Make trials standard the same as olympic standard

couldnt have said it better myself

Would be many boring events at most trials though.

The should be required to run all events though. The gun goes off and then 11 seconds of silence

Because it's not only trials for Olympics, but also national championship.

This.

The Trials is our national championship but it's also a chance to gain experience for people who might become Olympians in the next cycle. A lot of people on here liked the swimming Trials & part of their solid attendance numbers were tied to their number of participants. I'm not sure if treating the Trials like a DL meet would help fill a stadium. It would also turn a lot of races into paced time trials, which, yes, would lead to fast times but racing is a part of our sport that shouldn't go away like that.

I think the issue is with the Olympics trying to get more & more selective. I liked when most countries got to send 2-3 athletes & smaller countries could send a few athletes to different events. Rather than changing our structure, it's clear that top-3 at this meet is worthy of an Olympic spot. Did Corrigan really have to run his 3rd steeple in a week to prove he was an Olympian? Beating most people at the Trials didn't do that? It just put another race in his legs when he could've been recovering.

If it were up to me, I would keep the standards the same or even loosen them to bring in more participants. If the standards don't change, athletes know how it goes now & can choose to chase the standard before the Trials.

Wrong. Even a casual viewer knows that there is no Track and Field outside of the Olympics.

Watching a 25 lap race with just Weini Kalati and Kate Izzo would have been spellbinding.

If you made it a requirement, chances are more people would make achieving the standard before the trials a priority. The races would have more than just two people.

Many countries don't hold a meet.

Just one of the worst ideas I’ve ever seen on this site. It’s a national championship- fill the fields and stop trying to destroy the amateur/up and comer nature of the sport even further.

It would certainly save on travel costs.

Words of truth are not welcomed here. Fantasy, not reality. Most here have not been a participant at this level and dont understand process and progression through development and the motivation that is required to keep moving forward. Their concept of what it takes is about however long it takes to watch a race on tv, if that. If you take away the opportunities to go through that process then what's the point?

This might be the worst idea of all time. Congrats!

This part isn't a horrible idea. It's like, okay, distance runners, head to Stanford or San Juan Capistrano in March to get a fast time in. Throwers, go to Ramona or Chula Vista to get a long distance in.

Of course, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as more and more athletes get one-off top performances, the qualifying cutoff gets higher and higher, and the process repeats itself.

But yeah, there's an element of: if you want to go to they Olympics, get the qualifier out of the way well in advance so you can focus on training and competition at the Trials.

first off, people are ignoring it doubles as the national championships and we seem to be aiming for certain field sizes and beneath that trying to encourage collegians and pros to stay with the sport and not become stock brokers or teachers.

second, in that context we should be touting the champions even if they can't make the standard -- as the best in the country. in this sense, to me, a disservice.

third, in some good events we might have more than a final worth of oly std people. in some, no one or barely anyone.

fourth, what about getting the standard at the meet? not everyone has the same access to the big meets to set fast times. or some are getting over rehab or un-retirement.

last, you're basically wandering to the UK position without acknowledging as much. it's not just standard, it can also be rank (or is jager forgotten already). a premise that standard only need apply seems to mimic their premise of only the mark matters. who cares if you are #25 in the world and a shoe in on rank, you don't have the time. at which point this is less about excellence and more about the mark in abstract -- even if a bunch of rank or universality entries suggest the mark was too strictly set.

Many of the events would be this. Even if they made making the standard more of a priority the fields would be VERY small. Even if it's a priority, the number of people that can get them is not enough to have a meet.

i'd be curious (a) how many people got the oly std at eugene and (b) how many of them got to paris by making the time there. setting aside corrigan getting it after. as this would be a fairly precise calculation of your blindspot, no?

which also ignores x added people who made it on rank including ones whose ranking performance is in part eugene.

last point, while more defensible than those who want mu advanced direct to paris, it still reeks a little of setting up a meet between those perceived to be the fastest, as opposed to setting up a meet to determine who the fastest are. essentially, the difference between the diamond league and a world championship.

women's 200 being telling. thomas is a big hyped name who lived up to it. brown is veteran but not a big name. long when i watched NCAA i was like she's gonna be a threat.

but on times and hype a lot would have had richardson, steiner, prandini -- the sort of people on previous teams. it has a little bit of a backwards bias -- as DL meets often do. you make DL AFTER doing something smaller stage. maybe a new american sneaks in via Pre or something.

nah, i kind of like it a little more open and decided on the field and if coleman or mu misses, maybe they had a rotten day, or week, or months, or are no longer themselves. and the system exposed it.

that and you may have some amount of shamier little-stuff where someone screws themselves getting cute. couple tenths off and did 3 extra misguided races.

The opposite actually. We should be looking at ways to make this national championship meet larger with way more participants. Each athlete will bring a group of friends and family to watch who might not otherwise make the trip to watch in person. Give recently graduated collegiate athletes a reason to train for a couple more seasons and increase the pipeline of upcoming athletes. This would help grow the sport.

I would tweak this to say that for U.S. runners, you need to have the standard by the trials or in the trials themselves. You can still run and even win the race, but if you still don't have the Oly standard by the finish line, you can't represent the U.S. at the Olympics this time around.
Kinda best of both options.
That way, when everybody crosses the finish line, we know the team. There wouldn't be any of this "you finished third, but gotta go find some race somewhere to chase the standard!"