Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Tokyo 2020 Qualifying. Athletes to watch

24567…11

Comments

  • #32
    OOnegative
    Registered Users Posts: 4,834 ✭✭✭OOnegative


    Swashbuckler wrote: »
    Do you have to get the app to search for specific athlete?

    The results are up on Watch Athletics without downloading the app P.


  • #33
    Swashbuckler
    Registered Users Posts: 6,582 ✭✭✭Swashbuckler


    OOnegative wrote:
    The results are up on Watch Athletics without downloading the app P.

    Cheers B. Can't seem to search for the lad I want. No worries


  • #34
    brutes1
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 477 ✭✭brutes1


    OOnegative wrote: »
    2.18.47 for Ciaran In the early hours this morning in Tokyo, came strong in the second half of the race in atrocious weather conditions a big PB to boot. Time maybe a way outside what will go to Tokyo next year but he has another shot now to run another marathon in better weather conditions.

    Edit: He was first sub-elite also.

    Great run by him, more to come Id expect , he is very talented


  • #35
    OOnegative
    Registered Users Posts: 4,834 ✭✭✭OOnegative


    brutes1 wrote: »
    Great run by him, more to come Id expect , he is very talented

    Seems to be alright & at 31 he’s a few years left in him yet injuries permitting. Very talented chef to by looks of things.


  • #36
    healy1835
    Registered Users Posts: 2,181 ✭✭✭healy1835


    New marathon standard, 2:11:30, looks pretty out of reach for most, if not all, trying for Tokyo. Am I reading it wrong in saying that even with the bonus for winning national champs, you would still need to back it up with a fast marathon or half marathon?
    You'd hope that it will raise the bar and all that, but this Olympics may be too soon for that to happen?


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Flynnboslice
    Registered Users Posts: 13 ✭Flynnboslice


    healy1835 wrote: »
    New marathon standard, 2:11:30, looks pretty out of reach for most, if not all, trying for Tokyo. Am I reading it wrong in saying that even with the bonus for winning national champs, you would still need to back it up with a fast marathon or half marathon?
    You'd hope that it will raise the bar and all that, but this Olympics may be too soon for that to happen?

    The standards appear harder across the board because of the shift towards the new ranking system.

    Dublin marathon winner not guaranteed without the time (previously you had to win in under 2.18 so that it met standard as well as the selection policy)

    However it does now mean that Dublin performances carry more weight than other races of similar stature (Clohiseys 2.15 run in Dublin last yer worth more than Scullions 2.14 in Houston)

    Will also mean that Fionualla choosing Boston as her return marathon will carry more weight than simply time this year


  • #38
    Krusty_Clown
    Registered Users Posts: 19,495 ✭✭✭✭Krusty_Clown


    Flynnboslice wrote: »
    However it does now mean that Dublin performances carry more weight than other races of similar stature (Clohiseys 2.15 run in Dublin last yer worth more than Scullions 2.14 in Houston)

    Will also mean that Fionualla choosing Boston as her return marathon will carry more weight than simply time this year
    Why do you say that? Have they announced what races are eligible for world ranking criteria? Is it based on the IAAF accreditation system?
    Houston and Dublin are both IAAF rules compliant, so wouldn't it come down to times/ rankings?

    While Boston is eligible from a world rankings perspective (with adjustment) it is not eligible from an entry standards perspective, so not sure where that would leave Fionnuala. Without another planned marathon, she'd likely have to wait out the qualification window, to make sure she's made it, but given the new qualification standards, it's unlikely we'll see anyone making the standard (apart from Sinead Diver running for Australia), so she should be fine with a good performance (assuming the downward adjustment isn't too great).
    I'm assuming we still get to send a quota for each event, or has that changed?


  • #39
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Krusty_Clown wrote: »
    I'm assuming we still get to send a quota for each event, or has that changed?

    It hasn't changed.
    Ireland don't automatically get to send three athletes, but Kenya can only send three.

    Does this then remove the discretion of the Olympic committees, I wonder? Do Kenya have to send their top three ranked marathoners?


  • #40
    Flynnboslice
    Registered Users Posts: 13 ✭Flynnboslice


    Krusty_Clown wrote: »
    Flynnboslice wrote: »
    However it does now mean that Dublin performances carry more weight than other races of similar stature (Clohiseys 2.15 run in Dublin last yer worth more than Scullions 2.14 in Houston)

    Will also mean that Fionualla choosing Boston as her return marathon will carry more weight than simply time this year
    Why do you say that? Have they announced what races are eligible for world ranking criteria? Is it based on the IAAF accreditation system?
    Houston and Dublin are both IAAF rules compliant, so wouldn't it come down to times/ rankings?

    While Boston is eligible from a world rankings perspective (with adjustment) it is not eligible from an entry standards perspective, so not sure where that would leave Fionnuala. Without another planned marathon, she'd likely have to wait out the qualification window, to make sure she's made it, but given thee new qualification standards, it's unlikely we'll see anyone making the standard (apart from Sinead Diver running for Australia), so she should be fine with a good performance (assuming the downward adjustment isn't too great).

    National Championships are weighted higher but below gold label marathons.

    For McCormack the placings would offset some of the time discrepancy fir the ranking purposes

    https://www.iaaf.org/world-ranking-rules/basics


  • #41
    Duanington
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭Duanington


    Jaysus I'm lost with this one now


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    There was a programme on RTE in the last Olympic cycle about people trying to qualify for Rio. I seem to remember that the kick-boxer and the cyclist had basically the same qualification procedure - they had to compete in certain events, and get to the later stages of those events, to accumulate ranking points. That's how I'm thinking of athletics qualification - getting points for doing well in recognized competitions.


  • #43
    Flynnboslice
    Registered Users Posts: 13 ✭Flynnboslice


    RayCun wrote: »
    Krusty_Clown wrote: »
    I'm assuming we still get to send a quota for each event, or has that changed?

    It hasn't changed.
    Ireland don't automatically get to send three athletes, but Kenya can only send three.

    Does this then remove the discretion of the Olympic committees, I wonder? Do Kenya have to send their top three ranked marathoners?

    Bit unclear on this one but I imagine Kenya won’t be a nation influenced by rankings for distance events as they would come under the auto qualifier spots (50%) rankings would influence the other 50% which is why auto qualifiers have gone up nearly across the board 10.05 for 100 and 13.13 for 5k (which would have rule out Silver medalist Paul Chelimo in Rio)


  • #44
    Itziger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,012 ✭✭✭Itziger


    RayCun wrote: »
    There was a programme on RTE in the last Olympic cycle about people trying to qualify for Rio. I seem to remember that the kick-boxer and the cyclist had basically the same qualification procedure - they had to compete in certain events, and get to the later stages of those events, to accumulate ranking points. That's how I'm thinking of athletics qualification - getting points for doing well in recognized competitions.

    I haven't been following these new regulations at all. However, there is an obvious snag in trying to compare athletics with say boxing and giving weight to certain competitions. It makes sense to recognise opposition in boxing, that goes without saying. No-one is going to pretend that winning the Urbino Regional boxing festival comp is the same as winning or coming third/fourth in the European Champs. However, once a course is fair and properly measured and so on, a 2.11 marathon is a 2.11 marathon, whether run in Urbino or Paris. If anything the smaller competition could be said to be tougher in athletics cos the field wouldn't be near as strong. I'm confused.

    Note: I have no connection with Urbino one way or another I just pulled it out of me ar$e like the banker with the 15 billion figure.


  • #45
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Itziger wrote: »
    However, once a course is fair and properly measured and so on, a 2.11 marathon is a 2.11 marathon, whether run in Urbino or Paris. If anything the smaller competition could be said to be tougher in athletics cos the field wouldn't be near as strong.

    The rankings and the time positions are separate, I think.
    2.11 is 2.11 wherever you run it.

    But if you run a Diamond league 800m, or a national championship 800m, and win it, that gives you more ranking points than winning a small meet against no real competition. So there's an incentive for runners to race competitively instead of looking for meets where they'll get a pacer for the first 600 and no-one else in the field.


  • #46
    Duanington
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭Duanington


    So....the marathon for example, where does this realistically leave us?

    Will we have any women travel? There's nobody in that kind of form at the moment, nobody on the cusp of 2.29 ( which I think is the women's standard now)

    We have 2\3 men who could potentially dip under 2.14 before then but 2.11 looks out of reach.

    The alternative route is via the rankings but sure we're nowhere near the top 100 there either


  • #47
    Itziger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,012 ✭✭✭Itziger


    RayCun wrote: »
    The rankings and the time positions are separate, I think.
    2.11 is 2.11 wherever you run it.

    But if you run a Diamond league 800m, or a national championship 800m, and win it, that gives you more ranking points than winning a small meet against no real competition. So there's an incentive for runners to race competitively instead of looking for meets where they'll get a pacer for the first 600 and no-one else in the field.

    Yeah, that makes sense, especially with regards paced/time trial 800s and such like.


  • #48
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Duanington wrote: »
    So....the marathon for example, where does this realistically leave us?

    Will we have any women travel? There's nobody in that kind of form at the moment, nobody on the cusp of 2.29 ( which I think is the women's standard now)

    We have 2\3 men who could potentially dip under 2.14 before then but 2.11 looks out of reach.

    The alternative route is via the rankings but sure we're nowhere near the top 100 there either

    The thing about the rankings is that half the top 100 are from Kenya and Ethiopia, and only six of them can go. (Similarly in the sprints, lots of Americans in the top 100 who can't go) So 'top 100' isn't the standard, I don't know what it will be.

    But Lizzie Lee was saying on twitter that, aside from the rankings/standards changes, the number of women in the marathon is being cut.


  • #49
    spc78
    Registered Users Posts: 122 ✭✭spc78


    under the new rules Irish athletes will qualify via the rankings rather than the standard. given the the national championships are worth 45/35/30 ranking points, wouldn't Irelands best chance of sending 3 athletes to the games be to make the national championships a different race, say a 4 lap flat course so that the athletes could set a fast time AND get the ranking points? A German who wins their own national championships in Berlin will end up higher up the rankings than an irish person winning their own NC.

    An athletes best chance of qualifying is to maximise their ranking points over 2 races by placing 1,2 or 3rd in their national championships and running a second fast race, bonus points if they can place top 12 at a gold label or top at a Silver label marathon - thats not easy to do and other athletes will have the same idea - find a gold or silver race thats fast and doesn't have a deep field.....it'll get a bump in entries in the qualifying window if 10 athletes all have the same idea! But it remains that athletes who's national championships marathon is held on a fast course have an advantage over athletes whose NC is on a 'slower' course - e.g Dublin.


  • #50
    AuldManKing
    Registered Users Posts: 5,236 ✭✭✭AuldManKing


    RayCun wrote: »
    The rankings and the time positions are separate, I think.
    2.11 is 2.11 wherever you run it.

    But if you run a Diamond league 800m, or a national championship 800m, and win it, that gives you more ranking points than winning a small meet against no real competition. So there's an incentive for runners to race competitively instead of looking for meets where they'll get a pacer for the first 600 and no-one else in the field.

    So the level of competition in Diamond leagues and 'Gold Star' races just increased - so places will be fewer for Athletes lower down in the rankings - A vicious circle??


    spc78 wrote: »
    under the new rules Irish athletes will qualify via the rankings rather than the standard. given the the national championships are worth 45/35/30 ranking points, wouldn't Irelands best chance of sending 3 athletes to the games be to make the national championships a different race, say a 4 lap flat course so that the athletes could set a fast time AND get the ranking points? A German who wins their own national championships in Berlin will end up higher up the rankings than an irish person winning their own NC.

    An athletes best chance of qualifying is to maximise their ranking points over 2 races by placing 1,2 or 3rd in their national championships and running a second fast race, bonus points if they can place top 12 at a gold label or top at a Silver label marathon - thats not easy to do and other athletes will have the same idea - find a gold or silver race thats fast and doesn't have a deep field.....it'll get a bump in entries in the qualifying window if 10 athletes all have the same idea! But it remains that athletes who's national championships marathon is held on a fast course have an advantage over athletes whose NC is on a 'slower' course - e.g Dublin.

    There wont be any change to this years National Marathon Champs - but it'll make it a hell of a race!!
    I wonder who then will do the World Champs as it would be crazy for an Olympic hopeful to even consider this race.

    I guess the guys racing Spring Marathons this year (Clohisey) will have 3 attempts to get a good time/ranking points vrs the guys not doing a Spring Marathon (Scullion) who may only have 2 attempts.

    How does a good HM time compare with a good Mara time in the rankings? Is it similar points for similar performance?


  • #51
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    AuldManKing wrote: »
    So the level of competition in Diamond leagues and 'Gold Star' races just increased - so places will be fewer for Athletes lower down in the rankings - A vicious circle??

    Maybe, I don't know if it will make much difference though, always hard to get into DL.

    I'm still amused by Seb Coe introducing a rule to get athletes to race their competition.
    AuldManKing wrote: »
    How does a good HM time compare with a good Mara time in the rankings? Is it similar points for similar performance?

    Similar points for times, I think, but the placing scores are higher for a marathon.
    https://www.iaaf.org/world-ranking-rules/road-running


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Cathal Dennehy explainer


  • #53
    youngrun
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,477 ✭✭✭youngrun


    spc78 wrote: »
    under the new rules Irish athletes will qualify via the rankings rather than the standard. given the the national championships are worth 45/35/30 ranking points, wouldn't Irelands best chance of sending 3 athletes to the games be to make the national championships a different race, say a 4 lap flat course so that the athletes could set a fast time AND get the ranking points? A German who wins their own national championships in Berlin will end up higher up the rankings than an irish person winning their own NC.

    An athletes best chance of qualifying is to maximise their ranking points over 2 races by placing 1,2 or 3rd in their national championships and running a second fast race, bonus points if they can place top 12 at a gold label or top at a Silver label marathon - thats not easy to do and other athletes will have the same idea - find a gold or silver race thats fast and doesn't have a deep field.....it'll get a bump in entries in the qualifying window if 10 athletes all have the same idea! But it remains that athletes who's national championships marathon is held on a fast course have an advantage over athletes whose NC is on a 'slower' course - e.g Dublin.

    Yes agreed unless there is a real outlier like maybe Fionnuala in Ladies with a good shot at the time.
    I had a quick look at rankings and reckon Clohisey would get into the top 80. Hes at 448 now, but there are over 370 struck out as their countries hit the maximum 3 mark eg Kenya has 191 at or ahead of Mick, only 3 can go. Scullion not far off.

    Thats assuming a max field of 80 - Why so low???- and only 3 going per country regardless of the fact they can have multiples who hit the standards or WC finish standards.

    Needs to be up in lights though, assume AI will have their finger on the pulse.


  • #54
    KSU
    Registered Users Posts: 946 ✭✭✭KSU


    youngrun wrote: »
    Yes agreed unless there is a real outlier like maybe Fionnuala in Ladies with a good shot at the time.
    I had a quick look at rankings and reckon Clohisey would get into the top 80. Hes at 448 now, but there are over 370 struck out as their countries hit the maximum 3 mark eg Kenya has 191 at or ahead of Mick, only 3 can go. Scullion not far off.

    Thats assuming a max field of 80 - Why so low???- and only 3 going per country regardless of the fact they can have multiples who hit the standards or WC finish standards.

    Needs to be up in lights though, assume AI will have their finger on the pulse.

    Fionnuala running Boston so a top 10 would be a option also.

    Field size is low because Athletics quota has been reduced in the Olympics to 1900 across all events. IOC dictates number of entrants across all sports. IAAF then distribute this across all events male and female


  • #55
    Lazare
    Registered Users Posts: 4,412 ✭✭✭Lazare


    Mick Clohisey on target for 2:12


  • #56
    Itziger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,012 ✭✭✭Itziger


    Lazare wrote: »
    Mick Clohisey on target for 2:12

    Through the Half in 1.06.34


  • #57
    Lazare
    Registered Users Posts: 4,412 ✭✭✭Lazare


    What does Scullion need to do at DCM?

    He's obv not gonna run 2:11:30 at Dublin.

    Is it a national champs win or nothing?

    Assuming he does win NC, what does that do for him?


  • #58
    Singer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,415 ✭✭✭Singer


    Lazare wrote: »
    What does Scullion need to do at DCM?

    He's obv not gonna run 2:11:30 at Dublin.

    Is it a national champs win or nothing?

    Assuming he does win NC, what does that do for him?

    https://www.fastrunning.com/fast-10/2019/stephen-scullion/trying-to-make-sense-of-the-toyko-2020-marathon-qualification/24258

    Not sure how much of this analysis is still current.


  • #59
    OOnegative
    Registered Users Posts: 4,834 ✭✭✭OOnegative


    Singer wrote: »
    https://www.fastrunning.com/fast-10/2019/stephen-scullion/trying-to-make-sense-of-the-toyko-2020-marathon-qualification/24258

    Not sure how much of this analysis is still current.

    To quote the man himself, F*ck that’s complicated stuff!!


  • #60
    Lazare
    Registered Users Posts: 4,412 ✭✭✭Lazare


    So it's a national champs win and a big showing at Heuston and he'll still have to cross his fingers. Jaysus


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    KSU
    Registered Users Posts: 946 ✭✭✭KSU


    Lazare wrote: »
    So it's a national champs win and a big showing at Heuston and he'll still have to cross his fingers. Jaysus

    Gonna need about a 2.12.30-2.12 at the very least looking at the rankings currently


Advertisement