Athletics Qualification for Summer Olympic Games 2016

[heywoodu 13,560]

2 hours ago, Dragon said:

The ultimate in bad timing

David Omoregie  13.25 for the 110m hurdles today.

Maybe a good enough time for the Olympic final - but 5 days too late as he did not have a qualifying time before now

That's really sad indeed. Especially in a year in which the men's hurdles is really not that strong, he would definitely have been a good candidate to reach the final  

[OlympicsFan 783]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb Dragon:

Only 2.

I did check before I wrote that though. 13.25 was the exact time needed to reach last year's World Championship final

I dont think that its that simple and you would also have to mention how strong the wind was during Omoregie's run.

In 2011 it took 13.56s (-1.6m/s) to reach the final, at 2012 olympics it took 13.31s (-0.5m/s) to reach the final

In 2007 it took 13.35s (-0.3m/s) to reach the final, at 2008 olympics it took 13.43s (-0.4m/s) to reach the final

In 2003 it took 13.55s (+0.4m/s) to reach the final, at 2004 olympics it took 13.34s (0.0m/s) to reach the final

In 1999 it took 13.47s (0.0m/s) to reach the final, at 2000 olympics it took 13.39s (+0.4m/s) to reach the final

In general we see very often that events in swimming/athletics get (much) faster in olympic years and i think we will see it again this year.

 

I think McLeod, Ortega, Allen, Parchment, Bascou and Martinot-Lagarde are safe to be faster than 13.25s in Rio and i am pretty sure that at least 2 out of Ash/Porter/Belocian/Xie will also be faster than 13.25s.

 

To sum it up: I think that 13.25s with a slight headwind might be enough to make the final in Rio, but i doubt that Omoregie wouldve been able to run that time under these conditions.

 

Edit: Apparently he had a tailwind of 1.2m/s and the race took place in Loughborough, a track that is known to produce fast times. At the same meet Joel Fearon (never heard of him before) ran a huge lifetime best of 10.04s (+1.7m/s). Omoregie only finished 4th at the british Championships with a time of 13.67s (-1.3m/s), 0.36s behind Pozzi ...

Do you have any explanation why he should be in a much better shape now?

Edited July 17, 2016 by OlympicsFan

[OlympicsFan 783]

Also a bit too late:

 Florian Gaul 5.77m (pole vault)

 Sam Kendricks 5.77m

 Shawn Barber 5.70m

 Thiago Braz da Silva 5.70m

 Konstadinos Filippidis 5.70m

 Tobias Scherbath 5.70m

All in Rottach-Egern yesterday

Germany nominated Scherbath, Dilla and Holzdeppe, who didnt jump any higher than 5.40m this year. It would be really sad if Holzdeppe wouldnt be able to get into shape, considering that Gaul is now the best german pole vaulter this year but didnt get a spot. With his mark of 5.77m Gaul is now 7th in the world ranking. Of all the guys ranked ahead of him only Lavillenie, Kudlicka and Menaldo didnt compete in Rottach-Egern yesterday.

[Dragon 1,702]

18 hours ago, OlympicsFan said:

I dont think that its that simple and you would also have to mention how strong the wind was during Omoregie's run.

In 2011 it took 13.56s (-1.6m/s) to reach the final, at 2012 olympics it took 13.31s (-0.5m/s) to reach the final

In 2007 it took 13.35s (-0.3m/s) to reach the final, at 2008 olympics it took 13.43s (-0.4m/s) to reach the final

In 2003 it took 13.55s (+0.4m/s) to reach the final, at 2004 olympics it took 13.34s (0.0m/s) to reach the final

In 1999 it took 13.47s (0.0m/s) to reach the final, at 2000 olympics it took 13.39s (+0.4m/s) to reach the final

In general we see very often that events in swimming/athletics get (much) faster in olympic years and i think we will see it again this year.

 

I think McLeod, Ortega, Allen, Parchment, Bascou and Martinot-Lagarde are safe to be faster than 13.25s in Rio and i am pretty sure that at least 2 out of Ash/Porter/Belocian/Xie will also be faster than 13.25s.

 

To sum it up: I think that 13.25s with a slight headwind might be enough to make the final in Rio, but i doubt that Omoregie wouldve been able to run that time under these conditions.

 

Edit: Apparently he had a tailwind of 1.2m/s and the race took place in Loughborough, a track that is known to produce fast times. At the same meet Joel Fearon (never heard of him before) ran a huge lifetime best of 10.04s (+1.7m/s). Omoregie only finished 4th at the british Championships with a time of 13.67s (-1.3m/s), 0.36s behind Pozzi ...

Do you have any explanation why he should be in a much better shape now?

Well there's still a doubt on whether Parchment or Ortega will be in Rio...

Omoregie and Belocian were very closely matched as juniors but he has a tendency to clip hurdles this year. Yesterday was a clean run.

By the way Fearon is a Winter Olympian at bobsleigh and European Championship medallist at the sport

[FC Mezhgorye 135]

CAS rejects the claims/appeal of the Russian Olympic Committee and 68 Russian athletes 

[dcro 10,182]

According to Rio website, there will be 2377 athletes in athletics. Talk about going overboard.

[gvaisakh 23]

50 minutes ago, tirtha22 said:

I saw in Totallympics that Fatma El Shernoubi of Egypt received wild card in womens 1500 m athletics. Egypt also has 4 more participants in athletics. Can you explain what kind of quota is that?

@tirtha22 asked this question in our thread. Can someone answer this?

[dcro 10,182]

1 hour ago, gvaisakh said:

 

 

@tirtha22 asked this question in our thread. Can someone answer this?

 

It's an Universality quota, every nation is allowed to enter at least one athlete per gender. Egypt had qualified only male athletes so they were allowed to enter one more female athlete.

 

Even if a nation qualifies 50 athletes (all male) they can still enter one female as an Universality athlete.

[De_Gambassi 896]

Il y a 13 heures , dcro a déclaré:

According to Rio website, there will be 2377 athletes in athletics. Talk about going overboard.

 

http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1017133/exclusive-athletics-has-number-of-competitors-cut-for-rio-2016

 

Citation

Sebastian Coe, vice-president of the IAAF and former chairman of London 2012, also claimed that he understood the IOC's decision even it means that, if they stick it to strictly, it will be the lowest number of athletes to take in an Olympics since Barcelona 1992 when there were 1,725.

 

Tremendous job, they were only 650 athletes off   

Edited August 2, 2016 by De_Gambassi

[heywoodu 13,560]

18 minutes ago, De_Gambassi said:

 

http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1017133/exclusive-athletics-has-number-of-competitors-cut-for-rio-2016

 

 

Tremendous job, they were only 650 athletes off   

Tremendous job indeed, I prefer 2377 athletes than 1725