Breaking: 2020 Olympics qualifying will be focused on world rankings, not hitting a standard. How will this impact USA?

That same sentence you bolded appears in the qualification specs for 2019 Worlds.

Won't really know the practical significance until the Worlds entry standards are published, which is supposed to be November 1 upcoming.

We do know that the entry by rankings is a residual category after wild cards and entry standards. The question is how large the residual will be.

The rankings used as qualification for Doha will be those in effect as of September 6, 2019, with the meet beginning on September 28.

It will not be easy to know where an athlete will finally rank until all info is known. Post-September 6 will be rather late for selecting a team, certainly for the US system, so I'm skeptical of how far this idea will be pushed.

Not much changes wrote:

I doubt much will change with U.S. qualification. It will still be first three past the post who have a ranking that gets them in the WC/OG.

Whether it affects U.S. qualification depends completely on how high of a ranking an athlete needs to be eligible for the Olympics. If it's anything less than 100, in the distances at least, the number of athletes with a good enough world ranking to qualify for the Olympics would undoubtedly be smaller than the number who can hit a given time standard once. If it's the top 200, or 500 or 1,000 or something, then maybe it would make it easier to make an Olympic team for a second or third tier athlete.

sanchobaile wrote:

Not much changes wrote:

I doubt much will change with U.S. qualification. It will still be first three past the post who have a ranking that gets them in the WC/OG.

Whether it affects U.S. qualification depends completely on how high of a ranking an athlete needs to be eligible for the Olympics. If it's anything less than 100, in the distances at least, the number of athletes with a good enough world ranking to qualify for the Olympics would undoubtedly be smaller than the number who can hit a given time standard once. If it's the top 200, or 500 or 1,000 or something, then maybe it would make it easier to make an Olympic team for a second or third tier athlete.

From the description in the 2019 Worlds qualifying pdf, this isn't how it will work. Rankings are a residual category after entry standard qualification.

The significance of the rankings is going to depend on whether entry standards remain at the same historical quality level or are toughened. We'll know November 1.

I understand making increasing entrants for the marathon- I've always felt that each nation should get 1, then maybe a B standar to get 2 more and an "elite" standard to get unlimited.

But the 10,000 on the track- unless they go back to semi finals-the standard would have to be VERY tough to get.

The discussion and speculation surrounding qualification for world level meets has been taking place since Coe and the IAAF introduced the ranking concept a year or so back.

The PDF that acompanies the release you pasted does include some additional detail on qualification (including field sizes), but what remains unclear is how the IAAF language and guidelines will be imposed at a championship like the US Trials.

At this point, managers, coaches and athletes in the US do not seem to have a level of understanding as to how the points system will function.

Hopefully USATF will weigh in soon on the path to the Olympic Team, although we may all have to wait until after the annual meeting in December.

I'm guessing those entry standards will be much more difficult than the old ones, similar to how the world indoor chmps offers an outdoor qualifying performance that is much much harder than the indoor one (to allow for medal contenders to qualify who may have had an injury etc). For the 800m the time might be something like 1.44.5 would be my guess

Rojo the text you quoted doesn't really match the title of the thread.

This should have Americans running more Japanese/European races.

gagasfsfadsdf wrote:

Rojo the text you quoted doesn't really match the title of the thread.

Agreed. I clicked thinking he meant no more US Olympic Trials.

This will be a giant shambles esp for the USA with many top three finishers in US trials not having had any or enough ranking comps esp the NCAA athletes.

Standardized wrote:

The discussion and speculation surrounding qualification for world level meets has been taking place since Coe and the IAAF introduced the ranking concept a year or so back.

The PDF that acompanies the release you pasted does include some additional detail on qualification (including field sizes), but what remains unclear is how the IAAF language and guidelines will be imposed at a championship like the US Trials.

At this point, managers, coaches and athletes in the US do not seem to have a level of understanding as to how the points system will function.

Hopefully USATF will weigh in soon on the path to the Olympic Team, although we may all have to wait until after the annual meeting in December.

I doubt much will change with U.S. qualification. It will still be first three past the post who have a ranking that gets them in the WC/OG.

Maybe this means we can only send Rupp and not embarrass ourselves by sending a couple 2:13 guys.

It won't change anything with USATF-- if they have the IAAF standard time and finish top 3 at the Trials they qualify.

rojo wrote:

The 2020 Olympic track and field action starts in exactly 2 years.

The IAAF put out an interesting release today. I've bolded the last sentence below as it's the one I'm wondering about.

the IAAF wrote:

Athletes can qualify in one of two ways:

• By virtue of their IAAF world ranking position at the end of the qualification period.

• Achieving the entry standard within the qualification period.

Entry standards will be approved and published later this year, but will be set for the sole purpose of qualifying athletes with exceptional performances unable to qualify through the IAAF world rankings pathway.

Anyone know how this will play out? How would it impact say the third American distance runner - maybe one who doesn't run often on the international circuit?

If they have the standard and top 3 at the trials it’s still the same.

The change may be if they are ranked in the world but fail to make top 3 at the trials(bad race/injured). Would they be able to make it so more than 3 athletes make it???

We need to preserve the sanctity of the Olympic Trials and national championships. I'm all fine for having some sort of rankings points to encourage athletes to compete vs each other during the year.

But if the US has 3 guys with great rankings and someone comes out of nowhere to get top 3 at the Trials they should be on the team. That is best for the sport and the team. They can preserve the international ranking system by letting it be per country. So if US or any other country has 3 people with the ranking points, then they can select any 3 people they want for their team.

20,000 paying fans need to have a simple formula. Top 3 go to the Olympics. Sports are simple and need to be that way for fans. If it's "Hey watch the Olympic Trials and the 7th placer makes the team because they have higher points than the 3rd placer on some arcane formula" that isn't good.

yay for america wrote:

Maybe this means we can only send Rupp and not embarrass ourselves by sending a couple 2:13 guys.

Jared Ward did okay in Rio.

The Olympic marathon standard went from being 2:19 to about 2:14. The IAAF crushing dreams of the sub-elite.

Work Commute Track Club wrote:

The Olympic marathon standard went from being 2:19 to about 2:14. The IAAF crushing dreams of the sub-elite.

USATF won't change their Olympic Trials standards unless it's loosened by the IAAF (hasn't been released yet btw). Sub-elites don't need to worry- USATF won't tighten their standards.

Let's say you need to be a 2:13 guy to be ranked in the top 80 (on a 3 per country basis. which is possible) to be eligible for the Olympics Q.

The USA third place finisher at the trials is a 2:14 guy (unlikely, but hey, it could happen). He doesn't crack the top 80 in the world rankings by the deadline. He doesn't get to go to Tokyo.

The IAAF have potentially changed the US trials system.

By the way, the "standard" outside of the ranking system that will be released in November is for exceptional athletes who are not ranked highly. It will be likely 2:10 or faster. I have had conversations with the IAAF regarding this.