my interpretation of the rules is that you can only "automatically" qualify if you finish in the top 4 and have achieved standards.
if the spots aren't filled thru that method, it seems like USATF can do whatever it wants to fill the rest of the spots
Apparently Mekhissi won the race, didn't know he was so fast at 1500.
killarney wrote:
This puts him #14 in the world this year. 18 guys now have the A.
Probably shoudn't have assumed he won the race - Mekhissi won in 3:33, Abinet just beat out Torrence, so he's #16 with at least 20 guys with the A.
Have a crazy haircut like you're still in high school for the "big race"?
No pressure at all because didn't make team AGAIN?
Go right to last place and get vacuumed to a time?
I will guess Davie Torrence.
Do the same year after year.
Dude, he posts to say thank you, and you chime in just to be rude? Everything I have ever seen you write on this bored is rude and condescending. It's unnecessary.
Good for David Torrence, glad he got a nice race in. I am confident that the Manzano and Lomong will nail the A standard soon, but its great to see David get there too.
or "was hurt early in the year, missed some training, and is just now getting into shape post-us trials"? either way, imma guess it's better than what you've done this year or any other year, anonymous criticizer:) nice run DT!
Same story for $1000 wrote:
Have a crazy haircut like you're still in high school for the "big race"?
No pressure at all because didn't make team AGAIN?
Go right to last place and get vacuumed to a time?
I will guess Davie Torrence.
Do the same year after year.
I have Malmo's back on this one, figuring out the standards is not difficult, and shouldn't be challenging unless you are a child. Seriously, even if it looks confusing just sit down with it for 5 minutes and it will make total sense.
No argument there... I just don't get the need to attack anyone for saying thank you for an explanation.
Good performance for Bayer as well.
Mens 1500m
1 3'33''12 MEKHISSI BENABBAD Mahiedine Efs Reims A. *
2 3'34''06 ABINET Abiyote (Eth) ETHIOPIE
3 3'34''19 TORRENCE David (Usa) ETATS UNIS D'AMERIQUE
4 3'34''40 ALEMAYEHU Zebene (Eth) ETHIOPIE
5 3'35''99 ESSALHI Younes (Mar) MAROC
6 3'36''08 BAYER Andrew (Usa) ETATS UNIS D'AMERIQUE
7 3'36''98 TIOUALI Mohammed (Mar) MAROC
8 3'38''49 HITRANE Jamal (Mar) MAROC
9 3'39''27 CANTERO Bryan As Aix-les-bains
10 3'42''25 YEGO Elkana (Ken) KENYA
Will any qualifying standards obtained this year carry over for the next world championships?
The next championships are in two years.
The most they go back is to the prior year for times.
It seems like the same year qualifying is the new thing for WC's and prior year for the Olympics.
But that can always change.
And I thought I was a jerk wrote:
No argument there... I just don't get the need to attack anyone for saying thank you for an explanation.
Saying its scary that anyone would think the qualifying criteria is difficult to understand is "an attack"? You're hypersensitivity is disingenuous.
Malmo is right. I don't get why so many people find this so hard to understand.
It's not that the process is hard to understand. It's the difficulty in keeping up with the athletes to figure out who is on the team. Not all of us spend several hours a day on letsrun, and sometimes we miss races where standards are hit.
LOLololOLLOLLOl wrote:
I have Malmo's back on this one, figuring out the standards is not difficult, and shouldn't be challenging unless you are a child. Seriously, even if it looks confusing just sit down with it for 5 minutes and it will make total sense.
But the point is no one wants to spend 5 minutes figuring it out. It needs to be simple enough so the average person on the street can understand it in 30 seconds.
People have smartphones and only use 3 features, they can't be bothered with understanding their investments, they don't figure out how much they will have to pay when there adjustable mortgage increases.
Thanks to Twitter, Facebook, and CNNHLN, we have very short attention spans. Do you think the average person wants to figure out the USTAF rules for WC track and field qualifying?
If hard core fans haven't bothered to figure it out do you think the casual, or non-fan will bother?
They will bother when you know the difference between their and there.....
It would be really nice if the top three went only if they met the standard at the actual trial race.
The only five athletes eligible for the 1500 are Matt Centrowitz, Leo Manzano, Lopez Lomong, Matt Elliott and Will Leer.
WRONG!!
WRONG!!
WRONG!!
So you're saying that Torrance has no chance? If the team had to be picked today who else would you send?!?
If you were picking the team today your choices are either
A) Centro
B) Centro and Torrance
C) Centro, Torrance and Rupp
Obviously C isn't happening but anyone with half a brain is picking B. all those posters saying how smart you are can now turn their praise my way and if anyone would like to thank me for breaking it down I promise I won't yell at you like that guy did.
SMJO wrote:
They will bother when you know the difference between their and there.....
It would be really nice if the top three went only if they met the standard at the actual trial race.
Well, I got it right the first time - but then again, I'm too lazy to proofread.
It's super, super simple.
A country can send a maximum of four athletes per event at the WC broken down as such:
-One athlete with a B standard
-Three athletes with an A standard
-One returning world champion (standards are irrelevant for him/her)
"So, if the Beers beat Detroit and Denver beats Atlanta in the American Southwestern Division East Northern, then Milwaukee goes to the Denslow Cup, unless Baltimore can upset Buffalo and Charlotte ties Toronto, then Oakland would play LA and Pittsburgh in a blind choice round robin. And if no clear winner emerges from all of this, a two-man sack race will be held on consecutive Sundays until a champion can be crowned."
malmo wrote:
Saying its scary that anyone would think the qualifying criteria is difficult to understand is "an attack"? You're hypersensitivity is disingenuous.
Its scary that you don't understand what he mean.
Your comment basically said its scary how stupid he was. I doubt anyone would enjoy getting the comment.