Rio 2016 Marathon Qualification, whos trying?

NetwerkErrer · 02-04-2015 12:02pm

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

I do think this is a good debate to have, btw and no need for folks to get upset. We need to talk about these things..

Next, of course all of us internet warriors would love to be selected for the olympics. Second, of course those selected worked their arses off and should get a chance. But we send a lot of people who don't get out of their first heat, and I do often wonder if we should better support fewer people. Should we give those fewer folks more resources - I think it's a valid debate. [How do you select them, its simple, these folks consistently do well during their season, be that at indoors, at college meetings in the states [since most of our T&F prospects are over there], at major races / meetings, at euro's etc]

There is the other debate right there, should younger folks be allowed go, over someone who wants to go to one last championship to crown off their career - that is often a very hard call..

Send the person in their early 20's for the excellent experience, or send the person who is doing well in their mid-30's who wants one last go.

If this was sprinting, and someone got to the Olympics that would be great, but what if they get knocked out in heat 1 at 8am on morning one of the games with 20 people watching RTE? Is that a success [and does it matter!]? For them it is, getting to the games after years of hard work there, but as a nation and for the AAI and for the development of athletics?

It's the same with the Marathon and people finishing well down the race IMHO - but I could well be wrong...

Fair points but we don't have the depth to make choices like that, It's not like GB where they can choose to send a 20 year old instead of a 30 year old because we don't have 5-6 athletes who made the standard. We rarely have a team in the first place not to mind being able to pick and choose who we can send. It's very rare to have that choice in a small country but when it's a prospect v an experienced athlete, that choice can only be made on an individual basis and you can't set in stone a procedure for picking one over the other, it will always be a judgment call if the situation has arisen.

Chivito550 · 02-04-2015 12:03pm

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

I do think this is a good debate to have, btw and no need for folks to get upset. We need to talk about these things..

Next, of course all of us internet warriors would love to be selected for the olympics. Second, of course those selected worked their arses off and should get a chance. But we send a lot of people who don't get out of their first heat, and I do often wonder if we should better support fewer people. Should we give those fewer folks more resources - I think it's a valid debate. [How do you select them, its simple, these folks consistently do well during their season, be that at indoors, at college meetings in the states [since most of our T&F prospects are over there], at major races / meetings, at euro's etc]

There is the other debate right there, should younger folks be allowed go, over someone who wants to go to one last championship to crown off their career - that is often a very hard call..

Send the person in their early 20's for the excellent experience, or send the person who is doing well in their mid-30's who wants one last go.

If this was sprinting, and someone got to the Olympics that would be great, but what if they get knocked out in heat 1 at 8am on morning one of the games with 20 people watching RTE? Is that a success [and does it matter!]? For them it is, getting to the games after years of hard work there, but as a nation and for the AAI and for the development of athletics?

It's the same with the Marathon and people finishing well down the race IMHO - but I could well be wrong...

Did you go to National Indoors this year? If you did you would have seen the buzz when Dara Kervick got the euro indoor qualifier. It certainly inspired me as I raced in the heat after him. This sort of thing creates excitement amongst the athletics community, particularly kids. And this was euro indoors. Could you imagine the excitement for the Olympics. Who gives a toss what Jonathon Beer Belly thinks. It's the excitement and inspiration to those who actually want to run is what is most important. Sending few athletes kills the sport. The depth over time will decrease as youngsters choose other sports that have less stringent criteria. I don't believe it to be a valid debate at all actually. It's rather short sighted.

As far as I'm concerned, if you reach the IAAF standard that should be the end of it. They are damn tough standards to achieve, particularly on the track and even more so in the field.

NetwerkErrer · 02-04-2015 12:22pm

Chivito550 wrote: »

Did you go to National Indoors this year? If you did you would have seen the buzz when Dara Kervick got the euro indoor qualifier. It certainly inspired me as I raced in the heat after him. This sort of thing creates excitement amongst the athletics community, particularly kids. And this was euro indoors. Could you imagine the excitement for the Olympics. Who gives a toss what Jonathon Beer Belly thinks. It's the excitement and inspiration to those who actually want to run is what is most important. Sending few athletes kills the sport. The depth over time will decrease as youngsters choose other sports that have less stringent criteria. I don't believe it to be a valid debate at all actually. It's rather short sighted.

As far as I'm concerned, if you reach the IAAF standard that should be the end of it. They are damn tough standards to achieve, particularly on the track and even more so in the field.

I agree, Raising the standard wouldn't increase performance. The standard is only ever raised by countries when there is significant depth at that level already. The more depth you have, the higher the standard needs to be to get the only the very best outliers from that level to qualify so you don't have the headache of picking from 30 Q times. Raising it without depth is a recipe for disaster.

The people at that level are already competitors. We don't need a higher standard, it's a bigger depth that is key to strong performances. The more people competing, the greater the chance of outliers and then you can raise the standard.

RayCun · 02-04-2015 12:24pm

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

Should we give those fewer folks more resources - I think it's a valid debate. [How do you select them, its simple, these folks consistently do well during their season, be that at indoors, at college meetings in the states [since most of our T&F prospects are over there], at major races / meetings, at euro's etc]

There were 17 T&F individual athletes, and a relay team, sent to the 2012 Olympics. My guess is that keeping 8 at home and spending their money on the other 9 would not have significantly improved performances in the 9 (or split them 14/3).
And also that if you asked a panel of experts before the Olympics to select the 9 that outperform the 8, they wouldn't agree, and many of them would get it wrong.

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

There is the other debate right there, should younger folks be allowed go, over someone who wants to go to one last championship to crown off their career - that is often a very hard call..

I think it was only the women's marathon last time around that had this problem, maybe the walk. Might be an issue in the marathon again next year. In most cases we are not heaving with athletes capable of qualifying.

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

If this was sprinting, and someone got to the Olympics that would be great, but what if they get knocked out in heat 1 at 8am on morning one of the games with 20 people watching RTE? Is that a success [and does it matter!]? For them it is, getting to the games after years of hard work there, but as a nation and for the AAI and for the development of athletics?

To have a 100m sprinter qualify for the games would be a success, for the nation and AAI and development of athletics. Holding out the promise of a place on the Olympic team for those who can achieve the standard is a driver of that success

tHE vAGGABOND · 02-04-2015 12:24pm

Slight tangent, but if you're in Athlone at the national indoors, I think we already have you

What I really want is the next Cian Healy to pick T&F and not Rugby [he still has two schools records I believe, for shot and hammer, correct me if wrong]. Or someone who plays GAA and has everything needed to be a long distance runner to get support and give it a real go. We need world class athletes to pick our sport and not others - that's the challenge if we want to win medals and grow the sport. Maybe it's an impossible challenge..

That is done by supporting those folks to a decent level, which by listing to JTG and following a number of serious folks on twitter, the AAI dont do terribly well..

RayCun · 02-04-2015 12:33pm

or Shane Long, the former hurdles champion.

Or there's a kid in my club who is an excellent high jumper. But he's also an excellent soccer goalkeeper.

The money isn't there in athletics to keep someone who is as good in both. And cutting Olympic teams down to the bone isn't going to change that, it wouldn't free up that kind of cash. But if you have a kid who likes athletics, the dream of Olympics qualification could be the thing that keeps them in the sport.

dublin runner · 02-04-2015 12:36pm

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

Slight tangent, but if you're in Athlone at the national indoors, I think we already have you

What I really want is the next Cian Healy to pick T&F and not Rugby [he still has two schools records I believe, for shot and hammer, correct me if wrong]. Or someone who plays GAA and has everything needed to be a long distance runner to get support and give it a real go. We need world class athletes to pick our sport and not others - that's the challenge if we want to win medals and grow the sport. Maybe it's an impossible challenge..

That is done by supporting those folks to a decent level, which by listing to JTG and following a number of serious folks on twitter, the AAI dont do terribly well..

Sorry but that really won't happen. Rugby has the money, professionalism and recognition. GAA is more professional than athletics, better organised and players are treated better. I really don't want to make this GAA vs. Athletics but the likes of Pollock aren't even funded.

walshb · 02-04-2015 12:39pm

One can apply the whole athletics vs. other sports to any place on earth. There are far more financially appealing sports to go for.

RayCun · 02-04-2015 12:39pm

Also, to get on the Ireland rugby squad you have to be in the top 25? in the country, which is a lower bar than making the Olympics team. And you're competing against five other countries for success, not the whole world

walshb · 02-04-2015 12:42pm

RayCun wrote: »

Also, to get on the Ireland rugby squad you have to be in the top 25? in the country, which is a lower bar than making the Olympics team. And you're competing against five other countries for success, not the whole world

You compete against the whole world in rugby too. They have a WC event!

Apples and oranges. Team sports vs. Individual sports.

dublin runner · 02-04-2015 12:43pm

walshb wrote: »

One can apply the whole athletics vs. other sports to any place on earth. There are far more financially appealing sports to go for.

Yes but I would rather compare the organisations and how they treat their athletes. That's getting of topic though.

demfad · 02-04-2015 12:50pm

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

I do think this is a good debate to have, btw and no need for folks to get upset. We need to talk about these things..

Next, of course all of us internet warriors would love to be selected for the olympics. Second, of course those selected worked their arses off and should get a chance. But we send a lot of people who don't get out of their first heat, and I do often wonder if we should better support fewer people. etc

Your argument assumes that the only goal of national and individual participation in the Olympics and Olympic events is to try and win or medal.

Id disagree with that.

The games were founded by Pierre de Coubertin, who took a keen interest in
the English education system which included sport in the school curriculum unheard of in his own country France.

He gave the Games an international and modern dimension and
saw them as part of a wider strategy of education through sport.

The Games has evolved along with society being influenced by society and also making its own mark on society.

The creed is still:

"The important thing in life is not the triumph, but the fight; the essential thing is not to have won, but to have fought well."

The competitive element is not about only winning, or only winning at all costs. Its about sending your nations fastest, strongest and fittest to compete fairly, respectfully with other nations fastest, strongest and fittest.

But at its heart the Olympics is about influencing the health of young people and old, using sport as education about making nations care about the health of its citizens.

Not partcipating because you have no chance of winning flies in the face of that.

Chivito550 · 02-04-2015 12:59pm

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

Slight tangent, but if you're in Athlone at the national indoors, I think we already have you

What I really want is the next Cian Healy to pick T&F and not Rugby [he still has two schools records I believe, for shot and hammer, correct me if wrong]. Or someone who plays GAA and has everything needed to be a long distance runner to get support and give it a real go. We need world class athletes to pick our sport and not others - that's the challenge if we want to win medals and grow the sport. Maybe it's an impossible challenge..

That is done by supporting those folks to a decent level, which by listing to JTG and following a number of serious folks on twitter, the AAI dont do terribly well..

And making Olympic and World qualification harder than it needs is the way to go about attracting people to a sport already without financial incentives?

Glad you are not working for AAI is all I can say.

PVincent · 02-04-2015 1:09pm

For what it is worth ...Kids are inspired by the adult runners . I see first hand the impact that one of our girls has on the kids in our club when she is able to call down and present medals , or have a few selfies with the kids , or even do some training with them . And she is only a National Medallist . I mean only in the sense of the argument. Can you imagine the inspiration if she qualifies for the Olympics in Rio ( even if it is part of the Relay Team ) . It wont just be the kids in the club she inspires to train harder .

Send as many as we can to the Olympics or Championships . That inspiration will filter down . It is Athletics only chance to inspire the next generation .

Chivito550 · 02-04-2015 1:16pm

PVincent wrote: »

For what it is worth ...Kids are inspired by the adult runners . I see first hand the impact that one of our girls has on the kids in our club when she is able to call down and present medals , or have a few selfies with the kids , or even do some training with them . And she is only a National Medallist . I mean only in the sense of the argument. Can you imagine the inspiration if she qualifies for the Olympics in Rio ( even if it is part of the Relay Team ) . It wont just be the kids in the club she inspires to train harder .

Send as many as we can to the Olympics or Championships . That inspiration will filter down . It is Athletics only chance to inspire the next generation .

+1 Super post.

I have seen this in my club also. A national medallist and the kids absolutely love her.

ultrapercy · 02-04-2015 1:51pm

Chivito550 wrote: »

+1 Super post.

I have seen this in my club also. A national medallist and the kids absolutely love her.

I don't even understand how this is a discussion. If an athlete meets qualification criteria that athlete qualifies by right. This would not be a debate in any other sport. The Irish soccer team will likely finish third in their group (if they continue to be very lucky) proceed to a playoff with some lowly ranked nation that they will probably beat by a goal and thus qualify for the 24 team finals. That in my book is a low standard to achieve for qualification to a major championship but you dare not tell that to a soccer fan. Even in those circumstances very few people would suggest that the team should be prevented from competing by their own governing body or have to meet some more stringent criteria set by that body. As you have already said Chivito550 these arguments are really only put forward by non athletics people and mostly by bar stool sports fans who think finishing outside the world top 10 is failure but that a lienster hurling medal is legendary.

walshb · 02-04-2015 2:01pm

I don't think you can compare T&F accurately with other sports that are a lot more subjective, like say boxing or soccer or tennis or golf. T&F have markers and precise measurements that can assess athletes. Some athletes being sent to major events have PBs that we know won't stand a chance to progress them. And god forbid they progress a lot and they are called cheats. I still agree with the overall view that if the standard is met and the country selects you then go. Otherwise we wouldn't have races or events. We are up against some serious world powers in all sports, and we do fantastic in many sports based off our population.

Chivito550 · 02-04-2015 2:07pm

ultrapercy wrote: »

I don't even understand how this is a discussion. If an athlete meets qualification criteria that athlete qualifies by right. This would not be a debate in any other sport. The Irish soccer team will likely finish third in their group (if they continue to be very lucky) proceed to a playoff with some lowly ranked nation that they will probably beat by a goal and thus qualify for the 24 team finals. That in my book is a low standard to achieve for qualification to a major championship but you dare not tell that to a soccer fan. Even in those circumstances very few people would suggest that the team should be prevented from competing by their own governing body or have to meet some more stringent criteria set by that body. As you have already said Chivito550 these arguments are really only put forward by non athletics people and mostly by bar stool sports fans who think finishing outside the world top 10 is failure but that a lienster hurling medal is legendary.

Great comparison. 24 spots available for 51 countries to fight for, with about 10-12 of those countries being no-hopers like San Marino and Andorra. Qualifying for this is no great accomplishment. It would be expected. But the people who believe this to be a great achievement are the same muppets who believe the Olympics is no place for Brian Gregan. Unbelievable!

amcgee · 02-04-2015 2:10pm

average_runner wrote: »

I do agree with you, if they aren't going to be competitive then they shouldn't be going. By coming 66th, 68th, its not promoting the sport in Ireland or doing it any good, as no one is paying attention. Better off investing in the facilities instead.

JTG latest podcast addresses the whole funding thing and how the walkers have developed a professional setup and how the other events are in total disarray.

How are we ever going to compete if we dont send someone to run in the race. Most people outside africa cant really compete in the marathon, but thats just now, that can change over time. and beside Ireland have a proud history in long distance running and we should not throw that away

Krusty_Clown · 02-04-2015 4:29pm

ultrapercy wrote: »

Even in those circumstances very few people would suggest that the team should be prevented from competing by their own governing body or have to meet some more stringent criteria set by that body. As you have already said Chivito550 these arguments are really only put

Imagine the situation when you tried to explain to the Irish soccer team that they have to pay their own way for the qualification process? That they have to book and pay for their own flights to Rotterdam or Berlin. Pay for their own accommodation. Pay for anyone they want to bring with them. Sort out their own food and drinks, and lordy forbid - if they get injured, pay for their own rehabilitation?!

What's not being supplied is any justification for not sending a full repertoire. Is it a cost saving exercise? A face-saving exercise when they don't take home the gold medal?

menoscemo · 02-04-2015 6:01pm

Just getting back to the OP

So depending on QTs; in the mens we have:
Pollock
Fagan
Kenneally
Clohissey
Ciobanu
Hehir
Fraser
Seaward

In the Women's:
Britton
McCambridge
Lizzie Lee
Sanchez
Sinead Diver???

Anyone else?

tang1 · 02-04-2015 6:06pm

Cragg?
I've asked this before to a muted response, Sean Connolly, he looked very promising a few years back and just vanished, if theres some issue i apologise for asking.

Whats Ava Hutchinson at this weather anybody know, Linda Byrne likewise?

rom · 02-04-2015 6:40pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Imagine the situation when you tried to explain to the Irish soccer team that they have to pay their own way for the qualification process? That they have to book and pay for their own flights to Rotterdam or Berlin. Pay for their own accommodation. Pay for anyone they want to bring with them. Sort out their own food and drinks, and lordy forbid - if they get injured, pay for their own rehabilitation?!

What's not being supplied is any justification for not sending a full repertoire. Is it a cost saving exercise? A face-saving exercise when they don't take home the gold medal?

If the have a good standard marathon mission will cover it if they make their own way to Dublin.

menoscemo · 07-04-2015 2:03pm

menoscemo wrote: »

Ah ok, I wonder will she run the Marathon at the Worlds though?
In saying that, probably not the best place to try to get an Olympic QT...

So Fionnuala is targetting an Autumn Marathon as a qualifier for Rio. She doesn't say which one though. Unlikely to be Dublin I guess, hopefully she makes it easy on herself and picks a fast one like Berlin or Frankfurt

http://jumping-the-gun.com/?p=5083

tang1 · 07-04-2015 5:05pm

Any word on a confirmed qualifying time, sure Mick Clohissy isn't going to Rotterdam Sunday running blind regarding a time?

HelenAnne · 07-04-2015 11:17pm

tang1 wrote: »

Any word on a confirmed qualifying time, sure Mick Clohissy isn't going to Rotterdam Sunday running blind regarding a time?

2.18 I think

Itziger · 08-04-2015 8:53am

2:18? Jeez, sounds on the slow side.

HelenAnne · 08-04-2015 10:23am

Itziger wrote: »

2:18? Jeez, sounds on the slow side.

maybe I'm wrong. thought I read it somewhere. don't know, so!

ger664 · 08-04-2015 10:28am

Itziger wrote: »

2:18? Jeez, sounds on the slow side.

Agree this wont get you on the plane as I think more the 3 will get under it. 2:15 should get your butt on the plane

tang1 · 08-04-2015 12:08pm

As per this months edition of Irish Runner, 2.18 is indeed the male qualifying time for Rio and 2.44 for women. Qualifying for Worlds later this year is 2.15.30. Sean Hehir running Rotterdam Sunday to according to the report.

Rio 2016 Marathon Qualification, whos trying?

Comments