Tweet
Well, the 2009 Berlin World Championships are rolling around in less than a year, and it seems like we wouldn't be seeing some of the best athletes compete no matter how good they are. I'll be specific here: Nesta Carter was the 13th fastest male 100m sprinter in the past season, but he might have a tough time getting to the Worlds considering that Jamaica is loaded with Usain Bolt, Asafa Powell and Michael Frater, and the IAAF only allows each nation to send 3 athletes per individual event, unless a nation has a defending World champion, which allows them to send their World Champ followed by the next 3 athletes. So its likely that an athlete that can outperform other athletes in the final may not even be competing in the World Championship finals at all. So, do you think that the IAAF should change its qualification system for the World Championships, and if so, how, and which athletes and nations do you think will be most affected by it? Or, if you don't think that changes are needed, please state why.
-
0Yes0%0No0%0 -
Re: IAAF World Championships - 3 athletes per nation
Countries that would be most affected by a change by adding more athletes:
400m and shorter: U.S., Jamaica
800m and longer: Kenya, Ethiopia
Pole Vault: Russia :lol:
Countries most affected because they'd send less athletes as a result of changes:
400m and shorter: all countries except U.S.and Jamaica
800m and longer: all countries except Kenya and Ethiopia
Pole Vault: all countries except Russia"Long may you run"- Neil Young -
hell yes! why? because it is the world champs not the olympics. it is not about sportsmanship but determining who is the absolute best in the world. i know a few US hurdlers that would smile at this development. some sprinters too, but more hurdlers than anyone. and i am sure there are a few hungarian hammer throwers wishing for this tooComment
-
The existing policy of allowing the country with the defending champ to send 4 is good enough (with one exception, as I'll explain below).
In the even-numbered years between Olympics, I'd like to see a games with all the best regardless of country. IAAF picks the top 32 (or some other appropriate number, depending on the event ... marathon can have more, decathlon might have less) in each event based on their scoring tables or WAF-like selection criteria.
Then there will be a one-week meet with rounds, similar to OG and WC (except only 3 rounds would be needed in the sprints, as there would be no journeymen like in the OG/WC). Sweeten the pot with a bye into the next year's WC for the winners ... thus allowing potentially 5 into the next WC in the rare event that a country has both the World champ and the winner of this new meet who are different people.
Yes, it would be sort of like the WAF, but bigger and better ... and at it's not turning the WC itself into the WAF.Comment
-
Sprintblox:
This is a very interesting idea.
The even-numbered, non-Olympic year is a logical time to do it. The problem: Conflict with the European Championships. Scheduling could pose some difficulties. A full-fledged proposal for something like this would need to figure out how to coordinate the schedule for those two big events. But the idea is quite intriguing, and well worth pursuing.Comment
-
The WAF was a great idea, but it's not panning out as hoped. People skip and performances are down across the board. It needs to be retooled. This proposal merits consideration. Gathering the world's best in fields of 32, with rounds, might relight the pilot flame.Originally posted by DecFanComment
-
ok I rushed the last post.
The world championships should have ZERO country limits. We do not need to mimic the Games which is exactly what was done and no one can really think why.
Take the top 24 on time, add in whoever qualifies in the given countries accordingly, i.e. the person that takes 2nd at trials is not in the top 24 he goes.
Maintain the each country rule with a qualified time.
Maintain whatever field rules are in place.
This simple change ensures we have a true championships.
There is a reason our trials are tougher than most majors, it is the quality of the overall field. It is a travesty to watch events like the 100 and 110 hurdles at major meets. It is a headache to sit here and debate about how to qualify folks that are better than 99% of the world. This years 110H in Beijing is a perfect example. TT and Liu got hurt and we had 13.3s and 13.4s advancing through the rounds.
In the 100 you never see anyone try or need to run sub 10 every round or close to it, we have seen it at our own trials.
And i am sure the Kenyans sit around thinking similar thoughts in the distance races. And the Ethiopians.
I say let the World champs be the world champs. The Games are there own animal. WAF is not in this conversation, it is a pure money run. World's should be about the best of the best. If I can watch a subway series for MLB and root for a freeway series here in LA, I should be able to root for an all American 100m final. The best of the best!
In truth the Worlds is the best of the qualified not the best.
Example, going into Osaka last year the hottest hurdler on the circuit was Ryan Wilson, but because he faltered at in Indy he went home to watch the Champs. Dominique A was hurt and so was David Oliver. TT and David Payne did great but the point is there was no reason for Ryan not to be at Worlds.
I want to see the best of the best out thereComment
-
Ditto, but as gh has often pointed out, the little counties control the iAAF voting, so we won't see it in the OG/WC, but we could at WAF or its successor. I am a fan of the WCs EVERY year, but OG years, and it'd be nice if at least the even-year version eliminates the 3-per-nation rule.Originally posted by SmokeComment
-
The thing is that every Golden League meet doesn't have restrictions based on country so the OG and the WC are the exceptions, not the rule. That's the way it should be IMO. For example, in Brussels, 12 Kenyans ran in the men's 10K. I wouldn't want to see that in either the OG or WC and I'm a big fan of the Kenyans, too.Originally posted by Marlow"Long may you run"- Neil YoungComment
-
Well, he may have been your favorite but he was not necssarily the hottest. He may have only won Mt. SAC? lost to TT in New York, Merrit defeated him in Stockholm. I'm also guessing that Moore came out on top head to head before Osaka?
Originally posted by SmokeComment
-
kenya...steeple chase...
usa..the sprints...
how many euros would make any top 32 in those areas
most recent winner as 4th option is fine with meComment
-
It is absolutely amazing to me how many people who follow this sport closely who DO NOT want to see the best of the best at any kind of global championship. And do not even try to say that the World Athletics Final is anything approaching the same thing as a true global championship.Comment
-
Smoke, you the man. I hear you clearly.Comment
-
Just a guess, but I suspect you're greatly downplaying the role that nationalism plays in this discussion on all sides. While Americans have every reason to want the cap lifted, those from almost all other nations have I-want-my-guy-in reasons for opposing it. And the participation on this board is very international in flavor.Originally posted by donley2
If the poll were restricted to only Americans, I think you'd see the numbers/opinions change.
There's no amazement here at all. Very predictable.Comment
-
Many thanks for putting it so succintly.Originally posted by donley2
If the best 10 guys over 400H are american, I want to see all of them there. If best 10 guys over 3kSC are kenyans, I want to see all of them thereComment
Comment