishment was in 2007. That was a lifetime ago. And that wasn't in the 5000m.

I doubly shocked by how many people think he should be let in for marketing reasons. Marketing reasons is no way to select an Olympic team, including the participants in the trials. Otherwise we would let "ridiculously photogenic guy," Dean Karnazes, and the Chilean miner into the Trials.

If they let him in, he will scratch and not even show up. I think the USATF should call his bluff.

If they let Webb in, they'll have to let Fam in the steeple (because he's a past Olympian). If they do that, by the same logic, they should let Goucher and Broe into the 5k.

dasfadf wrote:

If they let Webb in, they'll have to let Fam in the steeple (because he's a past Olympian). If they do that, by the same logic, they should let Goucher and Broe into the 5k.

They can let Gerry the Jogger into the 10k, that would be awesome!

dasfadf wrote:

If they let Webb in, they'll have to let Fam in the steeple (because he's a past Olympian). If they do that, by the same logic, they should let Goucher and Broe into the 5k.

They can let Webb in because it will add to media interest in the 5000m. Unless someone can point out a set list of criteria for approving an appeal.

interesting article by Scott Douglas from 2008

http://runningtimes.com/Print.aspx?articleID=13776

Trials and Stipulations

An in-depth look at the Olympic Trials start list controversy

By Scott Douglas

As featured in the Web Only issue of Running Times Magazine

The U.S. Olympic trials process is fair and straightforward—place in the top 3 and have the Olympic “A” standard, and you’re on the team. Athletes and fans from other countries regularly praise the American system for removing politics and preferential treatment, cronyism and corruption from the mix. But what if the process for deciding who is on the start line isn’t as clear-cut?

That question arose during an otherwise magnificent Olympic trials in June and July. In the distance events, there were several instances where decisions about who was let into the meet appeared more arbitrary and capricious than straightforward and easily comprehensible. With the U.S. Olympic Committee threatening USATF with decertification as the national governing body of track and field, athletes’ claims of a lack of fairness, transparency and accountability took on extra weight. That was especially true with the trials being held in Eugene, Ore., where Steve Prefontaine is revered, in part, for his battles with one of USATF’s predecessors over athletes’ rights.

Although certainly not yet of Prefontaine’s caliber, Blake Boldon is a middle-distance runner who has placed in the top 10 at three recent national championships. At the outset of the trials, he was seeded 27th in the 5,000m field; USATF stipulated a minimum field size of 24. Because fields in the event had been expanded soon before races at other national championships, including the 2004 Olympic trials, Boldon spent $1,500 to be in Eugene to appeal to be added.

LOL ---all 50 of them. Webb broke a junior record in a country with mediocre distance running. That is his

only real claim to fame. Losers need to get off this jock. How this mediocre athlete is even the subject of discussion on these boards beats me.

WhatYo wrote:

When those people become a national champ and American record holder, than they should be admitted as well. Last I checked, no one else on the provisional list have the past accomplishments of Webb and therefore, should not be allowed in. They aren't getting screwed over. If they would be upset it would be because they are jealous that an exception was not made for them too.

There is a big difference between being screwed over and being jealous that an exception was made for another, more exceptional, athlete who has done far more for this sport than they have to date.

Its called an exception for a reason. Nothing anyone else has done on the provisional list would warrant an exception.

I'm not sure how that is not clear.

Parker Stinson won the 10k at the USATF Juniors last year. He has a more recent national title.

Anyways what if you were #25 on the list and your goal was to qualify and run and you were this close and in steps a guy who hasn't sniffed the time and someone grants an exception to him based on a time he ran x number of years ago. Oh and by the way he also skips over 10 other guys. That is bull shit.

What if one these guys was your athlete? You go in knowing the rules and the standards and the next thing you know is that the rules really only apply to the B level guys.

I am an Alan Webb fan but I also like fairness and following the rules and guidelines that are laid out. I am just as much a fan of these other guys as Webb and I feel that if he gets a chance than these are guys should be given the proper chance.

I think Webb beating Rupp at that road 5k and running mid 13s is enough accomplishment and that was a lot more recent than 2007.

When do we find out who's in the 5000?

Still doesn't seem clear to me who's even officially entered in the 10,000 which starts Friday. Thanks

TrackCoach wrote:

5. Webb will not be outclassed or dilute the quality of the races becasue he is w/o a doubt good enough to compete with most of the athletes who met the standard.

6. Webb is a mutiple times national champion and he deserves to be thrown a bone.

Ok, suppose Lagat went out and ran the steeple earlier in the year on the whim and recorded a time of 8:50. Now he decides he wants to compete in the trial in this event. Wouldn't reasons 5 and 6 in your post (above) also apply?

Yet I think most posters calling for Webb to be allowed in the 5K would not want Lagat admitted in similar circumstances. It just seems like if you open up events to athletes in which they haven't met the qualifying standards based on past performance or potential to compete it could make a shambles of the whole process.

I think it really just comes down to a lot of posters follow Webb's career and are personally interested. Maybe the USTAF should allow a "fan favorite" to be voted in for each event.

I think they should let Webb in. His 3:37 kind of qualifies him for the 5,000 sort of like how a 10k time qualifies you for the marathon trials in this particular exception / loophole. The cool thing about track and field being such a small sport is that everyone knows everyone and there can be a human element rather than blind bureaucratic rule following.

I think a lot of people were fairly confident that Webb could have run the OT standard in Indiana. I know that is not the same thing as actually running the standard, but I think a lot of people saw the direction and magnitude of the vector that is Alan Webb this season.

bangalangadanga wrote:

I think they should let Webb in. His 3:37 kind of qualifies him for the 5,000 sort of like how a 10k time qualifies you for the marathon trials in this particular exception / loophole. The cool thing about track and field being such a small sport is that everyone knows everyone and there can be a human element rather than blind bureaucratic rule following.

I think a lot of people were fairly confident that Webb could have run the OT standard in Indiana. I know that is not the same thing as actually running the standard, but I think a lot of people saw the direction and magnitude of the vector that is Alan Webb this season.

Maybe I'm just dense here, but a lot of people have run 3:37 or faster this year. Wouldn't they all be be "kind of qualified" as well?