What’s the big deal about the “Olympic Trials” ....

matt_london_413 wrote:

Think About It wrote:

This is an honest question - why do people talk about running “the Olympic trials” as though they actually have a chance of making the Olympics? Is the USA the only country that picks their team this way? It seems much ado about nothing .....

I don't think the trials are fair.

To me they are very unfair.

The odds of any given runner running their absolute best times in a 2 week window on any given year especially during the trials is rare.

Athletes should be given up to a full year to reach a trial standard.

There should be more heats at the Olympics.

Make the Olympic games a 3 month sport.

Give everyone a fair chance at qualifying.

3 months? You need to meet the folks who work behind the scenes at the Games. Also, cities struggled with 2+ weeks.

Pretty funny, Trials work pretty well in all sports. The US wins 100 medals at the Summer Games (each sport has its own selection procedures--some Trials and some qualifying through points or placings at other events).

Co-Flounder wrote:

Serious question. What do the participants and finishers receive? I am guessing they don't give out finisher's medals. But a race shirt would be an awesome souvenir.

In past trials (2004 & ‘08) they gave duffle bags or backpacks with a t-shirt, gloves, and other little goodies, if I remember correctly. My small duffel bag from many years ago is still my go to running bag.

Congrats! And thank you.

I agree. And all NBA players who are not all stars should quit. What’s the point?

The 10k qualifying standard is 28:00. If they made it 30:00 to match the soft marathon standard, would that grow track? Track needs more excitement.

Number of people on the track is the limit here.

So solution to find is probably different, but the question of how to build sport in a clever way is relevant.

Not sure removing elite events from the biggest global event aside from worlds and olympics is the best option btw, but I'm not an expert.

Think About It wrote:

This is an honest question - why do people talk about running “the Olympic trials” as though they actually have a chance of making the Olympics? Is the USA the only country that picks their team this way? It seems much ado about nothing .....

I mostly agree. Normally I wouldn't even make the trip, but I'll run it this if I hit the qualifying time just because I don't have much planned this summer.

Lost a few brain cells trying to understand your jealous point of view. Hopefully I can recover while reading more of your troll posts.

Think About It wrote:

This is an honest question - why do people talk about running “the Olympic trials” as though they actually have a chance of making the Olympics? Is the USA the only country that picks their team this way? It seems much ado about nothing .....

Run fast. You’ll figure out what it “means”.

Another serious question, or questions: with just 250 or so runners on the men's side, are there corrals or some kind of system to everyone lining up? Or can all the 2:14-2:19 hobby joggers toe the line right next to Galen? Is it a free-for-all with everyone elbowing their way to the front?

like really jim wrote:

Another serious question, or questions: with just 250 or so runners on the men's side, are there corrals or some kind of system to everyone lining up? Or can all the 2:14-2:19 hobby joggers toe the line right next to Galen? Is it a free-for-all with everyone elbowing their way to the front?

Good question. I would think the 2:17-18 guys would have the respect to not start in front. I am sure Galen could handle starting in the second row, in any case.

Looking at the last two races, it seems like the top guys lined up in front. I have to think anyone running there has the honour to let Ryan Hall, Galen Rupp, ... take a spot in the front row in front of them.

Im not American and i will be watching, i think it's a great spectacle and a cut troath way of making a team. I wish my own country would do something similar instead of somebody running a qualifying time in Berlin etc etc. Something appealing about having a race to qualify.

If only the shoe situation was a level playing field

sbeefyk2 wrote:

Think About It wrote:

Exactly! And seems like a better way of getting the consistently best runners

America is the inventor of the finisher medal and participation trophy. And the hosting cities make a lot of money with hotel rooms and food for a few days.

I think the Trials are a good thing to have. It keeps the competitive spirit going. If it was just pick the fastest times only a handful of runners who can afford to go to Europe/Dubai have a chance to run fast. But I agree it can be annoying when the 249th runner talks like they made the Olympics when in reality it was only the Trials. But non-runners don't know the difference.

Show me the 249th runner acting like they made the Olympics.

I’m not from the US but I think the trials are a great thing for the sport and anyone that qualifies should be rightly proud. Running 2’18 is pretty special.

In terms of why they’re great, it’s an All-American event, just the best people from your country lining up with a lot at stake. Look at the conversation that is generated by someone like Walmsley being involved, it’s great for the sport as a whole. Our sport needs more stories.

Sure, someone that ran 2’18’59 doesn’t have any chance of going to Tokyo, but someone that ran 2’13 does and for everyone else; they’re the people that make this sport great, that go and grind out the miles and make sacrifices just to say that they made it to these trials. I’m always impressed by these guys - good luck to you all.

I do think they need to lower it a bit, 2:16 or so. Mark Conover had only run 2:18 and broke away wwith a 2:12 at the trials. Anyone remember Droddy breaking out at last trials (who's the guy with the long hair, trucker cap, and mustach up front)?

I ran 2:18.45 to qualify in 1984. To answer a few of the questions, we got a nice backpack, long sleve tee and short sleve tee. The long sleeve from Adidas had a big finishers medal aplied to the front. Xerox gave out stop watches. There also wasn't any line up order. I warmed up next to Al Sal and everyone found their place at the start - I was started mid pack.

It was really great. Wrote a book about the experience.

amazon.com/Racing-Shadows-James-K-Dill/dp/1627202420/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=racing+shadows&qid=1570027393&sr=8-1

The OP asks about the Olympic Trials and my mind goes to the track but nearly everyone else jumps to one event, the marathon.

Qualifying for the Olympic trials is a huge accomplishment, esp. for those who run in their spare time and hold down jobs, have families, etc.

I think what rubs many people the wrong way is the bragging and media fluff pieces on X individual and their amazing journey to an OTQ time. It's great if folks qualify but they should avoid oversharing. Do you really need all of those kudos from others to validate your accomplishment? Similar problem with Strava - are you running for yourself or to impress other people and get all of those kudos and segment winner medals?

How many runners would be willing to show up at an empty track, push themselves to the limit but never tell anyone? Very few I think. Most run for the feedback they get from others and boost to their own ego.

Real runners are the people who would still run even if no one else would ever know.

The Olympic Trials, have you heard about them? I mean what is the big deal???

And why is it called the Olympic Trials??? I mean who is on trial?? And is the marathon the sentence?? Are people really lining up for this? I mean who thinks of this stuff??

Maybe the vitriol is inspired by the fact that a lot more people make the marathon trials than the track trials at any given distance, so that the latter standards are harder. But to me it is a wonderful thing for running in this country that they make the marathon standards hard but not unattainable for many good college and post-collegiate runners, because that really gives them a reason to train and promotes the sport. There are probably hundreds of collegiate runners every year with sub 32 10k's or xc equivalent. Many of them would stand a chance at making the Olympic trials qualifier in the marathon with hard training, as we see by the results in Japan every year where collegiate runners train for half marathon and many, many run sub 1:04 (trials qualifier now) and many go on to run well under 2:18.

Last year, Japan had 8 athletes go sub 2:10, 14 ran 2:10, 20 ran 2:11, 14 ran 2:12, and overall 136 ran 2:18:00 or better, according to the IAAF (463 were listed at 2:30:00 or better).

The results were arguably better at half marathon, 20 ran 1:01, 67 ran 1:02!, about 110 ran 1:03, and overall, a total of 200 ran 1:04:00 or better.

The U.S. would have similar results, at least at the half, if they competed at that distance in college.