not so slow wrote:
Hmm , Max did make the decision and favored LA if you read the article completely , to bad. Reading the article also gave a little view for the new LDR chair Ed , he is an elitist , making the standards for the marathon harder for the A and B standard. He doesn't get it in understanding the development of the sport for americans. Ed , we know you were at the top of the game in your career as an elite , you need though to expand your vision beyond your personal experience.
Stepping up to the plate , ok, I will donate the first $1000 to build a kitty to sue USATF for gross negligence in the site selection.
We are going backwards.
Of course Max favored LA, and whatever rule with the USOC says he has the power to decide and defy the 5-person committee. The committee can't change this rule because it's the USOC that owns the Olympic Trials and who's rules apply, not USATF.
No, that was a typo in the article. The committee adopted the IAAF standards. Not sure what you mean by "not understanding development". Based on the new standards, there were 120 men and 109 women from the 2012 qualifying times who meet them. How is development being hurt by having what will likely be 120-140 runners at the 2016 Trials?