Re: Is the Olympic selection process broken?

January 27, 2004 at 4:02 pm #13224

Ryan

Keymaster

Zeke wrote:

Why not have a half-marathon qualifying standard too? Say if you run sub-1:07 you can run in the Oly Trials. Maybe that help increase the size of the field a little. Maybe it’d keep some runners from getting beat up and having to miss the trials due to injury. I just thought of that idea, so don’t be too rough on me.

That’s an interesting idea and it would fit in well with what they currently do for the US Championships. If you remember, Sara Wells won last year’s US Championship in her debut marathon, getting in qualifying with a half marathon time. On the other hand, is the size of the field really an issue? I don’t know. Also, I’m not totally convinced on how much runners are getting beat up. I mean, they had all of 2002 and 2003 to qualify. It’s not like they had to run a qualifying time last fall, then do the Trials this spring, then come back with the Olympics. Culpepper hasn’t run a marathon in over a year, Browne originally qualified in the US Championships in 2001.

Zeke wrote:

I think one way to improve the current situation is to run the trials on a course that is similar to what the Oly marathon will be like. It doesn’t really make sense to run the trials on a flat course on a 50 degree day if the Oly marathon is going to be hilly and 90. I think you want to put the best runners for those conditions on the start line.

I do like this idea believe it or not. I see the point of wanting a fast course to try to avoid a situation like 2000. However, if we want the best difficult course/difficult weather representation, why select the team by using a time trial course in favorable weather?

Zeke wrote:

I think the idea of selecting the 3rd member, by committee, is interesting, but I don’t really like it – especially if I finish 3rd at the trials. I’d hate to bring the politics into it. Heck, maybe KK would fake an injury because he knows he’d get voted on anyway.

I’m not sure I really like it, either. Just throwing something out there since some people have expressed a dislike in the current process. The more alternative options I think of, the more I come to the realization that the current process is probably the best/most objective available.