World Champs: expand from 3 max per Country? Pros/Cons?

[Marlow]

So we've got track and gymnastics and swimming and equestrian that want to restrict the world athletic powers from inundating their sport's championships, and then tennis and golf, and virtually every other first-, second- or third-tier sport allowing ALL the best to show up. Which group is having more success? I submit the latter.

[LopenUupunut]

How about a compromise: let's test a new format with more spots per country with an event that would bring out such a format's best sides and see how it works out. Now, what could such an event be? Firstly, the final still shouldn't be entirely dominated by any one country, which rules out eight-athlete finals and therefore sprints and hurdles. Secondly, it shouldn't become too difficult to distinguish the many athletes from one country, so a field event would do better in any case. Thirdly, countries with superior domestic standard-reaching conditions such as long summers and fast tracks shouldn't be favored too much; not long or triple jumps, then. Fourthly, the event should have a clean reputation without too many doping cases in the recent past, so shot put, hammer and discus aren't optimal. Fifthly, the vertical jump competitions are very long as it is and shouldn't be lengthened any further by adding athletes. Sixthly, there should be a country or countries ready to use the extra spots - otherwise the test wouldn't make such sense - so wJT for instance wouldn't be optimal.

Does any event satisfy all the conditions above? - hmm, I can't think of any, guess we have to abandon that idea. Hey, wait, men's javelin might work! :wink:

[Big Daddy]

Leave it like it is. Top three. The world champ gets a bye. So it is the top 4 technically.

[Speedfirst]

Leave it like it is. Top three. The world champ gets a bye. So it is the top 4 technically.

I agree leave it like it is, I mean why stop at 5, 6 whatever, you have to draw a line somewhere. During the trials you perform to make the team, with the exception of the bye. So if you're not good enough during the trials, well you just weren't good enough. Injuries are all part of the sport (sports), when you hear the cry about injuries.

[Powell]

So we've got track and gymnastics and swimming and equestrian that want to restrict the world athletic powers from inundating their sport's championships, and then tennis and golf, and virtually every other first-, second- or third-tier sport allowing ALL the best to show up. Which group is having more success? I submit the latter.

You got it wrong. It's just the difference between an event where athletes represent their country and one where they compete for themselves only. T&F, swimming etc. don't put restrictions on how many athletes per country may compete in invitational meets. And conversely, in tennis, there is a limit in the Olympics or in the Davis Cup.

[gh]

So we've got track and gymnastics and swimming and equestrian that want to restrict the world athletic powers from inundating their sport's championships, and then tennis and golf, and virtually every other first-, second- or third-tier sport allowing ALL the best to show up. Which group is having more success? I submit the latter.

Tennis and golf are ruled by individual athletes with no national ties.

The only way track can achieve similar status is for a significant portion of the atheltes to note that they're forming their own union and going by their own rules. And the chances of that...

[kamikaze7]

I am not sure that people are interested in a 110mH final with 7 Americans and one Cuban. Even Americans would be bored stiff with such an event. The WC and the OG are about competing with other nations above all else. If you want to watch 7 Americans competing you can do so by watching the USATFC. Here I am talking mainly about casual T&F fans not hardcore fans who log onto this website daily.

[rasb]

I guess I'll have to go to Counselling, as I do not qualify as one of Marlow's "real fans". :wink:
I have absolutely zero interest in how the 6th from any Nation in any Event, would finish at the Worlds. Just as I have zero interest in who will be the 5th Kenyan in the steeplechase in Zurich or Brussels or wherever. Makes me yawn just thinking about it, and I can only imagine what it must be like for those who are not really into our sport in the first place (which is almost everybody, of course).
Top 3 per Country is just fine. And I even think the bye system sucked some of the energy out of the US Trials. Keep the Trials in each Country meaningful and exciting, and enjoy watching the best 3 from each Country do battle at the Worlds --- that works for me...

[donley2]

Top 3 per Country is just fine. And I even think the bye system sucked some of the energy out of the US Trials. Keep the Trials in each Country meaningful and exciting, and enjoy watching the best 3 from each Country do battle at the Worlds --- that works for me...

The list of countries in the world that have anything approaching our trials can be counted on less than one hand. In my (totally out there I admit) view of the world there would be no trials. You hit a certain mark (top 15 or 20 in the world lets say) and you are in the meet.

[Daisy]

You hit a certain mark (top 15 or 20 in the world lets say) and you are in the meet.

I'd refine it further to say top ten in world at end of season get wild card entry into worlds the following year.

This has the added advantage that at the end of the season athletes will be battling for that top ten position.

It also means that those who get the wild card can prepare for world championships without the worry of having to come back from injury too soon, or not be at the whims of their countries selection procedure.

In such a scenario the country of origin should have no relevance. Thus, those in top ten do not count against each countries alloted entries and politics can not deprive the worlds of a star athlete (Wilson Kipketer and Lagat come to mind).

[sprintblox]

Another alternative is to have a super-A standard, and allow anybody who meets that standard to be exempt from the per-country limits.

[Dave]

Another alternative is to have a super-A standard, and allow anybody who meets that standard to be exempt from the per-country limits.

I like this idea. ie top 3 from previous championships plus anyone else in the top 5-10 world list for both of the previous years

This means you get more African distance runners and more American hurdlers and 200 guys.

[Jnathletics]

I have one name for you that want 10 kenyans in the finals. Noureddine Morceli, anyone remember what happened to him in 1992? I think it would be a lot worse in the distance event which are dominated by one country. And didn't Khalid Skah have a similar issue in X-C? Do we really want a tour de France type race with domestic for the elite level of our sport? :roll:

[Marlow]

I have absolutely zero interest in how the 6th from any Nation in any Event, would finish at the Worlds.

So how do you feel knowing that the 4th or 5th or 6th placers only got their positions because other, better, athletes were denied a spot in the meet? If a nation sweeps an event (e.g., Kenya Steeple, USA 200) then the placings after the sweep are virtually meaningless if the 4th best from that nation could have continued the sweep past 3 places. I (for one - and only?) AM interested in places beyond third.

[mikli]

If potential winner, or even potential medalist, is out, the system is poor, and that is the case.

I liked Daisy's idea of wild card for top10. That could work.