Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
Amid all this very interesting discussion about the US team for Edmonton, please remember that the US is in the fortunate position of being able to send the maximum of 3 athletes per event (if qualified). As has been mentioned sometimes in the past, this is not true for most other countries. Many qualifiers (A or B) do NOT get on their team, because other constraints (probably financial) play a role in determining team size. Often, the athlete has to show final or even medal potential to be selected. David Dallman On Tue, 19 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 6/19/01 1:38:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << But what if he wins? Is it then a situation a la the marathon trials where > > the champion gets into the meet even if no qualifier? Can the champion who > > runs 3:39 go to Worlds and block others who potentially posess the standard? > > >> > > USATF's policy is to take as many people as possible per event. If Webb wins, > and doesn't meet the standard in doing so (and doesn't chase it in Europe), > then Michael Stember and David Krummenacker, assuming they run in Eugene, > will go to Edmonton. (This is also assuming that Gabe Jennings doesn't run, > and no else who finishes ahead of Stember and/or Krummenacker in Eugene > reaches the standard before the deadline of July 23--got all that??). Here is > the official policy from www.usatf.org(under "Elite Athletes"). > > The top three (3) place finishers at the selection competition (2001 GMC > Envoy USA Outdoor National Championships) who have met the qualifying > criteria will select themselves to the team. > * All athletes competing in the selection competition will be ranked > according to their order of finish at the selection competition. The Ranking > List for each event will be compiled as follows: > > 1. Athletes will be ranked according to order of place finish in the event > final. > 2. Ranking outside the event final will be based on performance in the > preliminary rounds, beginning with the semi-finals. > 3. The top-performing athlete in the semi-finals will be the next ranked > athlete, with ranking continuing according to performance through the > semi-finals and into the preliminary rounds, if necessary. > 4. Only the athlete’s performance in his/her last round of competition at > the Championships will be used for ranking. > * If any of the top 3 finishers in the selection competition do not meet > the “A” qualifying standard during the qualifying period, the next athlete > on the ranking list from the selection competition who has met the “A” > qualifying standard will be selected to the team. > * In an event where only two (2) athletes have met the “A” qualifying > standard, only those two athletes who compete at the selection competition > will be selected to the Team, regardless of their place at the selection > competition. > * In an event where only one (1) athlete has the “A” qualifying standard, > the highest placing finisher at the selection competition with the “A” or > “B” standard will be selected to the Team. > * In an event where two or more athletes meet the “A” qualifying standard > during the qualifying period (but after the selection competition) in an > event where only one “B” qualified athlete has been selected to the Team (at > the selection competition), the “B” qualifier will be replaced on the Team > by the two “A” qualified athletes. > > Walt Murphy >
Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton
Ryan Eckl wrote: "In addition to promoting the sport, it is one of the missions of the USATF to develop the nation's promising talent. Note that no one was adversely affected by the decision to let Hall run. In other words, no one was denied entry who otherwise would have been accepted. USATF is providing the opportunity for one of the nations best-ever mile talents to run in a race at the level he has proven he can run." Try this hypothetical...12 runenrs advance from the preliminaries to the finals...say Webb/Ritz/Hall finish 13th and fail to qualify for the National Championship Final in their eventshould the USATF grant them an exception and advance the "high school phenom" to the final...they have already given them (not Webb obviously) special treatment to advance this far, why not give them a free pass one round further??...under the arguments that I have read in support of the special treatment presented on the list, nobody would be harmed if the USATF just allowed an extra person into the final (or would someone be harmed?) If Hall or Ritz do advance to the Final in Eugene then there will be people who will be harmed; the first person who does not qualify will be harmed. What if that extra runner qualified for the World Team?? If it is good for promoting the sport to allow a runner that does not meet the qualifying mark into the meet, then it MUST be good for promoting the sport to advance this same runner to the final??? On another note, it can easily be believed that runners like Hall and Ritz have about 10 more years of National Championships ahead of them in their futuresthen why do they need to receive special treatment to gain entry to the National Championship meet at this stage in their career?? They have plenty of years ahead to gain the valuable experience of racing in high caliber meets like the USATF Championships. Do you find it funny/ironic that these runners will not (I hope) receive this same special treatment next year or any other year in the future? Yet next year, at this time, they will still be "America's future of distance running". Should these same runners get special treatment in attempting to to qualify for the NCAA championships or USATF Championships next year? Where is the line drawn?? And yet another point where this whole situation has opened Pandora's box was the timing in which Ritz was told that he would be allowed into the National Championships with a non-qualifyinbg mark. John Chaplin was quoted in SI 2 months prior to the final qualifying date that he would be admitted into the meet. That fact alone DOES do harm to other runners in that while Ritz was able to plan/train knowing that he need not attempt to run a qualifying mark, any other runner in that same situation would be forced to train and plan their race schedule accordingly to give them the best chance to obtain a qualifying mark. This topic hits home for me very much. Last year my wife missed the 5,000m qualifying mark for the Olympic Trials by .01 of a second (we have the finishlynx photo to prove it; arms across the line, knee across the line, but not the torso). We went through the process of appealing to get her entry into the meet. Did she deserve to get in? No. Would she have run if she was granted entry? YES. I do take exception to anyone who believes that the USATF should be able to choose which of the athletes in this situation are allowed entry based on subjective standards. But I at least applaud the USATF for being consistent in 2000 with staying true to their stance across the board. However, in my opinion, ANYONE who argues that the exceptions made this year were to accomodate field size is sadly mistaken. My 2 cents worth, Daniel Niednagel [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
In a message dated 6/19/01 6:34:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Does Stember have the "A" standard? I thought he made the Olympic "A" standard but not the world "A" standard >> Stember ran 3:35.11 in Monaco last year. (The "A" standard is 3:36.20) Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
In a message dated 6/19/01 1:38:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << But what if he wins? Is it then a situation a la the marathon trials where the champion gets into the meet even if no qualifier? Can the champion who runs 3:39 go to Worlds and block others who potentially posess the standard? >> USATF's policy is to take as many people as possible per event. If Webb wins, and doesn't meet the standard in doing so (and doesn't chase it in Europe), then Michael Stember and David Krummenacker, assuming they run in Eugene, will go to Edmonton. (This is also assuming that Gabe Jennings doesn't run, and no else who finishes ahead of Stember and/or Krummenacker in Eugene reaches the standard before the deadline of July 23--got all that??). Here is the official policy from www.usatf.org(under "Elite Athletes"). The top three (3) place finishers at the selection competition (2001 GMC Envoy USA Outdoor National Championships) who have met the qualifying criteria will select themselves to the team. * All athletes competing in the selection competition will be ranked according to their order of finish at the selection competition. The Ranking List for each event will be compiled as follows: 1. Athletes will be ranked according to order of place finish in the event final. 2. Ranking outside the event final will be based on performance in the preliminary rounds, beginning with the semi-finals. 3. The top-performing athlete in the semi-finals will be the next ranked athlete, with ranking continuing according to performance through the semi-finals and into the preliminary rounds, if necessary. 4. Only the athlete’s performance in his/her last round of competition at the Championships will be used for ranking. * If any of the top 3 finishers in the selection competition do not meet the “A” qualifying standard during the qualifying period, the next athlete on the ranking list from the selection competition who has met the “A” qualifying standard will be selected to the team. * In an event where only two (2) athletes have met the “A” qualifying standard, only those two athletes who compete at the selection competition will be selected to the Team, regardless of their place at the selection competition. * In an event where only one (1) athlete has the “A” qualifying standard, the highest placing finisher at the selection competition with the “A” or “B” standard will be selected to the Team. * In an event where two or more athletes meet the “A” qualifying standard during the qualifying period (but after the selection competition) in an event where only one “B” qualified athlete has been selected to the Team (at the selection competition), the “B” qualifier will be replaced on the Team by the two “A” qualified athletes. Walt Murphy
RE: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
Bulletin: Life is not fair. In addition to promoting the sport, it is one of the missions of the USATF to develop the nation's promising talent. Note that no one was adversely affected by the decision to let Hall run. In other words, no one was denied entry who otherwise would have been accepted. USATF is providing the opportunity for one of the nations best-ever mile talents to run in a race at the level he has proven he can run. Either setting a field number cap or a strict time-standard to which the USATF is bound to adhere is narrow-sighted and close-minded, not to mention unreasonable. Though track is, almost intrinsically, a fair sport, the USATF is not governed by subjective concepts such as fairness, especially when the better good of the sport can be acheived. -Ryan W. Eckel -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 3:57 PM To: Kristopher Rolin Cc: Michael Contopoulos; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton. Netters Kristopher Rolin writes: > On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Michael Contopoulos wrote: > Anyone notice that they have let Ryan Hall into the 1500m as the last > qualifier. Looks like they let the a guy in front of him in also with a > 3:42.6 when the time was 3:41 something. Ritz's was only like .16 of the Q > time not a full second...they seem to be bending all the rules to get the > BIG THREE into the meet. Later, Rolin I noticed and I am not pleased. While many of you take the point that such things are good for the promotion of T&F, a point I understand, I say again that the "some animals are more equal then others" approach is not the answer. Certainly the women's 10k standard was loosened by 10 seconds but that decision was made based on the numbers in the the field rather then any one individual. For the 1500 and the 5000 both fields were essentaily already full with with out loosening the standards. I might point out that on 3 separate occasions walkers who were very close to the standard in a event with very low numbers (12 or less) were denied entry into the U.S. Championships. There is no simple solution to this. Either you set a cap on numbers and fill them in in all events or no one with out a qualifier gets in. Should I remind you all of the whole debacle at the trials of the 1500 meter runner who was not allowed in (I can't remember his name but I recall he had won a medal at world indoors)- as a I recall there was strong sentiment that he not be allowed in.
Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
Netters Kristopher Rolin writes: > On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Michael Contopoulos wrote: > Anyone notice that they have let Ryan Hall into the 1500m as the last > qualifier. Looks like they let the a guy in front of him in also with a > 3:42.6 when the time was 3:41 something. Ritz's was only like .16 of the Q > time not a full second...they seem to be bending all the rules to get the > BIG THREE into the meet. Later, Rolin I noticed and I am not pleased. While many of you take the point that such things are good for the promotion of T&F, a point I understand, I say again that the "some animals are more equal then others" approach is not the answer. Certainly the women's 10k standard was loosened by 10 seconds but that decision was made based on the numbers in the the field rather then any one individual. For the 1500 and the 5000 both fields were essentaily already full with with out loosening the standards. I might point out that on 3 separate occasions walkers who were very close to the standard in a event with very low numbers (12 or less) were denied entry into the U.S. Championships. There is no simple solution to this. Either you set a cap on numbers and fill them in in all events or no one with out a qualifier gets in. Should I remind you all of the whole debacle at the trials of the 1500 meter runner who was not allowed in (I can't remember his name but I recall he had won a medal at world indoors)- as a I recall there was strong sentiment that he not be allowed in.
Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
> it would seem to be the same situation as 2000 Oly mens/womens Marathon > Trials if Webb wins > > the WC "B" standard is 3:38.40, which he's already met with 3:38.26 so he > would be able to go to Edmonton if he wins no matter how slow Unless two other Trials finalists break 3:36.20 afterwards, right? That is where t&f is different than the marathon was. - Ed Parrot
RE: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
> >-Original Message- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Post, Marty > >Even if Webb makes top 3 it seems extremely remote he'll have > >"A" qualifier. > >And his coach has supposedly said he will not chase one in Europe. That's exactly what Coach Raczko said in Raleigh Sunday after Webb and South Lakes won the DMR in national record time. Raczko also said that even if Webb got the A qualifier at Eugene, it is not a certainty he would run at Edmonton. That would depend on an assessment of what's best in the long run.
RE: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
it would seem to be the same situation as 2000 Oly mens/womens Marathon
Trials if Webb wins
the WC "B" standard is 3:38.40, which he's already met with 3:38.26 so he
would be able to go to Edmonton if he wins no matter how slow
-Original Message-
From: Ryan Grote [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 2:25 PM
To: Post, Marty; 't-and-f@darkwing. uoregon. edu' (E-mail)
Subject: Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to
Edmonton.
But what if he wins? Is it then a situation a la the marathon trials where
the champion gets into the meet even if no qualifier? Can the champion who
runs 3:39 go to Worlds and block others who potentially posess the standard?
Better yet, who the hell cares, let the racing play itself out on the track
and worry about the ramifications later. Its that old cart before the horse
thing.
Grote
adiRP/MMRD
- Original Message -
From: Post, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 't-and-f@darkwing. uoregon. edu' (E-mail) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:46 PM
Subject: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to
Edmonton.
> The WC "A" standard at 1500m is rather stiff this year: 3:36.20.
>
> >From 1983 there has been exactly one US championship where the winning
time
> was 3:36.20 or faster, last year when Jennings ran 3:35.90 (and he was the
> only one).
>
> The last three US champs in Eugene ('86, 93, '99) winning times were
> 3:42.41, 3:42.74 and 3:39.21.
>
> Even if Webb makes top 3 it seems extremely remote he'll have "A"
qualifier.
> And his coach has supposedly said he will not chase one in Europe.
>
>
> Marty Post
> Senior Editor
> Runner's World Magazine
> www.runnersworld.com
>
>
Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
But what if he wins? Is it then a situation a la the marathon trials where
the champion gets into the meet even if no qualifier? Can the champion who
runs 3:39 go to Worlds and block others who potentially posess the standard?
Better yet, who the hell cares, let the racing play itself out on the track
and worry about the ramifications later. Its that old cart before the horse
thing.
Grote
adiRP/MMRD
- Original Message -
From: Post, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 't-and-f@darkwing. uoregon. edu' (E-mail) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:46 PM
Subject: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to
Edmonton.
> The WC "A" standard at 1500m is rather stiff this year: 3:36.20.
>
> >From 1983 there has been exactly one US championship where the winning
time
> was 3:36.20 or faster, last year when Jennings ran 3:35.90 (and he was the
> only one).
>
> The last three US champs in Eugene ('86, 93, '99) winning times were
> 3:42.41, 3:42.74 and 3:39.21.
>
> Even if Webb makes top 3 it seems extremely remote he'll have "A"
qualifier.
> And his coach has supposedly said he will not chase one in Europe.
>
>
> Marty Post
> Senior Editor
> Runner's World Magazine
> www.runnersworld.com
>
>
t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
The WC "A" standard at 1500m is rather stiff this year: 3:36.20.
>From 1983 there has been exactly one US championship where the winning time
was 3:36.20 or faster, last year when Jennings ran 3:35.90 (and he was the
only one).
The last three US champs in Eugene ('86, 93, '99) winning times were
3:42.41, 3:42.74 and 3:39.21.
Even if Webb makes top 3 it seems extremely remote he'll have "A" qualifier.
And his coach has supposedly said he will not chase one in Europe.
Marty Post
Senior Editor
Runner's World Magazine
www.runnersworld.com
Re: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to Edmonton.
Yes, but the way Berryhill runs, he will be out there pounding away at
3:36-3:38 pace. Now you throw in a huge kick and a race the last 400 and
Webb gets his qualifier.
M
>From: "Post, Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Post, Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "'t-and-f@darkwing. uoregon. edu' (E-mail)"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: t-and-f: Webb maybe top 3 at USATF 1500... but not going to
>Edmonton.
>Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 13:46:03 -0400
>
>The WC "A" standard at 1500m is rather stiff this year: 3:36.20.
>
>From 1983 there has been exactly one US championship where the winning time
>was 3:36.20 or faster, last year when Jennings ran 3:35.90 (and he was the
>only one).
>
>The last three US champs in Eugene ('86, 93, '99) winning times were
>3:42.41, 3:42.74 and 3:39.21.
>
>Even if Webb makes top 3 it seems extremely remote he'll have "A"
>qualifier.
>And his coach has supposedly said he will not chase one in Europe.
>
>
>Marty Post
>Senior Editor
>Runner's World Magazine
>www.runnersworld.com
>
_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
