Nick Willis misses World Championships by 1 spot due to four "gift athletes"

pretty dope wrote:

5th Avenue Mile wrote:

Current rankings for Tokyo 2020:

https://www.tokyorankings.com/

Why is Makhloufi listed as an “auto qualifier” for the Olympics?

Why aren't you worried about Zane Robertson having an "auto time" in the marathon?

Because they are the athletes chosen by the country to represent them. No trails planned.

coachkritter wrote:

Why was Nick running a road race when he should have been trying to improve his qualifying time in a track race?

There was nothing more he could do to improve his chances -- the Qualification Period for Doha ended at midnight, Friday, September 6, two days before the 5th Ave Mile.

This. Very surprised they had booked his travel.

Didnt Angie Smit not get selected for 800m despite being ranked in the field on the roll-down list...???

Star wrote:

Nick ran 3:35.25 in September of last year. Sometimes the window goes back to the previous year. I guess not this time.

But the window did go back to September -- it just didn't go back far enough! It opened on September 7, 2018, but Willis ran his 3:35.25 on September 2.

A shame for Willis and New Zealand but he was running poorly for most of the year and never really even came close to getting the standard despite several attempts.

I'm saying he did enough to merit a spot, certainly over 4 non-qualifiers.

zxcvzcxv wrote:

I'm saying he did enough to merit a spot, certainly over 4 non-qualifiers.

It's bad enough that Nick Willis got away with racing sub-3:30 1500m at age 32. Does Willis want to make 2019 1500m World Championship final at age 36 and prove that he owes his career to a special cocktail of PEDs? Willis has poked his finger in the eye of I.A.A.F. long enough. It's time for Willis to get on his horse and ride out into the sunset.

it's bad enough ... wrote:

zxcvzcxv wrote:

I'm saying he did enough to merit a spot, certainly over 4 non-qualifiers.

It's bad enough that Nick Willis got away with racing sub-3:30 1500m at age 32. Does Willis want to make 2019 1500m World Championship final at age 36 and prove that he owes his career to a special cocktail of PEDs? Willis has poked his finger in the eye of I.A.A.F. long enough. It's time for Willis to get on his horse and ride out into the sunset.

What's so unusual about a 32 year old running sub-3:30? I could see if he was in his late 30s/early 40s there might be some suspicion warranted - but 32? C'mon....man, 32 is young for a distance runner who isn't injury prone and takes care of themselves.

sbeefyk2 wrote:

A good example of the everyone's a winner mentality. Nick thought "Oh I won because I'm the last person on the descending order list so I don't have to work hard and I'll still make the World Champs." Sorry, Nick. To be successful in distance running you have to work hard all the time.

You don’t genuinely believe that’s what nick thought. And if you do, well, I’m sorry dude.

What a farce.

The only positive I can see from this is that Nick has been

in athletics for a long, long time. I don't know how many WC's he's competed in. Maybe every one since '05?

That would be 7 and this would be his 8th.

Perhaps it's a way of life telling him he should do something different instead of competing in athletics.

But having said that, he qualified fair and square it seems, so why shouldn't he get to do what he wants?

You shouldn't have 4 random pacific islands with 30k people on them with entrants at the IAAF words.

I say do it mathematically. What's the lowest populated country that would have a legitimate qualifier? Iceland?

Ok, if your country has no legit qualifiers and has a lower population than Iceland, you can send 1 if that athlete is better in their chosen event than all other athletes from the no name countries. That sounds fair to me. 1 non legit qualifier per country provided they are the best amongst the no name countries. And they can't bump out anyone with a legit qualifier. The IAAF should look at non legit qualifiers as exceptions rather than additions to the field. They are added to the field as a form of mercy or to gain reputation for their country.

Inquiring minds want to know wrote:

it's bad enough ... wrote:

It's bad enough that Nick Willis got away with racing sub-3:30 1500m at age 32. Does Willis want to make 2019 1500m World Championship final at age 36 and prove that he owes his career to a special cocktail of PEDs? Willis has poked his finger in the eye of I.A.A.F. long enough. It's time for Willis to get on his horse and ride out into the sunset.

What's so unusual about a 32 year old running sub-3:30? I could see if he was in his late 30s/early 40s there might be some suspicion warranted - but 32? C'mon....man, 32 is young for a distance runner who isn't injury prone and takes care of themselves.

You just labeled Nick Willis a distance runner. There are a lot of distance runners who read post and post on let'srun. Many of you gals and guys set your Marathon personal best past the age of 31. What you gals and guys do in the Marathon is irrelevant to 1500m. There are 32 outdoor sub-3:30 1500m runners. Willis is the only one to set a sub-3:30 personal best at age 32. Lagat, who set his 1500m personal best, 2001 at age 26, last raced sub-3:30 at age 31. It is unusual because no one else has done it.

Greg wrote:

But having said that, he qualified fair and square it seems, so why shouldn't he get to do what he wants?

He did not qualify fair and square.

The IAAF is the International Association of Athletic Federations. While it refers to the upcoming event in Doha as the "World Championships", that term is not entirely accurate because athletes do not compete at large, as members of various national federations. This is significant, as the corruption associated with nationalism has had a huge effect on the sport, including its first major age of doping, boycotts by large numbers of countries, and even the introduction of war when a warring nation (Israel) sent a team of (mostly) soldiers to the Munich Olympics in 1972. (USA, as a nation actively at war, put soldiers into multiple competitions, and other nations have done so too.)

The closest thing to the world championships this year is over and done with, although many events were missing entirely. That was the Diamond League. The fact Willis was even on the bubble is due to many better athletes being declared ineligible due to their national affiliation.

Agreed. Bad for the sport. He is a professional and will take this as extra motivation moving forward. He was improving the last few races culminating in his 5th Avenue victory. The nay sayers will say what they want. The gifted athlete provision needs to be revisited. Why would a country want to send someone who is much slower that the rest of the field? Since when do we send “JV” athletes to the “State” meet?

arpy wrote:

The IAAF is the International Association of Athletic Federations. While it refers to the upcoming event in Doha as the "World Championships", that term is not entirely accurate because athletes do not compete at large, as members of various national federations.

This is the fundamental problem. The selection process is pretty much the same as for the Olympics. So the WC is in effect an Olympics Lite in the eyes of the general public. National uniforms, flags and anthems but no rings or flame. The organizers tinker with the selection criteria to try to get as many nations involved as possible so there can be lots of different flags flying outside the stadium. But as it isn't the Olympics it only gets a fraction of the attention the Olympics gets.

Should they try the option of just inviting athletes based on rankings? Well, you would get more representative best in the world field but there would be a whole new set of gripes. Who wants to watch a marathon where 130 of the 150 runners are from just two countries? Who wants to watch the sprints when over half the finalists are from the USA?

Also, the qualifying rules would be a source for more complaints. If you need three results to get on the rankings list but my hero was injured in the early part of the window and only has two results - I want the rules bent. My hero ran an exceptional road race - that should be allowed to count.

Whether the WC's are 'Olympics Lite' or 'Best in the World' all the organizer can do is define a criteria and then stick to it. Some athletes will feel cheated, some fans will feel outraged but that's life. If they buckle under the pressure for athlete #42 to get a concession then what do they do for athletes #43 to #45? In the end the qualifying standard becomes 'who shouts loudest'.

A miss is as good as a mile wrote:

Star wrote:

Nick ran 3:35.25 in September of last year. Sometimes the window goes back to the previous year. I guess not this time.

But the window did go back to September -- it just didn't go back far enough! It opened on September 7, 2018, but Willis ran his 3:35.25 on September 2.

That's a pretty perfect pot.

I think "gift" athletes should be limited to the marathon, for three reasons:

1) There's unlimited space on the roads, so they don't crowd anyone out.

2) There is relatively little chance of a gift athlete in the marathon having any impact on the outcome, whereas in a 1500, especially at a tactical pace, one of those athletes could trip someone or affect the way the race plays out.

3) More than any other event, the marathon has always been associated with the idea of participation and of individual struggle against one's own limits. Those ideas fit pretty well with the idea of gift athletes.