• Login
  • |
  • Contact

    LIVE SUPPORT

    SEND US A MESSAGE

    ContactCode

    OTHER

    Email:
    info@trackie.com

    Voicemail:
    1.877.456.5544

Discussion Forum >>

TrackieReg - Free Online Registration for pretty much anything!
Reply to topic Go to last post
Avatar
User since:
Jan 23rd, 2014
Posts: 243
thumbs_up 5
Report  ORIGINAL

Myth said 3 months ago

Doha 2019 WC Standards Posted

Qualification Standards for the IAAF World Athletics Championships Doha 2019

Women
800m - 2:00.60
1500m (Mile) - 4:06.50 (4:25.20)
5000m - 15:22.00
10,000m - 31:50.00
Marathon - 2:37:00
3000m SC - 9:40.00

Men
800m - 1:45.80
1500m (Mile) - 3:36.00 (3:53.10)
5000m - 13:22.50
10000m - 27:40.00
Marathon - 2:16:00
3000m SC - 8:29.00

Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #1 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    The woman’s standards are much faster this year! I wonder why they made thins change. Were there a lot of women running under 4:07.5 and 2:01? They had previously made standards slower because of all the skewed results due to doping so wonder why they’ve made them faster again. Should make things interesting...

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #2 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Hmmmm, could be a very small contingent going based on 2018 PB's.

    Quote comment
  • cooperaa User since:
    Sep 25th, 2014
    Posts: 106
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #3 

    cooperaa said 3 months ago

    Lots of women hit the time for the marathon!

    Rachel Cliff 2:28:53 @ Berlin
    Lyndsay Tessier 2:30:47 @ Berlin
    Kinsey Middleton 2:32:09 @ STWM
    Melanie Myrand 2:34:08 @ Chicago
    Leslie Sexton 2:36:03 @ STWM
    Krista Duchene 2:36:46 @ STWM

    Only Levins on the men's side.

    Quote comment
  • master2b User since:
    Jun 9th, 2011
    Posts: 220
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #4 

    Master2B said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "The woman’s standards are much faster this year! I wonder why they made thins change. Were there a lot of women running under 4:07.5 and 2:01? They had previously made standards slower because of all the skewed results due to doping so wonder why they’ve made them faster again. Should make things interesting..."


    In 2018 in the women's 800 we had:

    Butterworth - 2:00.81
    Bouchard - 2:01.25
    Westaway - 2:01.61
    and with the probable addition of Melissa Bishop the standard doesn't look too bad.

    The 1500 looks a bit more dire:

    G. Stafford - 4:05.83
    L. Stafford - 4:09.17
    with Nicole Sifuentes retiring it leaves only Gabriela unless someone else has a big improvement.

    The AC 2017 WC standards in these events were: 2:01.00 and 4:07.50.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #5 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Master2B
    "In 2018 in the women's 800 we had:

    Butterworth - 2:00.81
    Bouchard - 2:01.25
    Westaway - 2:01.61
    and with the probable addition of Melissa Bishop the standard doesn't look too bad.

    The 1500 looks a bit more dire:

    G. Stafford - 4:05.83
    L. Stafford - 4:09.17
    with Nicole Sifuentes retiring it leaves only Gabriela unless someone else has a big improvement.

    The AC 2017 WC standards in these events were: 2:01.00 and 4:07.50."


    Yeah we had 3 who didn't make the standard in the 800m in 2018. Close doesn't count last time I looked.

    They made the standards faster because more people were making the previous standard. therefore they lower the mark. Not sure how your doping comment has any relevance.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 4
    Report    REPLY #6 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    27:40 for Men's 10,000 is ridiculous

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #7 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: cooperaa
    "Lots of women hit the time for the marathon!

    Rachel Cliff 2:28:53 @ Berlin
    Lyndsay Tessier 2:30:47 @ Berlin
    Kinsey Middleton 2:32:09 @ STWM
    Melanie Myrand 2:34:08 @ Chicago
    Leslie Sexton 2:36:03 @ STWM
    Krista Duchene 2:36:46 @ STWM

    Only Levins on the men's side."



    It will be interesting to see who decides to declare for the marathon, given it is likely going to be run at night. Very unique circumstances that will be challenging to train and prepare for!

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #8 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: cooperaa
    "Lots of women hit the time for the marathon!

    Rachel Cliff 2:28:53 @ Berlin
    Lyndsay Tessier 2:30:47 @ Berlin
    Kinsey Middleton 2:32:09 @ STWM
    Melanie Myrand 2:34:08 @ Chicago
    Leslie Sexton 2:36:03 @ STWM
    Krista Duchene 2:36:46 @ STWM

    Only Levins on the men's side."


    The IAAF standard for the women's marathon used to be 2:45, but AC (and most countries) had stricter standards.
    Does AC have to use these standards now?
    (that would be a great boost for marathon in - more athletes would be willing to give it a try)

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #9 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Master2B
    "In 2018 in the women's 800 we had:

    Butterworth - 2:00.81
    Bouchard - 2:01.25
    Westaway - 2:01.61
    and with the probable addition of Melissa Bishop the standard doesn't look too bad.

    The 1500 looks a bit more dire:

    G. Stafford - 4:05.83
    L. Stafford - 4:09.17
    with Nicole Sifuentes retiring it leaves only Gabriela unless someone else has a big improvement.

    The AC 2017 WC standards in these events were: 2:01.00 and 4:07.50."


    Kate Ayers? 4:09 in 2018, big breakthrough. Based on XC performance this fall, doesn't look like a fluke. Assuming that she is able to continue progressing in 2019, she might be a contender to make the standard. It would be a big ask, but not impossible.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #10 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    It can be expected that AC will have more strict standards, given the goal of the team sent is being competitive globally.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #11 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Yeah we had 3 who didn't make the standard in the 800m in 2018. Close doesn't count last time I looked.

    They made the standards faster because more people were making the previous standard. therefore they lower the mark. Not sure how your doping comment has any relevance."


    they changed the worlds standards a few years ago and made them slower because so many women were caught for doping which skewed the results of what the top women were running.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #12 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Kate Ayers? 4:09 in 2018, big breakthrough. Based on XC performance this fall, doesn't look like a fluke. Assuming that she is able to continue progressing in 2019, she might be a contender to make the standard. It would be a big ask, but not impossible."



    I imagine L. Stafford and Sarah McPherson will also be looking for this standard. L. Stafford just shaved 7 seconds off her time last year and if healthy don’t think it’s crazy to think she could shave another few. McPherson has been at that 4:09 mark for several years and could be near a breakthrough. Quite a few girls are on the cusp so I’m thinking we’ll have some girls in the mix if all goes well.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 4
    Report    REPLY #13 

    Runfastrunfar said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "It can be expected that AC will have more strict standards, given the goal of the team sent is being competitive globally."


    To what end?

    Your chances of making the Canadian Team in track and field is literally 1 in a million (1,125,000). By making the Canadian National Team Standards even tougher than the World Standard and the Olympic Standard you are making kids quit in droves. We almost lost Nina Schultz to China (she actually went to their Sports Championships) because of this "standard".

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #14 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    LOL 1 in a million how do you figure?

    No one is quitting the sport because of hard international standards. There may be one or two people but "droves" is just hyperbole. If you ask kids why they join the sport, you'll find very few who say "because of an Olympic performance" or "to make the Olympics." The number one reason kids do any sport is for fun and for friends. After a while they get good and they get competitive, but by then, they are intrenched. Maybe some of them will stop when they realise they are not going to make it much further, but that's ok. Not every single athlete is a potential champion. And national team uniforms are not given away for free. Please spare me the weeping and wailing over kids quitting.

    Also if you read the IAAF criteria carefully, you can see that there are numbers beside each event. The standards are set to end up with a certain number of participants in each event. So that is why the marathon standards are so much easier relative to the others: 100 participants vs 27 or so. If the Canadian standards are set to create a team with chances of being top 16 then the standards might be higher. But if you have ever heard Simon Nathan speak you'll know he brings up the following performance indicators when it comes to national teams, in order of importance: gold medals, podium, top 8, improving your rank coming into the competition, and PBs. So there is perhaps room for just laying out the IAAF standards as the Canadian standards.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #15 

    Runfastrunfar said 3 months ago

    Dear Anonymous:

    First and foremost, I will answer and address all your answers respectfully. I would like to add that I am a "proud Canadian track and field guy" who would genuinely like to see Canada and its track and field athletes succeed on a personal and "professional" level. If you look at my posts over the years my posts have always been in the vein of ,"how to improve and support Canadian track and field". Finally, it is easy to talk about "being there for the kids" but actually "doing it for the kids" is another matter. So . . . , to answer that before we even get into it I will state that I have consistently had the honor, and it is an honor, to coach or assistant coach national level age-group champions, provincial-level champions, high school champions, district champions, and city champions - some to the senior squad level. This is not counting the letters of reference written, academic scholarships secured, and athletic scholarships offered and accepted. In all that time, I did not ever take money of the athletes or their families. This was always done as a volunteer, so please do not think that I am a mercenary or an ego-coach. In fact, I make sure that I try and remain as anonymous as possible. When athletes or their families thank me I always say, "You did all the hard work. You ran the laps/raised a good person.".

    That being said, let me start answering your questions.

    LOL 1 in a million how do you figure?
    The one in a million figure is calculated by taking the total population of the Canada and dividing this number (36 million) by the 31 odd male and female athletes that wear the Maple Leaf on the Senior Track and Field Team at either the Worlds or the Olympics - I am not counting the World Cross athletes since I am a "track and field" guy AND we are taking about the Worlds' and Olympic Team. These numbers are easily verified on the Athletics Canada website and Stats Canada.

    No one is quitting the sport because of hard international standards.
    [I]This is absolutely not true[/I]. I have had several conversations with national-level juniors and senior-level athletes who have decided that due to the cost of training, finding a coach that can commit to them and their dreams, lack of competitions, and access to facilities that they have decided to call it a day and move on with their lives. This may be beating a dead horse, but I would like to refer you to the article Why Canada's Athletes are Struggling Financially by the Canadian Sports Centre - Manitoba (Link: Below).

    http://cscm.ca/blog/canadas-athletes-struggling-financially/

    Basically, the article states that the average Canadian Olympic-level athlete is subsisting at the poverty-level and that training for a year at this level takes between $20,000 - $40,000 a year. It is more for individual athletes - track and field is an individual sport.


    The number one reason kids do any sport is for fun and for friends.
    You say this, but at the same time you talk about the "Own the Podium", Golds, and being competitive on the international stage in the same breath. Which one is it? If it is the first, then fair enough I have zero problem with this premise, ideal, and goal. If it is the second, my question to you is, "Where will the next generation of "Golds" and "Owners of the Podium" come from?". We are moving more and more to a "pay-to-play" model of youth sports development (Links: Below). This model means that the pool of potential athletes will automatically be smaller.

    https://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/high-costs-keep-one-third-of-canadian-kids-out-of-organized-sports-study-1.1907384

    https://www.paradigmsports.ca/sports-participation-canada-declining/

    https://www.cbc.ca/sports/sports-participation-canada-kids-1.3573955


    I noticed that you failed to address NIna Schultz, our national Junior Champion and Provincial Record-holder, looking at competing for China. This is the "standard" that I am referring to that is driving kids away from the sport. How many world-class American high school national track and field champions would seriously contemplate competing for another country?

    You may say, Mondo Duplantis - Pole Vault, but let me give you a little background about his story. I have been following Mondo since he was in grade school. When Mondo broke the high school record his father asked USATF what support is he eligible for in order to continue training. The person on the other end of the line basically hung up the phone. When Mondo's father called the Swedish track and Field Federation the lady on the other end said, "What can we do to help?". The result is that Mondo is the European Champion in the pole vault beating the former Olympic Champion, the World Champion, the European champion, and World-record-holder.

    Think about how many Canadian Mondos are being "lost" to pay-to-play or the "Gods of Olympus Canadian Standard". Why did Canada move from the A++ standard to a "selection system?".


    Also if you read the IAAF criteria carefully, you can see that there are numbers beside each event.

    The IAAF absolute numbers have NOTHING to do with Canada's former A++ or the current selection system. If you qualify on times, heihts, or distances CAnada can choose NNOT to send you even though you have made the Olympic Standard or the Worlds Standard. By going on the Top-16 to be more competitive you are literally leaving Canada's "best and brightest" of the team. To make matters worse look at the revelations of the 2012 Olympics Women's Triple Jump and 800m medalists and finalists. They are literally looking way, way down the Finalists' List to award the medals to the clean athletes who actually deserved to medal. Using the current system of "selection" and it is implied by your answer your logic that this makes sense. We have literally left several Canadian women off the Olympic Team based on these "standards" of cheaters.

    By the way, the IAAF has had to modify the "new" Standards down because of these "discrepancies" in results. So yes, "I will cry for Canada", but not for Argentina.

    The US and China send everyone who is eligible. You can not win if you do not play. Examples of athletes who attended the Olympics, Worlds, or International competitions and had no hope of medalling are;

    Daley Thompson, Team Great Britain, (10th place 1976 Montreal)
    - He did not lose another Decathlon until 1988, winning two Olympic Golds, multiple World, European, and Commonwealth titles.

    Nafi Thiam, Belgium, 14th place at the World JUNIORS 2012 Barcelona - Four years later she is the Olympic and World Champion.

    (Your favorite Canadian track and field athlete here) in Rio 2016 - Gold in Tokyo 2020.
    "Oh, that's right, we never sent Jack or Jill, because we want to "own the podium".

    You do realize that Pierre de Coubertin never intended for the Olympics to be just about "golds". In fact, "golds"/Excellence is the third Olympic Ideal behind Friendship and Respect (Link: Below). The Olympic Creed even states clearly that,

    ". . . it is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle,. The essential ting is not to have conquered but to have fought well."


    Source: https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching-content/olympic-principles-and-traditions/


    My questions to you are,
    "Do you know better than the Modern Olympics founder?";
    "Are we doing a disservice to our youth with this rapacious desire for golds?";
    "What is the long-term plan and outcome of pursuing such a policy?".

    Runfastrunfar

    Quote comment
  • new-post-last-visitanonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 49344
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #16 

    Runfastrunfar said 3 months ago

    There is a typo in the Olympic Creed quote. It should read , " . . . the essential thing" not ting.

    Quote comment
Anonymous

says…    

Quote Underline Italics Bold
Submit Preview

By posting on our forum you are agreeing to the following guidelines.

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

 

Benefits of creating an account!

  • No need to reveal your real name.
  • Quicker to post (no need to enter the "two words" above each time).
  • Gives you the ability to edit your own comments and subscribe to topics.
  • It's free & quick to create an account!
Submit & Create Account

 

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1