¶2012OT w100—Carmelita Jeter 10.92

[j-a-m]

A coin toss would be the epitome of stupidity on the part of USATF.

I was gonna say pinnacle of stupidity, but I guess epitome works as well...

[ATK]

USATF has more power.

At the end of the day, if the athletes disagree, by the end of the meet Sunday USATF will flip a coin, with or without them there.

Thats not true. If they disagree they run. Only way the coin flip is used is if BOTH agree to it.

c. If both athletes refuse to declare a preference regarding the method between a run off and coin toss in regards to how the tie is broken, the tie will be broken by coin toss.

[Weights&Shoes]

The "coin toss protocol" is hilarious LOL

I am seriously dying of laughter.

Same here.

[guru]

USATF has more power.

At the end of the day, if the athletes disagree, by the end of the meet Sunday USATF will flip a coin, with or without them there.

Thats not true. If they disagree they run. Only way the coin flip is used is if BOTH agree to it.

c. If both athletes refuse to declare a preference regarding the method between a run off and coin toss in regards to how the tie is broken, the tie will be broken by coin toss.

There's a difference between "not declaring a preference"(as the rules state) and disagreeing, which is what you said in your earlier post

At the end of the day, if the athletes disagree, by the end of the meet Sunday USATF will flip a coin, with or without them there.

[ATK]

My mistake, you are correct. I meant to say if the athletes don't make a decision at all. Which I think is more than likely going to happen considering the 200m situation.

[guru]

My mistake, you are correct. I meant to say if the athletes don't make a decision at all. Which I think is more than likely going to happen considering the 200m situation.

I dont, especially with Tarmoh.

Either Felix will drop out, or they will run.

[ATK]

There are still to many hypothetical factors in here that they didn't think about, that very likely can happen.
Unfortunately we wont know the outcome for a week...

[Charley Shaffer]

The "coin toss protocol" is hilarious LOL

No kidding. It sounds as if USATF, embarrassed by not having enough rules in place, hired a pack of lawyers and tried to cover every possible situation, including the coin landing on its edge.

And they used "8 am PST" as the time for the coin toss. Do they not realize that we are currently on PDT and that "8 am PST" would be 9:00 a.m. PDT?

And they promised to provide a pre-1999 quarter! Maybe they haven't noticed that eagles haven't been on the reverse since 1998.

[Vault-emort]

Well done to the USATF brains trust for developing this great new set of rules...

I guess this tie-breaker process now also applies to multi or distance events at trials?

[Marlow]

I have the better solution. Threaten to cut Jeter in half. If one says OK and the other says no, then given it to the one who said no. If both say OK, give it to the 5th place runner. If both say no, threaten to cut Madison in half and so on, continue through the rest of the finalists till you have a split in answers. If necessariy, move on to immediate family, starting with Felix, cuz her name comes first alphabetically. Eventually you'll get to someone that one cares for and the other doesn't.

[Waterbuffalo]

Here is their official dead heat procedures announcement

http://www.usatf.org/News/Dead-heat-pro ... ?feed=news

2. If neither athlete declines their position, they will be given the option to determine the tie-breaker via coin toss or by run-off.

a. If both athletes choose the same option, that option will be utilized as the tie-breaker.

b. If the athletes disagree on the tie-breaker, the tie will be broken by a run-off.

c. If both athletes refuse to declare a preference regarding the method between a run off and coin toss in regards to how the tie is broken, the tie will be broken by coin toss.

This reads to me to not contemplate a scenario: where one (but not "both") athletes refuses to declare a preference. Thoughts? Is it implied that this scenario incurs Option 2.b (i.e. one but not both refusing to declare is presumed to be a disagreement)?

[ATK]

This reads to me to not contemplate a scenario: where one (but not "both") athletes refuses to declare a preference. Thoughts? Is it implied that this scenario incurs Option 2.b (i.e. one but not both refusing to declare is presumed to be a disagreement)?

There are tons of scenarios that can happen.

[j-a-m]

I guess this tie-breaker process now also applies to multi or distance events at trials?

Other running events yes, multi events no.

[toyracer]

If either of the two ladies really values that third place they should have retained a lawyer by now. I don't care if they have the same coach, this is the Olympics, this is life changing.

Athletes sign to run under rules that are already in place.

You don't run a race then make a rule to say who won a place on the team.

Does USTAF even have that power? By that I mean; is there within their rules a rule that says they can make up a rule that influences the outcome of a race for selection after it is already run?

On a side note I'd really love to see an unprocessed raw file of the photo. Highest definition etc. showing the timeline. Where is the actual finish line in the photo? Why is it that the photo has the athletes, the lane markers but not the finish line that is painted on the track?

[j-a-m]

This reads to me to not contemplate a scenario: where one (but not "both") athletes refuses to declare a preference. Thoughts? Is it implied that this scenario incurs Option 2.b (i.e. one but not both refusing to declare is presumed to be a disagreement)?

If only one athlete declares a preference, then her preference is effectively what happens.

[CookyMonzta]

I am not at all amused with that the USATF is trying to accomplish, and the way they are trying to do it. Is it really necessary for this dead heat to be broken during the Trials? ABSOLUTELY NOT!

I'm beginning to think the TV executives have got their muddy fingerprints all over this mess, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are trying to steer the board of referees into forcing a runoff on the last day, just for publicity.

If I were Bob Kersee, I would say, loud enough for the NBC fat cats to hear, "Enough of this shit!! Let the girls rest after the Trials 200, then pick the first European meet on the circuit that invites both of them to run a 100, and let it be settled there! I will not have either one or both of my girls injured and out of the Olympics to satisfy some fat cat's bottom line!"

And I must ask again: Did they put the photo under an electron microscope? I, too, have a feeling there was some bullshit going on under the tent when the final result was changed.

[CookyMonzta]

And one other thing: If they are both running the 200, what if both of them get hurt, fail to finish, and they both say NO to the coin-flip for the final 100 spot? No spot should be decided on anything resembling a rock-paper-scissors farce.

This must be settled in a race on the European circuit. St. Denis (July 6), London (July 13-14), or Monaco (July 20), or all 3 in a best-2-of-3. The coin flip is totally absurd, and they can't afford to injure themselves immediately before or after the 200 rounds. If I must say so, they should settle it at the Aviva meet in London. That is the Olympic city, no?

[trackonthebrain]

On a side note I'd really love to see an unprocessed raw file of the photo. Highest definition etc. showing the timeline. Where is the actual finish line in the photo? Why is it that the photo has the athletes, the lane markers but not the finish line that is painted on the track?

This should not be a side note. I'm in the film industry and there are many methods to adjust a photo in order to enhance it and make the images more clear. Ditto for law enforcement. Do we know what has been done to better sort out the images.

Also, has anyone seen the finish line image from the alternate angle?

Finally, at the stadium, on the scoreboard, the 100 times were extended to 1000's of a second to show Tarmoh as the 3rd place finisher. Where did these numbers come from? Were they not accurate? If they were not accurate, who generated them? Why? Shouldn't we hear from this person(s)?If the numbers were accurate, don't they determine who was 3rd? Or are they being considered unreliable? If so, why?

[CookyMonzta]

On a side note I'd really love to see an unprocessed raw file of the photo. Highest definition etc. showing the timeline. Where is the actual finish line in the photo? Why is it that the photo has the athletes, the lane markers but not the finish line that is painted on the track?

This should not be a side note. I'm in the film industry and there are many methods to adjust a photo in order to enhance it and make the images more clear. Ditto for law enforcement. Do we know what has been done to better sort out the images.

Also, has anyone seen the finish line image from the alternate angle?

Finally, at the stadium, on the scoreboard, the 100 times were extended to 1000's of a second to show Tarmoh as the 3rd place finisher. Where did these numbers come from? Were they not accurate? If they were not accurate, who generated them? Why? Shouldn't we hear from this person(s)?If the numbers were accurate, don't they determine who was 3rd? Or are they being considered unreliable? If so, why?

You will hear absolutely nothing from the officials on this matter. The fat cats at NBC are setting, or have successfully hijacked, the agenda here, and they demand satisfaction for the sensationalism they crave and seek in this matter.

I'll tell you this, though: If they have a runoff on the last day of the Trials, and either one, especially Allyson, rips her hamstring, the shouts you heard from Bob Kersee after Gail fell across the line for 5th in the Barcelona 100H in 1992 will be nothing like what you'll hear on Sunday. And then someone or some people will be sued to absolutely no end, for the way those 2 girls were sacrified on the vine for a network's brazen lust for live high drama!

[18.99s]

Does USTAF even have that power? By that I mean; is there within their rules a rule that says they can make up a rule that influences the outcome of a race for selection after it is already run?

By failing to have a tiebreaker in place before the trials, they de facto have that power, whether we like it or not, whether they like it or not. Somebody has to be chosen somehow.

[cigar95]

Where is the actual finish line in the photo? Why is it that the photo has the athletes, the lane markers but not the finish line that is painted on the track?

The entire photo *is* a photo of the finish line. (Or, more precisely, a very thin slit around the finish line.)

A Finishlynx image is an image of the finish line at many different times, rather than a photo of many different locations at one instant in time. Those very thin images are stiched together to produce what looks like a snapshot, but it isn't.

Hence when an athlete steps on the finish line, you get odd images such as Felix' foot in the image of this race. And if you notice one of Tarmoh's legs looks thinner than normal, it's because that leg was moving faster than the rest of her body as she crossed the finish line.

[lexvid]

I think a run-off is the fairest way to settle this and it should be after the 200. It has worked in swimming when it has happened and those races take far longer to run than a 100.

Felix and Tarmoh are in "trials shape" for better or worse right now which is when it counts, not a Diamond league meet in Europe where either one could get sick or injured before hand or false start during the race.

Someone suggested best 2 out of 3 which is far fetched and will surely sabotage any success either athlete would have in the Olympics by forcing them to peak just for those races knowing what's at stake.

Is all this fair to either athlete? no but it would be the "fairest" solution I could reasonably think of.

[optimistic]

Mike and Mike just discussed this on ESPN radio/ESPN2! They gave USATF some flack for not having a procedure in place and they agree with the runoff. On one side, I am glad track got a mention on such a popular show, but really....discuss this and not even a sentence about the world record that was also set this weekend?

[18.99s]

I think a run-off is the fairest way to settle this and it should be after the 200. It has worked in swimming when it has happened and those races take far longer to run than a 100.

One problem is that a runoff has a much higher risk of injury than a swimoff.

For this particular situation where they have to make a rule on the spot, a runoff is the least of the evils. But in the future, other methods that are performance-based but don't require a runoff would be better. For example, who has the better season's best or who has the better semifinal time.

Of course, it would be unfair to use the better semifinal time now, since neither ran the semifinals knowing it could be used as a tiebreaker. And using season's best at this time would be effectively picking Felix by committee. But if such rules are in place before the meet starts, the athletes would know what they have to do to qualify over certain other athletes and can act accordingly.

[Athleticsimaging]

I don't understand what the big deal is about a coin toss deciding things. This is what starts a tennis match and a cricket match despite it being known that order of commencement provides a benefit. It also provides for progression in rounds under IAAF rules and still has a roll in lane allocation.

In my view, both athletes failed, yes FAILED, at their given task, so neither deserves to go.

All that was required of the field was that three athletes beat the rest but only two managed that simple task and there is no doubt that those that met the challenge are going to London.

Those that failed clearly forfeited any right to team selection as surely as any athlete that failed to achieve an A qualifier by the end of competition but finished top three. If the selectors deem it necessary to fill the third spot, it is up to both athletes to accept any process because both signed up to compete in circumstances where there was no defined tie-break for third place.

[ATK]

They said seasons best could not be used because the selection of the team is based off the performance at trials to begin with. So it would have been unfair to decide a team member based off a non trials event. Which I think is a pretty valid reason.

[optimistic]

Finally, at the stadium, on the scoreboard, the 100 times were extended to 1000's of a second to show Tarmoh as the 3rd place finisher. Where did these numbers come from? Were they not accurate? If they were not accurate, who generated them? Why? Shouldn't we hear from this person(s)?If the numbers were accurate, don't they determine who was 3rd? Or are they being considered unreliable? If so, why?

There has been no official word on this, however this is what I have deduced: NBC stated numerous times that the times are measured every 3-thousandths of a second. Thus, there is a thousandths of a second measurement (as shown on the board), but that is not accurate in determining who crossed first. Why? Because they are moving continuously. At 1-thousandths of a second, Felix could have been ahead, but by the time the camera took a reading (at 3-thousandths), Jeneba could have moved ahead.....making this inaccurate for determining who truly crossed first. To use 1000ths, the equipment would need to measure every 3 (or so) ten-thousandths; which I am guessing it cannot do.

[lexvid]

They said seasons best could not be used because the selection of the team is based off the performance at trials to begin with. So it would have been unfair to decide a team member based off a non trials event. Which I think is a pretty valid reason.

Nothing is perfect or absolute. For example, the women's discuss event has the 6th place finisher going to London because the 3rd place trials finisher did not have the A standard. obviously neither did the 4th or 5th place finishers but at least a criteria is in place to account for this.

The fastest seasonal time pre trials should have decided the spot between Felix and Tarmoh.

[mal]

I don't understand what the big deal is about a coin toss deciding things. This is what starts a tennis match and a cricket match despite it being known that order of commencement provides a benefit. It also provides for progression in rounds under IAAF rules and still has a roll in lane allocation.

In my view, both athletes failed, yes FAILED, at their given task, so neither deserves to go.

All that was required of the field was that three athletes beat the rest but only two managed that simple task and there is no doubt that those that met the challenge are going to London.

Those that failed clearly forfeited any right to team selection as surely as any athlete that failed to achieve an A qualifier by the end of competition but finished top three. If the selectors deem it necessary to fill the third spot, it is up to both athletes to accept any process because both signed up to compete in circumstances where there was no defined tie-break for third place.

You have a strange view of the world.

[ATK]

They said seasons best could not be used because the selection of the team is based off the performance at trials to begin with. So it would have been unfair to decide a team member based off a non trials event. Which I think is a pretty valid reason.

Nothing is perfect or absolute. For example, the women's discuss event has the 6th place finisher going to London because the 3rd place trials finisher did not have the A standard. obviously neither did the 4th or 5th place finishers but at least a criteria is in place to account for this.

The fastest seasonal time pre trials should have decided the spot between Felix and Tarmoh.

Standards is a completely different situation.

Picking seasons bests would make the trials a joke and seem more like a fun game.
Athletes could potentially alter their race to purposely get a dead heat if they know they have a faster SB than another athlete.

[lexvid]

ATK, I agree as far as season's best without the A standard. They don't go. I'll amend that to mean season's best with A standard. In this case they both have the standard so it's a mute point.

It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to dead heat on purpose.

[unclezadok]

Why would anybody purposely be in a dead heat if they could make the team by going .01 faster? Aside from the fact that a runner would probably have to make about 1000 attempts before succeeding in creating a dead heat, in 999 of which he/she would probably be passed by others wile trying.

[ATK]

Athletes prepare for each meet differently, and tons of factors could have effected the races they were in during the season. If they knew their spot on the Olympic team was going to be based off their time before the trials they would have ran different in the season.

Other athletes who have better seasons bests but don't make the team could argue that its not fair to them.

[Athleticsimaging]

I don't understand what the big deal is about a coin toss deciding things. ...snip.....

You have a strange view of the world.

And you provide nothing of substance, yet again.

USA trials is top three, in the final, on the appointed day and that's that.
A process defended to the death on this board as the only possible way.

So season's best is bullshit, run off is not in the final on the day, so bullshit also, selector's belief in likely performance in London?, the exact opposite of performance on the day, so clearly bullshit. So what is left? Come on, what is not bullshit?

Face it, they failed to differentiate themselves as third best on the day, so fuckem, no team for either. That's the only solution in the ultimate dog eat dog competitive environment.

[DJG]

Here's how I see this playing out:
After the 200 final, a run-off will be held.
Felix has every reason to want a mulligan: bad start; bad, no lean finish.
(Plus she trains with Jeneba and I think she would have a pretty good
idea by now as to whom is faster.)
Jeneba will still be in the running for a 4x1 spot, and will still be on the boat to London.

No one in their right mind would let a toss-of-the-coin decide this tie.

USATF took how long to find a new CEO? No one should be surprised they aren't prepared
for this "unlikely" situation...ties never happen in running events! Yeah, right.

The NBC conspiracy is a good one, though; an 11sec thriller will bring in 11 million more viewers.