Canadian Olympic Track Team announced

[journeyman]

From Randy Starkman's Toronto Star blog:

Richard Adu-Bobie, Ottawa, men’s 4 x 100m relay
Ruky Abudlai, Coquitlam, B.C., women’s long jump
Dylan Armstrong, Kamloops, B.C., men’s shot put
Brian Barnett, Edmonton, men’s 200 metres, 4 x 100 relay
Tim Berrett, Edmonton, men’s 50km race walk
Massimo Bertocchi, Toronto, decathlon
Pierre Brown, Toronto, 4 x 100m relay
Tabia Charles, Pickering, women’s long jump
Tyler Christopher, Edmonton, men’s 400 metres
Jared Connaughton, New Haven, P.E.I., men’s 200 metres, relay
Nicole Forrester, Aurora, Ont., women’s high jump
Sultana Frizell, Perth, Ont., women’s hammer throw
Kelsey Hendry, Saskatoon, women’s pole vault
Anson Henry, Pickering, men’s 100m, relay
Priscilla Lopes-Schleip, Whitby women’s 100m hurdles
Mike Mason, Nanoose Bay, B.C., men’s high jump
Megan Metcalfe, Edmonton, women’s 5,000 metres
Taylor Milne, Guelph, men’s 1,500 metres
Carline Muir, Toronto, women’s 200 metres
Hank Palmer, Montreal, men’s 4 x 100 relay
Emanual Parris, Etobicoke, men’s 4 x 100m relay
Adrienne Power, Halifax, women’s 200 metres
Gary Reed, Victoria, men’s 800 metres
Scott Russell, Windsor, men’s javelin
Jim Steacy, Lethbridge, Alta., men’s hammer throw
Kevin Sullivan, Brantford, men’s 1,500 metres
Achraf Tadili, Montreal, men’s 800 metres
Angela Whyte, Edmonton, women’s 100m hurdles
Jessica Zelinka, London, Ont., heptathlon

On the bubble, all needing to run a qualifying standard before July 22:

Nate Brannen, Cambridge, Ont., 1,500m, needs to run 3:36.60
Adam Kunkel, Paisley, Ont., men’s 400m hurdles, needs to run 48.50 seconds
Malindi Elmore, Kelowna, B.C., women’s 1,500, can secure spot with 4:05.70
Perdita Felicien, Pickering, women’s 100m hurdles, needs to run 13.11 seconds
Dana Ellis, Kitchener, women’s pole vault, needs to jump 4.45 twice or 4.54 once
Hilary Stellingwerff, Sarnia, women’s 1,500, can secure spot with 4:05.70

***

No Gillis. That's too bad.

[pq]

Who on the list made it as a "rising star?"

[im]

Muir didn't even run the 200m at Trials... is it a misprint? I thought if she made the team it would be for the 400m...

Why do we send a 4x1 and not a 4x4 team? With Reid.Tadilli and Christopher, couldn't we add one more for a team?

[AndrePaul]

Jul 7, 2008 10:16:40 GMT -5 im said:

Why do we send a 4x1 and not a 4x4 team? With Reid.Tadilli and Christopher, couldn't we add one more for a team?

That is a great point, I think a Mens 4 x 400 would have a higher placing then then the Mens 4 x 100.

With either Johnson, Adam 46.55 or Kunkel, Adam 50.11(400 hurdles) running as the 4th runner.

Then again, I am not sure how the schedule would interfere with the 800m. I think Reed and Tadili have a stronger chance individually to do well so the 800 should definitely be the priority. However if it does not conflict, then why not?

[SI]

Jul 7, 2008 9:44:35 GMT -5 pq said:

Who on the list made it as a "rising star?"

Mason, at least, I think.

[SI]

Wasn't there talk at one point that there would be no extension until 22/07 except for injury exemptions?

[pq]

Jul 7, 2008 11:21:10 GMT -5 SI said:

Mason, at least, I think.

Metcalfe also maybe?

I, for one, am extremely happy to see someone represent Canada at a distance longer than 1500. Would be nice to see more, of course. And to echo journeyman's comment, why no Gillis?

[cruicks]

what about Andrew Ellerton for the 800 I know hes run the B standard at least twice and came 3rd at the trials hes gotta have a shot at rising star

[chomolungma]

Jul 7, 2008 11:22:52 GMT -5 SI said:

Wasn't there talk at one point that there would be no extension until 22/07 except for injury exemptions?

All extensions were given on a medical basis.

[spaff]

Jul 7, 2008 11:30:28 GMT -5 cruicks said:

what about Andrew Ellerton for the 800 I know hes run the B standard at least twice and came 3rd at the trials hes gotta have a shot at rising star

Rising star only applicable if no one else qualifies under A standard.

.....Unless your name is Eric Gillis??

[SI]

I guess he falls between the cracks because of this.

"IMPORTANT NOTE: Being eligible for “Rising Star” does not guarantee selection"

For an organization that measures qualifying in hundredths of a second and constantly points the complainers to the rules, that subjectivity is ridiculous.

[sdrew]

Jul 7, 2008 9:44:35 GMT -5 pq said:

Who on the list made it as a "rising star?"

5 according to this article, although he may have been working from a preliminary list at press time:
www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080707.TRACK07MAIN/TPStory/Sports

"There will be about 30 on the Olympic team when it is announced today - 20 having answered the performance standards, five top-performing youngsters in the rising star category, two medical extensions to make standards, including sore-footed hurdler Perdita Felicien, and a handful of appealed cases citing everything from recent surgery to hampering winds."

[MattMc]

I understand that this list is a prelim. list, however if Gillis is not on the team it is an outrage.

This is the kind of thing that sickens me and further moves us away from what the 'point' of our sport is.

I truly, deeply, hope that this is not true.

Matt

[Desy]

Megan Metcalfe made the team as a rising star, Pete. I am sure there may be others on the team that had rising star status going into the meet, like Adrienne Power?

Megan is on the team because she has a B standard, won nationals and she has a great international profile at other world meets. I think AC looks at the number of factors like team size, profiles, etc.

I think Gillis didn't make it because he hasn't raced at other world class track meets like Pan Ams or Worlds Track.

[feens]

Isn't the point/purpose of rising star to take those who don't have the international experience?

[SI]

He has it wrong. Quoting from the criteria:

"AND must not have been on a World Championship or Olympic Games team prior to 2007"

[mpdelmonte]

With the way Gillis has been progressing it is very likely that he'll be at 2012 for the marathon. He IS a rising star both by their subjective criteria and literally! If AC/COC doesn't take time to look at where he's come from and where he's going then they ought to be held accountable by the athletes themselves.

[Linc]

Just another thought about the reasoning...Gillis ran his 28:07 a couple of months ago...then he got beaten handily running a 13:55 at the trials when someone ran 13:42. Shouldn't he be ready to be coming through in that pace...

Does that show he is ready to perform well at the Olympics?
Maybe the selection commitee felt that he didn't show enough competitive readiness??

edit: I'm not trying to say he shouldn't be going; just offering another perspective.

[Desy]

But if they have made an international meet they are not considered a rising star? And therefore have to achieve A standard?

[mpdelmonte]

Jul 7, 2008 12:37:04 GMT -5 Linc said:

Just another thought about the reasoning...Gillis ran his 28:07 a couple of months ago...then he got beaten handily running a 13:55 at the trials when someone ran 13:42. Shouldn't he be ready to be coming through in that pace...

Does that show he is ready to perform well at the Olympics?
Maybe the selection commitee felt that he didn't show enough competitive readiness??

edit: I'm not trying to say he shouldn't be going; just offering another perspective.

I was wondering the same thing. Would it have been better for him not to race then?

[under845]

The COC and AC really needs to go with the American approach with these qualifiers, just because I think if someone meets the standard by the IAAF standards and is top 3 in their country, they should be able to go to world championships/the olympic games.... I understand that they want to send the most compettive team, but I say AC and the COC really needs to think about sending more runners regardless what happens at the games because that is the only way we can get better. Do you think if we do it the American way it will help the future of olympic track in Canada ?

[oldlegs]

Gotta agree with Linc here. While I feel for him, I don't think leaving Gillis off the team is an outrage due to the subjective nature of the selection. The fact is he got his ass handed to him by MacKenzie and ran close to 30 seconds slower than he did last year in the 5k. He also only made B standard once by 3 seconds in a 10k--compared to say an Ellerton who came within .07 and .12 in the 800m. (Not to say that matters because under IOC rules Ellerton couldn't be considered a rising star becae both Reed and Tadili have A standard).

I also agree, it may have a been a smarter idea for Gillis not to have raced. I guess he and his coaches thought he would win it easily, so worth the risk.

I would also note that had Reid Coolsaet or Simon Bairu not been injured, this wouldn't have been a issue as Gillis would have run into the same issue Ellerton is....

Interestingly if Bairu had known about the injury rule being applied at such a late date, I wonder if he would have packed in the season so early?

[journeyman]

With respect to Gillis, I think the 5000 loss and the fact that he raced two other 10ks after making the B standard and neither were close to 28:07 hurt him. You want someone who can consistently hit a certain level. I'm sure he will be at that level in the future, but maybe his inconsistency is what prevented him from being able to go. I am going to guess that if you compare his times to Metcalfe's, or to Mason's jumps, it's clear they are at a different level.

4x400 team: my guess is that we aren't ranked, having not run one, so it was not on the radar. Would be an ok team though, for sure.

Of the exemptions, I think only Kunkel's is not for injury. The rest were injured and in various stages of rehabilitation during the qualifying period (from Perdita who has not raced at all to Nathan Brennan who seems to be just on the cusp). I don't know for sure about the 1500 women, but I think they had some injury issues, too.

It seems like a fair selection though on the whole. Relay order most likely: Henry, Connoughton, Browne as 2-3-4. Lead off, not sure. Barnett is listed as 4x100, and he can run the curve for sure, but Hank, and EJ ran well at trials. Adu-Bobie has been a relay regular for a while now. Lots of options there...

[SI]

Kunkel started his season late this year because he was injured in 07.

[SI]

With respect to Gillis, how many times can you ask him to show optimal 10000 fitness? He did it early enough so could he back off and build up again. His training has been geared to Beijing(see below). I assume that DST knows what he is doing. I also assume that he is appealing(if such a thing is possible) and said appeal will include information from DST. I can see a case that could be made.

"With his training partners from the Speed River Track Club in Guelph, Ont., Gillis is training as if he is Beijing bound.

“For the most part that is what my coach and I have been telling people, that we aren’t confirmed, but we are expecting that I am going, and so I keep training as if I am,” he explains."

www.cbc.ca/olympics/athletics/story/2008/06/23/f-olympics-athletics-gillis.html


Would optimal training for a 10000 include a top notch race right now? Isn't that why the 10000 champs were June 4?

[MattMc]

Call it what you want, Gillis met all of the OBJECTIVE criteria and was left off based on SUBJECTIVE criteria. It is even more infuriating b/c the OBJECTIVE criteria have been mollified (and justly so) for other athletes (deadline extensions).

I would be more worried about sending him if he was running super well from Stanford to now as he would certainly crash from his peak. His results suggest to me that he probably backed off, recovered and is now in a heavy training phase readying to perform well in August.

Is the USOC going to 'deselect' Ritzenhein for the marathon b/c he was 30s off his 10k pr at trials? Hell no. He is using that race as preparation for August just as Eric was using this race as preparation for August.

This decision is truly baffling, disappointing and has caused me to fully lose faith in those who hold the power in our sport. I curse you all and hope that your milk sours, your houses are drafty and your tires are flat!

Matt

[SI]

Great minds think alike.

Clearly AC doesn't understand distance. Kind of unfortunate.

[journeyman]

Jul 7, 2008 13:38:14 GMT -5 MattMc said:

Call it what you want, Gillis met all of the OBJECTIVE criteria and was left off based on SUBJECTIVE criteria.

I curse you all and hope that your milk sours, your houses are drafty and your tires are flat!

Matt

My goodness Matt, was that a hissy fit?

You are right of course, the decision was subjective. I think SI has a good point about the 10000m being a tough event to run repeatedly at a high level in a short window of time. I'm not saying I agree with the decision. It does not make sense to set some criteria first (B standard + national championship) and then use other criteria (presumptive readiness, if that is indeed the case) to make the selection. I was just guessing at what those new, unstated, subjective criteria were, that's all.

[pq]

Without saying I agree with Gillis being left home (I don't) or agreeing with Linc's suggested hypothetical reasoning for such a decision, I thought I would pick up on this particular point from Matt:

Jul 7, 2008 13:38:14 GMT -5 MattMc said:

I would be more worried about sending him if he was running super well from Stanford to now as he would certainly crash from his peak.

Not all training approaches rely on/involve dramatic peaking with a significant post-peak drop-off in performance. Here I quote Antonio Cabral in discussing Portuguese training:

"Another important conclusion of Moniz Pereira is that it is possible for a runner to stay in his “best shape” for a long period – he believed up to eight months was possible. Later I will show how Lopes followed Moniz Pereira’s principle with great success, and stayed in top shape for eight months in a single “season” that included wins in Olympics, World Records and over Cross Country. This contrasts with a number of other training methods that believe this is not possible. Think here of those methods that prescribe long build up periods, and are designed so the athlete is in “top shape” for only a few days/weeks each season."

Apologies for the non sequitar observation, which is likely interesting at this time to nobody other than me.

[MattMc]

I'm just getting started JF. I am really baffled. If that's how we're going to treat our athetes, then what do we tell all the kids out there with Olympic dreams?

Random Joe Canuck spekaing with Gillis:

RJC: Congrats on going to the Olympics-- I saw that article on the CBC web site. We're so proud. All of the HS kids who I coach can't believe that a guy who trains in our hometown is going to Beijing! Maybe you could come speak with them some time?

EG: I am not going.

RJC: What? I thought you had run the B standard in the correct AC pre-approved meet within the correct AC pre-approved time line?

EG: Yes I did.

RJC: But you went on to win the National Championships by almost a minute didn't you?

EG: Yes I did.

RJC: I even went and read the "Rising Star' criteria with my buddy who specializes in contract law and you fulfill all the criteria including no past WC or OG?

EG: You are correct.

RJC: You train at a HP center in Guelph with a national team coach and submitted a thorough training and competition plan describing how you would be ready for the Olympics just as they asked?

EG: Yes I did.

RJC: You recently placed second in the 5000m at the National Championships-- your highest placing ever in that event during a heavy training phase. Surely that's a great sign?

EG: Apparently you missed the small print that says that even if you're fit, ready, plan to peak properly and fulfil all the criteria they can arbitrarily leave you off the team.

RJC: I remember that happening to Drayton way back! The more things change...

We really make it hard to be a fan of our sport don't we?