CookyMonzta wrote:When exactly is the entry deadline? if it is after July 14, then this should be done at the Aviva in London.
It is a 2-day meet; so, I imagine there may be a heat and a final. If one fails to make the final and the other qualifies, the finalist gets the 3rd spot, even if she doesn't finish in the final. It'll be a real test with real competition alongside those two.
The US deadline is at the end of the mens 200m final on Sunday.
Any runoff involving anyone else in the race is illogical. The point is for the two athletes to be the only factors.
What is the IOC and/or IAAF deadline? For the U.S. to insist upon a rush job, when at least one other option is open to them (which is not unprecedented), is absolute balderdash. Again, I can only conclude that the hands of the TV execs are deep in the cookie jar on this one!
The conditions of pure competition make it very much relevant that a runoff can be run in the middle of open competition with other competitors. What better motivation is there for them (especially Jeneba Tarmoh) to do their best? London is the perfect place, since that is where the Olympics are being held.
Last edited by CookyMonzta on Mon Jun 25, 2012 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
einnod23 wrote:[I disagree with the athlete(s) having the choice!
Yep, they should not have the responsibility of choosing a tie-breaker.. if three "semi-finals" was not enough, they need semi-final 3.5.. two woman run off.
CookyMonzta wrote:When exactly is the entry deadline? if it is after July 14, then this should be done at the Aviva in London.
It is a 2-day meet; so, I imagine there may be a heat and a final. If one fails to make the final and the other qualifies, the finalist gets the 3rd spot, even if she doesn't finish in the final. It'll be a real test with real competition alongside those two.
The US deadline is at the end of the mens 200m final on Sunday.
Any runoff involving anyone else in the race is illogical. The point is for the two athletes to be the only factors.
What is the IOC and/or IAAF deadline? For the U.S. to insist upon a rush job, when at least one other option is open to them (which is not unprecedented) is absolute balderdash. Again, I can only conclude that the hands of the TV execs are deep in the cookie jar on this one!
So what if someone other than the two false starts? what if someone in the race flinches, but does not get called for a false start? what if someone runs into another persons lane? what if someone pulls up with injury in the lane next to them?
And cant bring outside factors into a 1on 1 decision....
The conditions of pure competition make it very much relevant that a runoff can be run in the middle of open competition with other competitors. What better motivation is there for them (especially Jeneba Tarmoh) to do their best? London is the perfect place, since that is where the Olympics are being held.
NotSoOrdinary wrote:Personally, I agree with you. I do think Tarmoh is being treated unfairly.
How so? Given that there was a dead heat and only one remaining Olympic team spot for the 100m......
If you're talking about the premature result display showing erroneously that she'd gotten third, that's history now, and was quickly corrected. How is she *now* being treated unfairly?
ATK: Fat chance that anyone is going to run into those 2. If there is a false start by anyone other than those 2, it is still incumbent upon them to be prepared, as they would in any race where there is a false start. Should they both be placed in lanes next to each other, so much the better to have faster women on either side of them.
If there must be a one-on-one match race, it must take place after the Trials. To do it so soon after the 200 finals, when one or the other will still be fatigued (physically or mentally) after having run all-out in that final, forces one or the other to run the risk of injury, and also smacks of outside interference by the network in a desperate attempt to sell the drama.
If not the Aviva meet in London, they should find a small non-Diamond-League meet where none of the other competitors are capable of running 11.20. Since the PRs of Jeneba and Allyson are much faster, it will be, for all intentional purposes, still a one-on-one runoff. Put them in lanes 4 and 5.
Last edited by CookyMonzta on Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Haven't posted here in ages but how great would it be to have the run-off match race on a special 2 lane track in Times Square during Prime Time? There's already a big screen but I'm not sure if the pedestrian plaza is big enough. Would be pretty cool and NBC could probably get pretty good rating with Felix involved....
Crap. The w100 is not on the Diamond League schedule at the Aviva meet. But what if they schedule the 100 as a non-Diamond-League event? Then again, there are several minor meets between July 7 and July 14. The World Challenge meet in Madrid on July 7 sticks out as a possibility to decide the 3rd spot.
lagsun wrote:Haven't posted here in ages but how great would it be to have the run-off match race on a special 2 lane track in Times Square during Prime Time? There's already a big screen but I'm not sure if the pedestrian plaza is big enough. Would be pretty cool and NBC could probably get pretty good rating with Felix involved....
Yeah, yeah, been there, done that... with Donovan and Michael- .... and we all remember how that turned out. Well, maybe there's a lot of people now who weren't AROUND to remember how that one turned out. It wasn't pretty. In any case that was a P.T. Barnum circus kind of promotion, while this is serious athletics. Going back further, Jesse Owens had match races with horses. Ratings should not be a factor in this.
Last edited by Randy Treadway on Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
lagsun wrote:Haven't posted here in ages but how great would it be to have the run-off match race on a special 2 lane track in Times Square during Prime Time? There's already a big screen but I'm not sure if the pedestrian plaza is big enough. Would be pretty cool and NBC could probably get pretty good rating with Felix involved....
Anything that doesn't involve them holding this runoff so soon (within 3 days) after the 200 final. And ESPN would do a much better job at it.
lagsun wrote:Haven't posted here in ages but how great would it be to have the run-off match race on a special 2 lane track in Times Square during Prime Time? There's already a big screen but I'm not sure if the pedestrian plaza is big enough. Would be pretty cool and NBC could probably get pretty good rating with Felix involved....
Yeah, yeah, been there, done that... with Donovan and Michael- .... and we all remember how that turned out. Well, maybe there's a lot of people now who weren't AROUND to remember how that one turned out. It wasn't pretty. In any case that was a P.T. Barnum circus kind of promotion, while this is serious athletics. Going back father, Jesse Owens had match races with horses. Ratings should not be a factor in this.
I forgot about Bailey and Johnson. That is an even bigger reason why they should not have this runoff the day after the 200 final.
Last edited by CookyMonzta on Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CookyMonzta wrote:The World Challenge meet in Madrid on July 7 sticks out as a possibility to decide the 3rd spot.
Warm (maybe even hot) mediterranean weather came to mind to me too. Athens is another tour stop possibility. I think USATF could agree to do it at a recognized competition where Kersee's troops were already planning to go anyway.
CookyMonzta wrote:The World Challenge meet in Madrid on July 7 sticks out as a possibility to decide the 3rd spot.
Warm (maybe even hot) mediterranean weather came to mind to me too. Athens is another tour stop possibility. I think USATF could agree to do it at a recognized competition where Kersee's troops were already planning to go anyway.
Anywhere and any time but Sunday. There is no excuse whatsoever for the USATF to refuse to designate a meet for the runoff, to give the girls time to recover from running 6 races in a week; unless someone at NBC is pulling their leg. If they have not the courage to resist, lest one or both of the girls comes up seriously injured in that runoff, they should all resign.
Any talk of running with other athletes is seriously illogical like I said before.
Even if you think it wont happen it can happen and to many mental and psycological aspects come into play. Put Felix and Tarmoh in 4 and 5, fine. If one of the other 6 athletes has an amazing start that can effect them. If one of them has an odd running form that can effect them. If someone drifts into their lane than can be a factor. etc... Athletes are not robots, they see and sense things and everyone reacts differently but accordingly. Whether its physically or mentally, they react.
The only factors should be Felix and Tarmoh and the track. Any other athlete just leads to potentially more problems and changes the dynamics of what should be a pure head to head decision maker.
Last edited by ATK on Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ATK wrote:Any talk of running with other athletes is seriously illogical like I said before.
The only factors should be Felix and Tarmoh and the track. Any other athlete just leads to potentially more problems and changes the dynamics of what should be a pure head to head decision maker.
CookyMonzta wrote:What is the IOC and/or IAAF deadline? For the U.S. to insist upon a rush job, when at least one other option is open to them (which is not unprecedented), is absolute balderdash.
Both athletes will be on the IOC list for the 100m event, as the IOC allows 3 athletes + 1 alternate. And both will be present in London for the relay. The deadline to choose the which 3 compete is something like 12 or 24 hours (maybe less?) before the first round of the event starts, which would be in August. So there is well over a month to decide who gets to run in that 3rd spot! Deciding it next weekend is completely unnecessary.
I might be wrong but I thought Ms. Geer wanted the situation settled in terms of indentifying how the tie would be broken by the end of the trials rather than actually breaking the tie by the end of next weekend.
My gut feeling is along the lines of the poster who mentioned that as long as Felix was safely through on the 200m team there would be some agreement that she would run on the two relays and she would pass on the 100m.
Dutra5 wrote:I might be wrong but I thought Ms. Geer wanted the situation settled in terms of indentifying how the tie would be broken by the end of the trials rather than actually breaking the tie by the end of next weekend.
The team must be chosen by the end of the weekend...
Felix should bow out. She's not a serious contender in the 100 in London anyway. She would be a longshot to medal. It will just tire her out for the 200.
A NYT article on this quoted someone as saying that when there is a tie in a field event you drop down to the previous best mark or height clearance and that there is no counterpart in the running events.
Not entirely true.
Felix and Tarmoh both ran 100m prelims and semis:
Pre Semi F 11.19 11.23 T 11.16 11.10
Clearly Tarmoh beat Felix's time in both the Prelims and in the Semis (although not running against each other). Taking into account the pre and semi times seems just as fair as awarding first place to the guy who high jumps cleanly through 2.4m with three misses at the next height over the guy who also jumps 2.4 with three misses at the next height but had a single lower height miss.
So you could have three options: a runoff, coin toss, or use the above approach.
deortman wrote:A NYT article on this quoted someone as saying that when there is a tie in a field event you drop down to the previous best mark or height clearance and that there is no counterpart in the running events.
Not entirely true.
Felix and Tarmoh both ran 100m prelims and semis:
Pre Semi F 11.19 11.23 T 11.16 11.10
Clearly Tarmoh beat Felix's time in both the Prelims and in the Semis (although not running against each other). Taking into account the pre and semi times seems just as fair as awarding first place to the guy who high jumps cleanly through 2.4m with three misses at the next height over the guy who also jumps 2.4 with three misses at the next height but had a single lower height miss.
That's fine if they know that's the rule before the meet starts, so they can expend effort accordingly during the rounds if they feel they might need a tiebreaker. It's unfair to impose that rule after the races have been run.
deortman wrote:A NYT article on this quoted someone as saying that when there is a tie in a field event you drop down to the previous best mark or height clearance and that there is no counterpart in the running events.
Not entirely true.
Felix and Tarmoh both ran 100m prelims and semis:
Pre Semi F 11.19 11.23 T 11.16 11.10
Clearly Tarmoh beat Felix's time in both the Prelims and in the Semis (although not running against each other). Taking into account the pre and semi times seems just as fair as awarding first place to the guy who high jumps cleanly through 2.4m with three misses at the next height over the guy who also jumps 2.4 with three misses at the next height but had a single lower height miss.
That's fine if they know that's the rule before the meet starts, so they can expend effort accordingly during the rounds if they feel they might need a tiebreaker. It's unfair to impose that rule after the races have been run.
Actually, preliminary and semi-final times should NEVER be used - even if the rules are stated beforehand. The reason why is that those marks do NOT count towards a final result - UNLIKE IN A FIELD EVENT. You guys need to remember that you can WIN a field event on any one of SIX attempts; it's not like you get 5 practice throws with only your final sixth jump/throw being valid. It doesn't work like that. But, that IS how it works on the track. If you set the WR in the semi-final you still have to win the final.
This sport has ALWAYS been about how you finish, not how you start.
ATK wrote:The team must be chosen by the end of the weekend...
The point being made by many is that it is totally unnecessary for the entire team to be finalized by the end of this weekend. Again, I ask, what is the IOC/IAAF deadline for the U.S. to submit its entire roster? And if someone withdraws from the team for any reason, including injury, what then? That precedent, prompting a replacement, most certainly correlates with the precedent that would be set if the runoff were to be held a week after the Trials, be it in a European meet or in a single race right here in the U.S. Once again, they have neither a reason nor an excuse to schedule the runoff outside the Trials schedule; none whatsoever.
What if there's a dead heat for 3rd in the 5,000 or the 10,000?? They are NOT going to have a runoff on the final night of the Trials in either event! Certainly, I doubt they would hastily demand a runoff in the m200 (the last event) if that 3rd spot should end up a dead-heat. If they dare try, in the 200 or the 5K/10K, then I would be convinced that the TV execs are clearly pulling USATF's strings. It would be a disgrace to see 2 people, probably dead-tired from having run one or both long-distance events, running another 12½ or 25 laps. It would be a pathetic tragedy if one of them collapses.
They'd better have a nice, long conference call after the Trials to sit down and think things over before they come up with a far more constructive solution to put in the rule book, before someone takes them to court next time. You don't make up rules on the fly, and you certainly don't let outsiders (especially TV networks) influence your decisions, which only serve to shatter the credibility of the governing body even more.
Last edited by CookyMonzta on Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Dutra5 wrote:I might be wrong but I thought Ms. Geer wanted the situation settled in terms of indentifying how the tie would be broken by the end of the trials rather than actually breaking the tie by the end of next weekend.
The team must be chosen by the end of the weekend...
Dutra5 wrote:I might be wrong but I thought Ms. Geer wanted the situation settled in terms of indentifying how the tie would be broken by the end of the trials rather than actually breaking the tie by the end of next weekend.
The team must be chosen by the end of the weekend...
Both Ms. Felix and Ms. Tarmoh are on the team.
The actual 100m team member and the alternate must be determined...
CookyMonzta wrote:and you certainly don't let outsiders (especially TV networks) influence your decisions, which only serve to shatter the credibility of the governing body even more.
It's too late for that. TV already pulls the strings of practically every major and minor sport in America. Do you have any idea how many rules changes have been made in the NFL, the NBA, MLB and the NHL to satisfy TV demands? Also, do you remember in 2008, the Olympic swimming scheduled was changed to satisfy American TV viewers?
Dutra5 wrote:I might be wrong but I thought Ms. Geer wanted the situation settled in terms of indentifying how the tie would be broken by the end of the trials rather than actually breaking the tie by the end of next weekend.
The team must be chosen by the end of the weekend...
Both Ms. Felix and Ms. Tarmoh are on the team.
True, but they have not explained why the runoff must be done the day after the 200 finals, when they could reschedule it at least 3 days later to allow them to recuperate. I am pretty sure the IOC/IAAF deadline for all countries (including the U.S.) to submit their final rosters is well after July 1. So, there's no excuse.
Last edited by CookyMonzta on Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
For those interested...here is the IAAF qualification PDF.
Entries close July 9. That includes up to 3 per country plus a reserve athlete (alternate). The reserve can replace one of the entered athletes up to final confirmation for the specific event.
Dutra5 wrote:I might be wrong but I thought Ms. Geer wanted the situation settled in terms of indentifying how the tie would be broken by the end of the trials rather than actually breaking the tie by the end of next weekend.
The team must be chosen by the end of the weekend...
Both Ms. Felix and Ms. Tarmoh are on the team.
True, but they have not explained why the runoff must be done the day after the 200 finals, when they could reschedule it at least 3 days later to allow them to recuperate. I am pretty sure the IOC/IAAF deadline for all countries (including the U.S.) to submit their final rosters is well after July 1. So, there's no excuse.
You'll get no argument from me. As I just posted entries close July 9th however both women would be on the roster anyway.
Dutra5 wrote:I might be wrong but I thought Ms. Geer wanted the situation settled in terms of indentifying how the tie would be broken by the end of the trials rather than actually breaking the tie by the end of next weekend.
The team must be chosen by the end of the weekend...
Both Ms. Felix and Ms. Tarmoh are on the team.
The actual 100m team member and the alternate must be determined...
Go out back on the track they train on prior to July 9th and have at it.
Dutra5 wrote:For those interested...here is the IAAF qualification PDF.
Entries close July 9. That includes up to 3 per country plus a reserve athlete (alternate). The reserve can replace one of the entered athletes up to final confirmation for the specific event.
Pick a meet, any meet, held between July 4 and July 8, in Eugene or anywhere else in the U.S., and schedule the runoff in that meet. They have the second-half of the week after the Trials. What's their excuse not to consider it?
I can imagining USATF will just flip a coin, they seem very solid on their original rule that the team for each even will be determined after the event ends. AKA the entire team will be chosen by the end of Sunday.
CookyMonzta wrote:and you certainly don't let outsiders (especially TV networks) influence your decisions, which only serve to shatter the credibility of the governing body even more.
It's too late for that. TV already pulls the strings of practically every major and minor sport in America. Do you have any idea how many rules changes have been made in the NFL, the NBA, MLB and the NHL to satisfy TV demands? Also, do you remember in 2008, the Olympic swimming scheduled was changed to satisfy American TV viewers?
The swimming schedule change, if we're lucky, will be the last time that ever happens. I doubt the Russians in Sochi will submit to scheduling an event at 4:00 in the morning (8:00 P.M. NYC time, 5:00 P.M, L.A. time) to satisfy the NBC fat cats.
.... and we all remember how that turned out. Well, maybe there's a lot of people now who weren't AROUND to remember how that one turned out. It wasn't pretty. In any case that was a P.T. Barnum circus kind of promotion, while this is serious athletics.