Athletics Canada Announces 2012 Marathon Standards
09/22/2010 12:48:13 PM
Coach
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 70
http://athletics.ca/display_news.asp?newsid=1037
http://athletics.ca/display_news.asp?newsid=1037
09/22/2010 1:21:40 PM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 22
I'm not that familiar with the previous standards; are these times quicker than the standards in 2008?
I'm not that familiar with the previous standards; are these times quicker than the standards in 2008?
09/22/2010 2:22:29 PM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 280
Yes for the men. Cue whining.
Yes for the men. Cue whining.
09/22/2010 2:39:57 PM
Coach
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 435
@SI10 Really, SI? Is that the way you want to play this, right out of the gate? I actually have no complaints about these standards, as I think we now actually have some people capable of hitting them, and apparently committed to doing so. As a general principle, however, I think we should let international championship committees set the standards, based on how many people they want to see on the starting line; they already do this, of course, and we should abide by their numbers. BTW, why don't we? Because national sport funding is about propaganda, pure and simple. The state wants to project and image that we are better than we really are at sports by not playing ones we're not quite as good at. This is, of course,completely counter to the original, liberal internationalist spirit of international sport (such as it is/was). Once thing that does puzzle, however, is the suggestion at the bottom of the document, under the rubric of "rising stars", that AC may pick up-and-coming athletes for the marathon using 10,000m times. Am I reading this correctly?
@SI10

Really, SI? Is that the way you want to play this, right out of the gate?

I actually have no complaints about these standards, as I think we now actually have some people capable of hitting them, and apparently committed to doing so. As a general principle, however, I think we should let international championship committees set the standards, based on how many people they want to see on the starting line; they already do this, of course, and we should abide by their numbers. BTW, why don't we? Because national sport funding is about propaganda, pure and simple. The state wants to project and image that we are better than we really are at sports by not playing ones we're not quite as good at. This is, of course,completely counter to the original, liberal internationalist spirit of international sport (such as it is/was).

Once thing that does puzzle, however, is the suggestion at the bottom of the document, under the rubric of "rising stars", that AC may pick up-and-coming athletes for the marathon using 10,000m times. Am I reading this correctly?
09/22/2010 3:40:23 PM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 280
[quote=oldster]This is, of course,completely counter to the original, liberal internationalist spirit of international sport (such as it is/was).[/quote] Huh? "Original, liberal" as of when? Amateur rules were specifically enforced to keep sport as an activity for the elite and were hung on to for dear life.
ldster wrote:
This is, of course,completely counter to the original, liberal internationalist spirit of international sport (such as it is/was).


Huh? "Original, liberal" as of when? Amateur rules were specifically enforced to keep sport as an activity for the elite and were hung on to for dear life.
09/22/2010 4:24:37 PM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 16
For the 2008 Olympics if a male ran under 2:12:38 between May 26th 2007 and May 25th 2008 then he qualified with the A standard. The A+ standard was 2:11:31, which was used if you ran your qualifying marathon between Sept 1st 2006 and May 26th 2007. Of course you had to prove fitness leading up to the games. The Women's A+ standard was 2:27:35 and A standard was 2:29:08 for '08.
For the 2008 Olympics if a male ran under 2:12:38 between May 26th 2007 and May 25th 2008 then he qualified with the A standard. The A+ standard was 2:11:31, which was used if you ran your qualifying marathon between Sept 1st 2006 and May 26th 2007. Of course you had to prove fitness leading up to the games. The Women's A+ standard was 2:27:35 and A standard was 2:29:08 for '08.
09/23/2010 2:19:08 PM
Coach
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 435
@SI10 The Olympic founders where aristocrats when it came to who could participate, but they subscribed to a liberal (e.g. as opposed to nationalist or imperialist) doctrine when it came international relations (i.e. the world as a "community of nations"). They meant the Games to be a civilizing "celebration of international brotherhood"-- hence the stuff about the importance of taking part rather than winning that was gradually set aside as nations decided to use the Olympics, and international sport in general, to demonstrate national/cultural superiority. That the founders of the Olympic movement (the key ones, like de Coubertin, anyway) were liberals in the sphere of international relations is one of the may reasons why Hitler at first rejected the idea of bidding to host the '36 Games. And on what basis did he change his mind? That he realized the Games could be successfully used to demonstrate the opposite of international brotherhood-- Aryan/German racial/national superiority. Yes, the Canadian sport system, particularly with the OTP program, probably now owes more the the Third Reich than it does to the original spirit of the Olympic Games. Just because Canada is not plotting to take over the world doesn't mean it doesn't use sport for propaganda purposes. Do other countries also do this? Of course, but that's not the point.
@SI10

The Olympic founders where aristocrats when it came to who could participate, but they subscribed to a liberal (e.g. as opposed to nationalist or imperialist) doctrine when it came international relations (i.e. the world as a "community of nations"). They meant the Games to be a civilizing "celebration of international brotherhood"-- hence the stuff about the importance of taking part rather than winning that was gradually set aside as nations decided to use the Olympics, and international sport in general, to demonstrate national/cultural superiority. That the founders of the Olympic movement (the key ones, like de Coubertin, anyway) were liberals in the sphere of international relations is one of the may reasons why Hitler at first rejected the idea of bidding to host the '36 Games. And on what basis did he change his mind? That he realized the Games could be successfully used to demonstrate the opposite of international brotherhood-- Aryan/German racial/national superiority. Yes, the Canadian sport system, particularly with the OTP program, probably now owes more the the Third Reich than it does to the original spirit of the Olympic Games. Just because Canada is not plotting to take over the world doesn't mean it doesn't use sport for propaganda purposes. Do other countries also do this? Of course, but that's not the point.
09/23/2010 7:38:25 PM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 280
I don't even know where to start. I make a little joke about whining and the standards and you give me a hard time about playing it that way and then you play the Nazi card? You're comparing the people who came up with OTP to Hitler? Seriously? And I can't believe you would try to prove any point at all by using the IOC and 1936. That ridiculous organization let that Nazi philanderer Brundage be president for 20 years even after his behaviour at and before the 1936 Olympics. The same guy who also didn't want women to participate in track. The same guy who kicked Smith and Carlos out of the village in 1968 even though he had no problem with Nazi salutes in 1936. The same guy who didn't want to give Thorpe back his medals(basically jealous because he beat him in 1912). He ran your epitome of international brotherhood for 20 years. Please. Anyway, it's kind of pointless trying to cling to whatever altruistic concepts Coubertin et al had over one hundred years ago. Unless we want to go the way of those kiddie fun runs where everyone gets bib #1 and a gold medal at the finish line, the world doesn't work that way, now more than ever. There's too much money (corporate sponsorship) and too much ego in play (both individual and national/political) to have anything other. The whole function of the games is elitist. It is only for the very best (otherwise why have any standards? Why not just say every country can enter three people drawn at random from their entire population?). By accepting the concept of Olympic qualifying standards (whether from the IOC, IAAF, COC or AC) we are all agreeing to that mindset. We're just arguing about where exactly to draw the line.
I don't even know where to start. I make a little joke about whining and the standards and you give me a hard time about playing it that way and then you play the Nazi card? You're comparing the people who came up with OTP to Hitler? Seriously? And I can't believe you would try to prove any point at all by using the IOC and 1936. That ridiculous organization let that Nazi philanderer Brundage be president for 20 years even after his behaviour at and before the 1936 Olympics. The same guy who also didn't want women to participate in track. The same guy who kicked Smith and Carlos out of the village in 1968 even though he had no problem with Nazi salutes in 1936. The same guy who didn't want to give Thorpe back his medals(basically jealous because he beat him in 1912). He ran your epitome of international brotherhood for 20 years. Please.

Anyway, it's kind of pointless trying to cling to whatever altruistic concepts Coubertin et al had over one hundred years ago. Unless we want to go the way of those kiddie fun runs where everyone gets bib #1 and a gold medal at the finish line, the world doesn't work that way, now more than ever. There's too much money (corporate sponsorship) and too much ego in play (both individual and national/political) to have anything other. The whole function of the games is elitist. It is only for the very best (otherwise why have any standards? Why not just say every country can enter three people drawn at random from their entire population?).

By accepting the concept of Olympic qualifying standards (whether from the IOC, IAAF, COC or AC) we are all agreeing to that mindset. We're just arguing about where exactly to draw the line.
09/24/2010 7:45:26 AM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 22
I don't really understand why they make the standards harder? It would be nice to cheer for a Canadian while watching the marathon in 2012 instead of cheering for Ryan Hall and Dathan Ritzenhein.
I don't really understand why they make the standards harder? It would be nice to cheer for a Canadian while watching the marathon in 2012 instead of cheering for Ryan Hall and Dathan Ritzenhein.
09/24/2010 8:57:29 AM
Power User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 176
@Desy Desy they are just trying to keep you off the team! Hey, I hear you are part of a new group in Ottawa. That roster looks pretty fast. What's the deal? Are a few of those ladies planning to make a run at the standard?
@Desy

Desy they are just trying to keep you off the team!

Hey, I hear you are part of a new group in Ottawa. That roster looks pretty fast. What's the deal? Are a few of those ladies planning to make a run at the standard?
09/24/2010 8:58:31 AM
Coach
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3
We sure sugar coat the past, don't we, about the "spirit of the Olympics". DeCoubertin almost alone began the modern movement. His motivation was not that of altruistic world peace, so much as infusing the state of France's anemic school/ military/ social system to invigorate what he perceived as a weak social mien. This was after an excursion to Britain and particularly Rugby school, where he saw youth playing sport enthusiastically and deduced that somehow it was aligned with the pursuit of excellence and academics. He initially envisioned a Games without countries and their jingoism toward accomplishment to sport - but also desired an Olympics without team sport (too militaristic) and without women (a 'weaker sex'). This quickly was hijacked by others and he grew despondent and what he had initiated to the degree when in the '20s, he wanted nothing to do with the Games - he, as many others, became quite disillusioned at the realities of modern bureacracy, hypocrisy, and any other negative-acy which accompanies the flaws of the human character (here 'cue': national propaganda, drug cheats, bureacrats, monetary corruption, gender misidentification, . . . outrageous prices for souveniers, whatever). This is all rife with irony, as in retrospect, we can appreciate in our luxury of studying history, such as it appears to be (often not the actual fact). This does not, and should not, tarnish our enthusiasm for sport and our own motivation; but let us keep it all in perspective: after all, the word "sport" comes from "disport" which roughly means "to play". These discussions turn into a "forum" (at times) whereby we want to vent our frustrations, display our own disappointments at our failures, or simply want to hear our own voice. And yes, I note the irony in my post as well.
We sure sugar coat the past, don't we, about the "spirit of the Olympics".
DeCoubertin almost alone began the modern movement. His motivation was not that of altruistic world peace, so much as infusing the state of France's anemic school/ military/ social system to invigorate what he perceived as a weak social mien. This was after an excursion to Britain and particularly Rugby school, where he saw youth playing sport enthusiastically and deduced that somehow it was aligned with the pursuit of excellence and academics.
He initially envisioned a Games without countries and their jingoism toward accomplishment to sport - but also desired an Olympics without team sport (too militaristic) and without women (a 'weaker sex'). This quickly was hijacked by others and he grew despondent and what he had initiated to the degree when in the '20s, he wanted nothing to do with the Games - he, as many others, became quite disillusioned at the realities of modern bureacracy, hypocrisy, and any other negative-acy which accompanies the flaws of the human character (here 'cue': national propaganda, drug cheats, bureacrats, monetary corruption, gender misidentification, . . . outrageous prices for souveniers, whatever).
This is all rife with irony, as in retrospect, we can appreciate in our luxury of studying history, such as it appears to be (often not the actual fact).
This does not, and should not, tarnish our enthusiasm for sport and our own motivation; but let us keep it all in perspective: after all, the word "sport" comes from "disport" which roughly means "to play".
These discussions turn into a "forum" (at times) whereby we want to vent our frustrations, display our own disappointments at our failures, or simply want to hear our own voice.
And yes, I note the irony in my post as well.
09/24/2010 11:31:59 AM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 280
[quote=Desy]I don't really understand why they make the standards harder? It would be nice to cheer for a Canadian while watching the marathon in 2012 instead of cheering for Ryan Hall and Dathan Ritzenhein.[/quote] Why are the standards going to prevent you from doing that?
Desy wrote:
I don't really understand why they make the standards harder? It would be nice to cheer for a Canadian while watching the marathon in 2012 instead of cheering for Ryan Hall and Dathan Ritzenhein.


Why are the standards going to prevent you from doing that?
09/24/2010 11:36:50 AM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 133
[quote=Stingersxc]Hey, I hear you are part of a new group in Ottawa. That roster looks pretty fast. What's the deal? Are a few of those ladies planning to make a run at the standard?[/quote] Desy's on a ladies team now? You move away, you miss a lot!
Stingersxc wrote:
Hey, I hear you are part of a new group in Ottawa. That roster looks pretty fast. What's the deal? Are a few of those ladies planning to make a run at the standard?

Desy's on a ladies team now? You move away, you miss a lot!
09/24/2010 11:56:15 AM
Power User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 176
@peteq Nicely done. Here's the full roster: http://www.oert.ca/Meet%20the%20Team.html Just no dudes listed as having Full Marathon as their event. Desy is Half Marathon though. Unless that's meant to read 1/2, Marathon.
@peteq

Nicely done.

Here's the full roster: http://www.oert.ca/Meet%20the%20Team.html

Just no dudes listed as having Full Marathon as their event. Desy is Half Marathon though. Unless that's meant to read 1/2, Marathon.
09/24/2010 1:44:21 PM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 280
"Full marathon" is redundant and usually used by idiotic uninformed reporters who write stories about marathoners with no indication of time anywhere in the article.
"Full marathon" is redundant and usually used by idiotic uninformed reporters who write stories about marathoners with no indication of time anywhere in the article.
09/25/2010 3:26:20 PM
Power User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 176
@SI10 It's true that it is redundant, but it says "Full" in their list there, so that's what I wrote. Maybe the club is trying to promote their group in a language the media understands. Language changes with use, redundant or not. It's like PIN number or SIN number. It's wrong, but everyone still says it, and everyone knows what it means, so there's no harm done. There are plenty of battles to fight in getting the marathon and distance running to a state of respectability, but this is probably not one of them.
@SI10

It's true that it is redundant, but it says "Full" in their list there, so that's what I wrote. Maybe the club is trying to promote their group in a language the media understands. Language changes with use, redundant or not. It's like PIN number or SIN number. It's wrong, but everyone still says it, and everyone knows what it means, so there's no harm done. There are plenty of battles to fight in getting the marathon and distance running to a state of respectability, but this is probably not one of them.
09/25/2010 6:23:14 PM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 280
Not everyone says "full marathon". Everyone says PIN number and SIN number. I cringe when I hear or read 'full marathon".
Not everyone says "full marathon". Everyone says PIN number and SIN number. I cringe when I hear or read 'full marathon".
09/25/2010 6:56:30 PM
Power User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 176
Not yet... The subject of this thread should be changed to Athletics Canada Announces 2012 FULL Marathon Standards. To avoid confusion. Which marathon are they talking about? I can run 2:11 for a Half marathon. Olympics?
Not yet...

The subject of this thread should be changed to Athletics Canada Announces 2012 FULL Marathon Standards. To avoid confusion. Which marathon are they talking about? I can run 2:11 for a Half marathon. Olympics?
09/25/2010 7:37:24 PM
User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 280
"Everyone" will never use that phrase because, I for one, would never embarrass myself and say it. Ever.
"Everyone" will never use that phrase because, I for one, would never embarrass myself and say it. Ever.
09/26/2010 7:50:41 AM
Power User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 176
@SI10 At least we can count on you to keep the faith.
@SI10

At least we can count on you to keep the faith.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.