Help save the US Olympic Marathon Trials - A call to action

Here's an idea for everyone who might run in the Olympic Marathon Trials.

Finish top three, and don't be pathetically slow.

we agree with you

I agree that the trials are awesome, but I still can't get past the argument as to why should the USA (or Japan) get this special treatment...

We need a TLDR-the post and article is too long and unclear.

-New Olympic standard is 2:11

-You have to hit that time during the qualifying window AND Olympic trial top 3 to make the US olympic team

How is this any different then years past when the US didn’t send 3 athletes in some events because they didn’t have the A standard?

tarckstar wrote:

Here's an idea for everyone who might run in the Olympic Marathon Trials.

Finish top three, and don't be pathetically slow.

Hilly course and Atlanta weather might not make for a fast race...

tarckstar wrote:

Here's an idea for everyone who might run in the Olympic Marathon Trials.

Finish top three, and don't be pathetically slow.

You don't know much about championship racing. Do you know how many times a medalist at the marathon hasn't hit the current A standard? Championship style racing without rabbits is a different game so expecting the top 3 at the trials to hit the A standard is not a good method. Plus you factor in the trials are a very hilly course in what could be less than ideal conditions in Atlanta.

Jarad Ward was 6th at the Olympics but do you know what he ran in LA at the trials???? 2:13:00, 1min 30 sec slower than the current standard. Would it have been smart not to allow him to go or better for the sport?

why?? wrote:

I agree that the trials are awesome, but I still can't get past the argument as to why should the USA (or Japan) get this special treatment...

Or why other countries would want to give the US a break...

The reduction in numbers is happening across a lot of sports mainly because of the addition of several sports or events in the Games and the IOC desire to keep the number of athletes around 10,000 (yep, 10 thousand).

why?? wrote:

I agree that the trials are awesome, but I still can't get past the argument as to why should the USA (or Japan) get this special treatment...

Why shouldn't they? What's ridiculous is that for IAAF rankings, all national championships are equal. So winning the Luxembourg national championships gets you the same number of competition points as a USA championship

why?? wrote:

I agree that the trials are awesome, but I still can't get past the argument as to why should the USA (or Japan) get this special treatment...

It's not special treatment. I knew a few people would say that.

1) The reality is both countries picked their Trials races LONG before the IAAF changed the rules. Japan's race is going to be run in a hot as hell mess on purpose to imitate the . Suguro Osako got hurt and dropped out of Tokyo. So if a 2:06 guy gets third in the Japanese Trials, you don't think he should go to the Olymipcs? By having to hit the standard, you are also messin gup the Trials races which in my mind should be tactical to imitate the Olympics.

2) The IAAF ranking system WAY undervalues the quality of the US and Japanese championships. They would be valued the same as the Ghana national championships which is a joke. We are getting unspecial treatment. The reality is it's much harder to finish top 3 at the US Trials than it is to finish top 10 once in a 2 year period in a world marathon major. The US and Japanese Trials should clearly be valued as the equivalent of a gold label race.

...says the guy who couldn’t run remotely close the “pathetically slow” times the “pathetically slow” marathoners run at the Trials...

One paragraph in and already reading some incorrect information.

"Held every four years, the US Olympic Marathon Trials represent all that is great about our sport. All of America’s best gather in one place on one day to race and try to reach the pinnacle of our sport — the Olympic Games. Finish in the top three and you go to the Olympics. Finish outside of the top three and your Olympic dream waits another four years."

This is not true. It has always been the first 3 to cross the line with the standard. It has NEVER been the top 3 to cross the line. The standard is just harder now.

Ayy Cee Cee wrote:

One paragraph in and already reading some incorrect information.

"Held every four years, the US Olympic Marathon Trials represent all that is great about our sport. All of America’s best gather in one place on one day to race and try to reach the pinnacle of our sport — the Olympic Games. Finish in the top three and you go to the Olympics. Finish outside of the top three and your Olympic dream waits another four years."

This is not true. It has always been the first 3 to cross the line with the standard. It has NEVER been the top 3 to cross the line. The standard is just harder now.

The greatest trick the troll ever pulled was convincing the reader it wasn’t a troll

I understand this logic, but I'm confused about the outcry. The IAAF stiffened the A standard. It's now 2:11:30 from 2:19:00 (at the 2016 Olympics). I think we can agree 2:19 is an absolute joke for an Olympic qualifying standard. And I would argue 2:11:30 is fair. So, my argument is the Olympic Trials have NOT changed at all. All that changed is the A standards have stiffened up.

Over the years there have been several athletes who placed top 3 at the track and field Trials and have been left off the team or had to chase the standard in the weeks between the Trials and Olympics or they would have been left off the team. So, if your argument is the new rules changed the Olympic Trials, then that does not reconcile with history where athletes have been left off the team (or had to chase a time) after placing top 3 at the Trials. There is not change.

I know the marathon is unique in that you can't run a marathon every week to chase the standard, but there is ample time and plenty of fast races in the qualifying window to hit the standard. In other words, guys like Jared Ward, Rupp, and any of our top runners don't need to fine tune their training to run 2:11 on a fast course. They should be able to wake up, go to London or Berlin and jog 2:11:10 and come home and keep training.

How about every country that has over 5 qualifiers prior to the trials can send their top 3 at the trials whether they hit the standard or not?

That would only include Japan and USA.

The purpose of the restricted standards is to limit the field size. Japan and USA already have more than the allotted qualifiers.

Under the old Trials format, the hierarchy and logical path was very easy to understand for US fans, Olympic Trials then Olympics. American fans had a clear understanding of how it worked. The new format could feature an illogical path (top three don’t automatically make the Olympics), making it difficult for fans to understand.

Again, this has never been the case in any event including the Marathon.

Not the same for all wrote:

How about every country that has over 5 qualifiers prior to the trials can send their top 3 at the trials whether they hit the standard or not?

That would only include Japan and USA.

The purpose of the restricted standards is to limit the field size. Japan and USA already have more than the allotted qualifiers.

Not exactly. The purpose of the new system encourages qualifying by ranking with a tougher automatic time standard. It's not meant to be tougher, at least not as tough as the automatic standards imply.

With roughly 9 months to go the following people have the Olympic Standard. The women's race will be competitive with many women having already hit the standard.

The men are another story. In 2018 alone, 241 men ran 2:11:30 or faster. In my opinion if you aren't in the top 241 in the world you have no place at the Olympic Games.

1. Jordan Hasay - Boston

2. Desiree Linden - Boston

3. Lindsay Flanagan - Boston

4. Aliphine Tuliamuk – Rotterdam

5. Roberta Groner – Rotterdam

6. Emily Sisson - London

7. Molly Huddle – London

8. Kellyn Taylor - Prague

1. Scott Fauble – Boston

2. Jared Ward - Boston

You guys have it all wrong. This isn't something that was pulled out of the air by USATF and the IAAF.

It was a decision based on heavy lobbying. A Super Pac made up of the three US major marathons (Boston, Chicago, NYC), Nike and Adidas. They all want the top US runners racing more and doing big races. There is not much of an audience for the Trials.

Follow the money, bro.

False. There are a ton of IAAF Gold Label Marathons where a top 5 finish earns you the standard. This new system will do the opposite of what you are saying. For example, this is why Bernard Lagat is racing the Gold Coast Marathon in July. https://www.iaaf.org/competition/calendar/marathon-and-road-races/iaaf-gold-label-road-races

all wrong wrote:

You guys have it all wrong. This isn't something that was pulled out of the air by USATF and the IAAF.

It was a decision based on heavy lobbying. A Super Pac made up of the three US major marathons (Boston, Chicago, NYC), Nike and Adidas. They all want the top US runners racing more and doing big races. There is not much of an audience for the Trials.

Follow the money, bro.