<< I don't understand this discussion. And I also don't understand the logic
behind USATFs decision making process. Why aren't the standards for the
marathon the same for track? Top 3 go... assuming they have the A standard.
>>
Because the marathon is different from (most of) the track race
Netters
Gary wrote:
> The other difference is that in no other event do the course and the weather
> mean so much. Running a hot-weather OT marathon is akin to running all the OT
> track 10Ks at high altitude, say like Colorado Springs. No American would be
> likely ever to get an A standard
In a message dated 12/06/01 07:02:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< I don't understand this discussion. And I also don't understand the logic
behind USATFs decision making process. Why aren't the standards for the
marathon the same for track? Top 3 go... assuming they have the A standard.
> The Olympic Games serve two purposes... to represent your country and to
give athletes the opportunity to see if >they are one of the top marathoners
in the world. It is not a charity ball where you get to go if you have
worked the >hardest. If anything it is a reward for the people who have
d
I don't understand this discussion. And I also don't understand the logic
behind USATFs decision making process. Why aren't the standards for the
marathon the same for track? Top 3 go... assuming they have the A standard.
If they do not, then the next highest finished with the standard goe
rian T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 9:57 AM
Subject: RE: t-and-f: Re: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
> <<< That's so very sad. What was third and forth choice of the little
boys,
> free sunglasses and be
ge-
From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 8:56 PM
To: 'Mark Winitz'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: t-and-f: Re: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
That's so very sad. What was third and forth choice of the little boys,
free sunglasses and belly
In a message dated 12/4/01 7:27:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>The bad news is that the IAAF may stiffen the "A" and "B" qualifying
>standards in keeping with their current direction of reducing the size
>of
>Olympic fields.
If there's one event that can handle increased fields, w/o causin
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: t-and-f: Re: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
The responding female athletes in the survey that followed wanted in
this
order: #1 - a course (and conditions??) that mimics that to be expected
in the Games; #2 - prize money.
The responding male athletes placed top val
Paul Merca wrote:
>Some questions I have:
>
>- --I read the USATF release, and it mentions something about "prize
>money" being the top priority that the athletes wanted on the site
>selection...the question is, how many athletes were surveyed, and was
>there a range of ability levels surveyed
10 matches
Mail list logo
