This is why America sucks at the Marathon.
Low standards.
Sad.
This is why America sucks at the Marathon.
Low standards.
Sad.
You can fit more people on a road than on a track.
US has had an Olympic Trials for 50 years. Don't think you even needed a time for the first one in Alamosa, but after that it was 2:26 or 2:28 and then dropped to the low or sub 2:20s after that. The OTs are on the roads. There can be more runners on the roads than on the track. You can't have 300-400 entrants on the track, that would take 10 heats and half the day.
jamin, just run and quit complaining about everything.
Did you want the trials marathon to have 12 runners? That would look a little weird I think.
So?
jamin wrote:
What?
So what is the 28:00/10km standard equivalent back out to the marathon ..something like 2:09:00..?! WTF ..let’s hear it.
bcvb wrote:
Did you want the trials marathon to have 12 runners? That would look a little weird I think.
A lot of us would order if the marathon trials was limited to 40 or 50 competitors. The past few Olympics, they couldn't drop the entry standard below a certain time, because that was the IOC rules. But now that those rules have changed, they could drop the time a little lower.
They should make it so all competitors under 2:11 are granted entry, plus the next fastest times to fill a field of 50.
That probably gets you back to the 2:14 mark or so in a given year.
200 people in a marathon all on the same start line runs the risk of a serious contender being tripped at the start.
Fewer than 10 guys will hit that 10k time, and they'll go up the descending order list to probably 28:15 or 28:20 to fill the field with 24 athletes.
Meanwhile 200+ guys will hit the marathon B standard of 2:19:00. Even more for the women of 2:45:00.
But what does the conversion say about the 2:11:30 marathon equivalent for 10k? Now we've got 10 guys who have run under 2:11:30 in the past year and one week. Three who have run under 2:10 in the past year and one week. And a bunch more at 2:12.
Film Rep wrote:
This is why America sucks at the Marathon.
Low standards.
Sad.
Even with NIKE and their PED's, altitude tents and training several weeks at altitude, it has become obvious. All sixteen of one's great great grandparents need to have been born and raised at altitude. All eight of one's great grand parents need to have been born and raised at altitude. All four of one's grandparents need to have been born and raised at altitude. Both parents need to have been born and raised at altitude. One's genes need an opportunity to mutate to adjust to altitude. Runner needs to have been born at altitude. Some of you may respond: Rupp and Radcliffe. On the juice. Both of them.
Film Rep wrote:
This is why America sucks at the Marathon.
Low standards.
Sad.
The standard for elite runners isn't 2:19. It's top-3, and no governing body sets it. It move organically as more and more competitive runners push each other.
The OTQ time has zero relevance to pro runners, except to the extent that having a lot of qualifiers from around the country helps increase interest in the event.
LSXC is correct. What’s the big deal? There’s plenty of room on the course for the hundred or 200 OTQ qualifiers (I’m just guessing) in the race. Maybe some more.
Saw some progress for the US guys at Chicago, four under 2:11 and and six more under 2:12. Plus Fauble and Ward under 2:10 at Boston. Need to get numbers running fast and out of the 2:14-2:15 mindset but having 2:19 guys in the trials makes for a better race and a few may end up under 2:10 one day. More guys under 2:10 then a few under 2:09 and we are moving in the right direction. Must be hard to stay focused and motivated with the 2 hour and women's 2:14 nonsense.
Good. If USATF LDR Committee had a clue they'd go back to 2:22ish & 2:50ish or come up with a way to put the 500 fastest men & the 500 fastest women on the line for the Trials. Road races allow for bigger fields. There's so much hype around the Trials that the local papers would write about the 2:24 male & 2:48 female elementary school teachers from small towns and help build the sport. So many kids participate in cross country and track in high school. More qualifiers might help them get interested in a race like the Trials and then pay attention to the front end finishers. The top end elites wouldn't be bothered with what's behind them. Look at a major marathon. I'm not saying open the flood gates but I think a softer standard would help the sport grow and help people stay in the sport longer. A rankings system could be cool too and have a slightly bigger race and market people training all over the country.
The marathon trials are a developmental program. It is a big incentive for a lot of runners to stick with it to have a shot at the trials. If you ratchet up the standard to 2:12 (or thereabouts), you will have a very small field of runners which would make the time and money spent doing a stand alone race seem like a waste. Organizers would just shift to having a race within a race at one of the major marathons instead of a stand alone race.
Who wants to see 200-500 sub elites running 2:15 + smh. No thanks. Cut the race down to the top 25-50 guys by time. And the women’s time of 2:45 is seriously outdated. Should be at least 2:35, maybe lower.
Hey guys, I told you about my PR the other day of FIVE flushes. Well, today I unleashed the beast. I had to get the old stick out to break it apart!
It's about 30:05 and it's on the road. Track 10K would be 29:30-45. It's a pretty good, fair and fast standard. Funny thing is, Jamin, if you listened to malmo, shut your trap and ran your balls off for a year, YOU might be able to qualify for the Olympic trials. And I guarantee that you'd be singing a different tune if you were on the cusp.
The majority of the male runners are slower than the current women's WR. I always knew that purple dinosaur that was teaching you that you're all winners would backfire at some point.
Tell your mom I said hi.
You do realize that all of the 2:10-20 marathoners of yesterday are running 13:30-14:45 5Ks on the track nowadays or mucking about with Ultras, then going into careers rather than working at a shoe store and chasing the dream. Plenty of fast distance runners and depth but they're not all into road races and marathons.
Bring back the 82 NYC field wrote:
The majority of the male runners are slower than the current women's WR. I always knew that purple dinosaur that was teaching you that you're all winners would backfire at some point.
Tell your mom I said hi.