Japanese Olympic Marathon Trials Standards Announced- Want to make the Trials? You'd better run a sub 2:11

New Start Thread

wejo

cofounder

2 years ago 12/23/2017 8:07am CST

Back To IndexForum Index

Japan is going to an Olympic Trials Marathon race in 2020.

And to show how good the Japanese are at the marathon to get into the Trials you pretty much need to run sub 2:11 in the marathon as a man or sub 2:29 as a woman (at one hot weather marathon the standard moves to 2:15 but you still have to be top 3 Japanese). The standards aren't straightforward as the Japanese federation is making sure there is tons of interest in their Japanese marathon tv broadcasts so you still have to finish high in those races. As for the Trials race itself, it's not just top 3 across the line automatically make the team.

http://japanrunningnews.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-mgc-6-inside-2020-tokyo-olympic.html

Thoughts?

Anyone know how many US men would have made the last Trials if the standard was 2:11?
lorde

registered

2 years ago 12/23/2017 8:39am CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

Ritz, Meb, Jeffrey Eggleston, Ryan Vail, and Luke Puskedra are all the sub-2:11s in the Trials window.

Obviously Rupp doesn't make it since he debuted at the Trials.
Victor Alexander

registered

2 years ago 12/23/2017 10:03am CST
re: lorde

Back To IndexForum Index

Pretty much exactly the standards as they are in The Netherlands, for example. (It was 2:10 for London 2012 even). I don't find it that strange... Especially as it seems the Japanese have at least 3 runners who can actually run sub 2:11.
Not the trend

2 years ago 12/23/2017 10:37am CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

That's insane considering marathon times are getting slower. sub 2:11! Canada wouldn't have anyone on the team.
Kvothe

registered

2 years ago 12/23/2017 11:26am CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

I bet this generates a lot of interest in running Berlin and London from top Japanese runners. There is a huge incentive to finish first - not just top 3 - at this trials as the 2nd or 3rd place runner then has to run another fast marathon at one of the 6 final challenge races. This could be good for an athlete like Kawauchi though who likes to race all the time.
The Land of Rising Sun.

2 years ago 12/23/2017 12:06pm CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

If you are going to have an Olympic trial, limit the field to those who have real chances to make the team. That makes sense unless you think racing a marathon with 12 people is awkward.

this and this

2 years ago 12/23/2017 2:54pm CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

Japan has a long and proud tradition in the marathon.

They likely want to send Olympic Marathoners that actually have a chance to medal, and not just to take part.

This system improves the odds of sending athletes that are tested and proven.
Hardloper

registered

2 years ago 12/23/2017 2:58pm CST
re: Victor Alexander

Back To IndexForum Index

Victor Alexander wrote:

Pretty much exactly the standards as they are in The Netherlands

Except it's not at all like the Netherlands because the Netherlands does not even run a trials race
Meme me.....

2 years ago 12/23/2017 3:04pm CST
re: The Land of Rising Sun.

Back To IndexForum Index

The Land of Rising Sun. wrote:

If you are going to have an Olympic trial, limit the field to those who have real chances to make the team. That makes sense unless you think racing a marathon with 12 people is awkward.

Not if you run it on a track.
douglas burke

registered

2 years ago 12/23/2017 4:33pm CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

wejo wrote:

Japan is going to an Olympic Trials Marathon race in 2020.

And to show how good the Japanese are at the marathon to get into the Trials you pretty much need to run sub 2:11 in the marathon as a man or sub 2:29 as a woman (at one hot weather marathon the standard moves to 2:15 but you still have to be top 3 Japanese). The standards aren't straightforward as the Japanese federation is making sure there is tons of interest in their Japanese marathon tv broadcasts so you still have to finish high in those races. As for the Trials race itself, it's not just top 3 across the line automatically make the team.

http://japanrunningnews.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-mgc-6-inside-2020-tokyo-olympic.html

Thoughts?

Anyone know how many US men would have made the last Trials if the standard was 2:11?

According to Tilastopaja 37 USA Men have run under 2:11, The 1000th fastest Marathoner PERFORMER is 2:10.17 and the USA has 21 Men in the top 1000, Japan has 94 at 2:10.17 or better.

Also 27 USA Women have run under 2:29:00
Master Po

2 years ago 12/23/2017 4:51pm CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

Japan has adequate depth in long-distance running, plus lots of popular interest, to make this possible.

Obviously, no nation has anything near the depth of Kenya and Ethiopia. This year, 15 Japanese men have run sub-2:11. Nine more have run 2:11:xx, and 11 have run 2:12:xx. But the depth really shows in half-marathon numbers. While 'only' 7 men have run sub-1:02, 43 have run 1:02:xx, and 111 have run 1:03:xx. (These numbers are for performers, not total performances.)

Some of those half-marathon performers are also on the marathon list, but in any case that is a large pool of distance talent to generate a competitive OT race with much more than a handful of runners.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Sara Palin

2 years ago 12/23/2017 8:51pm CST
re: Meme me.....

Back To IndexForum Index

Meme me..... wrote:

The Land of Rising Sun. wrote:

That makes sense unless you think racing a marathon with 12 people is awkward.

Not if you run it on a track.

I think it would still be awkward. It would, however, be neat if somebody got lapped, and then came back to win.

vivalarepublica

2 years ago 12/23/2017 10:51pm CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

These qualifying standards make no sense. I need like a table or something to break them down.
Tough standard doesn’t equal success

2 years ago 12/24/2017 1:10am CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

How many medals did they win in 2016? Tough standards do not translate to success or development at the elite level.
Sdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdf

registered

2 years ago 12/24/2017 1:43am CST
re: Tough standard doesn’t equal success

Back To IndexForum Index

I thought there was an IOC rule that your trials qualifying standard could not be more stringent than the Olympic standard? Does that not apply to the marathon?

I know that some years the US ended up with more than the targeted 24 at trials in the track events because of this rule. For example, the men's 100 usually ends up with more than 24 making the auto qualifyer.
wisenheimer at work

2 years ago 12/24/2017 2:30am CST
re: Tough standard doesn’t equal success

Back To IndexForum Index

Tough standard doesn’t equal success wrote:

Tough standards do not translate to success or development at the elite level.

i think sub 2:11 is a good standard (if a country wants to produce competitive athletes and not olympic tourists).

i remember that in germany the standard was 2:12:15 at first for rio. only one athlete (arne gabius) was fast enough at that time, all the others failed, in one case a runner performed a 2:12:50. a big talk arose in the media, a lot of compassion. one argument was that championship races usually are not fast. as if an athlete, having very hard times to run a sub 2:15, would have a great chance to outpace the whole world elite in a quite "slow" olympic race. the standard was lowered to 2:14.

long story short, 210 runners performed in the year 2017 a sub 2:11.
Mid D Guy

2 years ago 12/24/2017 8:35am CST
re: wejo

Back To IndexForum Index

It all boils down to the purpose of the Olympic Trials. If the only purpose is to select people that may have a shot at medalling, then, sure, go for a 2:11 standard.
In the US, however, the Olympic Trials are much more than this. They provide a goal for the best amateurs runners to shoot for and, by doing this, they contribute a lot to promote the sport or running. Training with your local elite that is aiming at an OT qualifier is much more inspiring that reading about Galen Rupp training on an online forum. 80% of the people cares for the Olympic trials race because they know somebody running in it, even if he/she does not have a chance to actually finish top-3.

Dropping the standard from 2:19 to 2:11 won't magically create many more 2:11 marathoners, but will actually discourage many 2:2X guys from even trying to get an OT qualifier.
800 dude

registered

2 years ago 12/24/2017 9:40am CST
re: Mid D Guy

Back To IndexForum Index

Mid D Guy wrote:

It all boils down to the purpose of the Olympic Trials. If the only purpose is to select people that may have a shot at medalling, then, sure, go for a 2:11 standard.
In the US, however, the Olympic Trials are much more than this. They provide a goal for the best amateurs runners to shoot for and, by doing this, they contribute a lot to promote the sport or running.

Actually, the most obvious reason to have a trials race is as a competition in its own right to see who gets the honor of representing their country. If that's the object, then anyone capable of placing top three in the trials should be included, not just those who could place top three in the world. I loathe the trend of national federations treating anything other than winning medals as worthless.
Dingler

2 years ago 12/24/2017 11:27am CST
re: Sdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdf

Back To IndexForum Index

Sdfsdfsdfsdfsdfsdf wrote:

I thought there was an IOC rule that your trials qualifying standard could not be more stringent than the Olympic standard? Does that not apply to the marathon?

I know that some years the US ended up with more than the targeted 24 at trials in the track events because of this rule. For example, the men's 100 usually ends up with more than 24 making the auto qualifyer.

USATF rule not IOC rule.
reader of articles

2 years ago 12/24/2017 11:38am CST
re: vivalarepublica

Back To IndexForum Index

So far 5 men have qualified and 1 woman.

http://www.mgc42195.jp/mgc/wild-card.html