Thanks for the info (again). Great to have some ITU stuff on the forum too.

I'm going down to Sydney this week-end to watch the WTS races, should be fun.

Agreed - thanks for the update!

---

Aaron Bales
Lansing Triathlon Team

Do you think the ITU will give the some, if not all of the 5 discretionary invites to US men?

---

https://twitter.com/mungub

looks like ben collins wasn't clear on how to get a start in san diego...or happy about being left off (i tend to agree with him if points/politics are set aside)

from his twitter...
"Looks like San Diego start list was based only on Yokohama results. I wasn't there so Im SOL? Wish we'd known that! Im 10th on the wait list"

Any federation with an athlete(s) in the Gold Group can exceed the quota. There are 7 Aussies, 7 Kiwis and 7 Russians in the mens' race, and 9 Aussies in the womens' race.

Is Kemper trying to be ready for San Diego? I thought he was for sure out. I think it would be a shame if Brown, Billinton, Fretta ect are not on the start line. A shame!

He has been in the pool. Without a doubt he is swimming fast. Not sure if he's back at the 16:10 1500m time he was accustomed to in the fall. Good news is he didn't really have to take much bike/run time off and he's been playing on the alter g. HK is one tough dude, though he may not look like it.

since we have no athlete in the "Gold Group", and if each nation can only have 6 athletes, It looks like the most the US could get is 2 extra slots.

---

Hoka One One - Field Service Rep

Thanks for this. So with Haskins being subbed out, does that mean there's no chance of her making the Olympic team?

so this is basically ridiculous.

it seems like apparently everyone was under an impression that it would be done one way, and then ITU changed qualification around so it included yokohama?

When did the ITU decide to pick the start list like this? If this has been known all along then a lot of the blame falls on USAT for not keeping their olympic hopefuls up to date on what the need to do to get a start at trials.

Thanks for compiling. I was certainly one of the people that was confused by the list. I think it brings up two interesting topics (or maybe further continues them):

1) Why is the process so complicated? There can't be a single person in the sport that thinks this is the best way to get people interested in the process. They need to take a hard look at the process after this season. Press "reset," if you will.

2) Someone like Ben Collins basically said he had no idea how the list came together. That a) tells me the system is too complicated, and b) makes me wonder if it is Ben's (and other athletes) fault he isn't on the start list? Shouldn't the athletes and their coaches know, without a doubt, how they can and cannot make the starts? Is this on USATF/ITU or the athletes in this case?

Really, it boils down to the fact that it's all to confusing - which is really too bad. Still love ITU, they just need to figure it out.

Though I am indeed a big fan of Slowtwitch, I usually just read the forums and abstain from responding. In this instance, however, I think I must chime in regarding the San Diego men's Olympic Trials event. As you all know, the start list was released yesterday and only 4 American men, myself included, qualified under the existing ITU criteria. USA Triathlon has a substitution policy, however, which allows for one athlete who does not make the start list and has the highest "record" of non-qualifying athletes to sub in for an athlete who does make the start list and has both the lowest "record" of the American men on the start list and a lower "record" than the athlete subbing in. The "record" is made up of the sum of an athlete's 2 best point totals in the prior 12 months obtained in a World Championship Series race, a World Cup, or a Region Championships race (La Paz, January 2012, not Pan Am Games). In this instance, I am the American male with the lowest record on the start list and I was informed yesterday by USA Triathlon that Hunter Kemper will be subbed in for me. You need not ask me how I feel about spending the last 4 years of my life trying to qualify for this race, being one of only 4 men to do so for our country, and then being removed to place someone who has not qualified into the race. I think that goes without saying. Believe it or not, however, this is not the issue I take with this process. Okay, listen to this...

So all relevant athletes have been aware of this "record" and substitution business for quite some time. We have all spent thousands of our own dollars to travel to random races to cultivate and strengthen our records in anticipation of this process. Here's the funny thing though: your record only comes into play if you MAKE THE INITIAL START LIST! Why is this important? Well, Ethan Brown (who I might point out is an extremely talented athlete, an even better person, and my good friend) is essentially the #1 athlete in the world on the ITU wait list to get into San Diego. This means that in a matter of hours when a random person withdraws from the race (and this will happen) Ethan will roll onto the start list. Ethan has a lower record than I, but will not be a sub candidate as he was not on the original start list. Stated differently, an athlete who performed well enough to make the initial start list (me) can be subbed for while an athlete who rolls onto the start list hours later but did not perform well enough to make it into the race initially AND has a WORSE record than me (Ethan) is protected and does not have to worry about being subbed out. Had Ethan had 15 more ITU points (maybe he would have finished a spot or two higher in Mooloolaba or in a random South American points race) he would have been on the initial start list and would have been the athlete with the lowest record making him the substitution candidate, but, since his results were not quite good enough to get him onto the start list initially, HE IS PROTECTED and doesn't have to worry about being subbed for!!! In summary, a worse performance is being rewarded. I am being penalized for making the start list over my teammates/competitors. USAT should have the common sense to wait until 12 days out from the race when the FINAL FINAL start list is set and then make its substitutions given the athletes who are on the start list then when athletes have rolled in off the wait list. Still, they are not adopting this process (well, yet). Their reasoning? "We want to provide notice to the athlete who will be subbed." ????????????? Okay, so let me get this straight... you want to be fair to me by providing me with notice that I might be taken off the start list? The athletes who are about to roll on don't even have "notice" that they'll be in the race so how are they negatively affected if you tell them when they roll on that they will be subbed for? In the words of Hunter Kemper, the beneficiary of this whole process, this is "ridiculous." I have some other words to describe this process, but I'll keep it classy.

Stay tuned to see how this all plays out. I have worked hard to get to this place and I am not going to just give in to this fundamentally unfair and flawed process.

Mark, thanks for chiming in. Do you have any ideas why USAT wanted to sub Hunter Kemper in? If you're not comfortable posting in the forum, feel free to PM me.

Congrats for doing well enough to actually qualify to be on the start list. Sorry that USAT is essentially shafting you with an injured athlete. Hope that we get to see you race somehow.

Thanks for the support guys. I wish to reiterate that I have no issue with any of the hard-working and talented athletes involved in the process, only the ridiculous method in which USAT has chosen to implement their criteria. As for Hunter, the reason USAT is using him as a substitute is because he has earned that right via his record - his point total of his best two races (of the WCS, WC variety) in the past 12 months is higher than any other athlete who did not make the start list.

I should also point out that if Hunter rolls onto the start list from the waiting list, all of this is moot from my perspective and I will be allowed to keep my spot. Unfortunately Hunter is #15 on the wait list and his chances of rolling on are quite low.

USAT is really doing you a fovor Mark. Instead of just ramming it into you asshole dry, they are giving you time and some grease, so that now when they butt fuck you, it will slip in nice and easy, and they will hope that you did not notice it. Like you, I would notice, and this whole thing stinks. Is it just their usual incompitence, or is it that they are using this as a way to circumvent you and get the next guy in??. I'm guessing it is the usual, they never think things through and account for all variables. Or maybe you pissed in someone's cornflakes..

mark,

i agree this whole thing has been one big clusterf**k. quick question, were you guys aware all along that this is how the san diego start list would be selected? As in, they would take top 30 from yokohama last year, etc. It seems like a bunch of the other olympic hopefuls were under the impression that the start list would be selected differently, many of them believing they had made the trials.

I will not comment on competence, but I will point out a few more facts unknown to the general community. As it stands now, Olympian Sarah Haskins will be subbed out for Jill Petersen who also did not make the start list. Why didn't Jill make the start list? Jill has enough points to qualify for the original start list, but did not send an email to USA Triathlon telling them she was actually interested in participating in the Olympic Trials. Yep. Seriously??? Jill has been living at the Olympic Training Center for 4 years and preparing 24/7 to try for the Olympic Games. That's it. One single goal. Given that she is among a small handful of girls (5) actually eligible for trials, that all conversation on international trips to World Championship Series races as well as international camps and daily training at the US Olympic Training Center among USA Triathlon employees, National Teams Directors, etc. revolves around Trials preparation, and that Jill has traveled to many international races for the sole purpose of solidifying her spot at Trials (and all this travel has not only been discussed with USAT officials, but also has occurred alongside them!), a reasonable person would think that USA Triathlon might actually do one of their athletes a favor and not throw them under the bus on a technicality. It is a fair, safe, and OBVIOUS assumption that USAT should make in that all the eligible athletes who've dedicated their lives to making the Trials should desire to be entered into the race. I feel that USAT has a fiduciary duty to ensure that, especially since they have often funded an athlete in the achievement of the process.

P.S. Sarah Groff... not on the start list either. Why? She too didn't send an email explaining she wanted to be at the second trials race. While she's already qualified for the Olympics, it was a given that she wanted to race at the only WCS race on American soil in 2+ years for her family and for her sponsors. Alas, she didn't spell it out for USAT in an email so, well, sorry Sarah.

Little off topic rant here, but this is ridiculous. Lets keep in mind, this is just to get into a race which is only one part of the qualifying process for the Olympics in triathlon in the US. Seriously... it shouldnt take hours to answer the question, "How does one make the Olympic team for triathlon?"

---

--------------------------

Team Timex 2014
@ajhodges

At the Yokohama race all of us were told that the points earned their would count in earning a spot at San Diego and possibly Sydney. I left that race thinking I was set. Upon returning home I was informed by USAT (I cannot specifically say whom, and must say that perhaps it was word of mouth) that this was not the case and Yokohama would not be counted. Misinformation was given and I can state with 100% certainty that all the pros and all the staff were shocked when the list came out yesterday. I have had either phone or email communication with every single American athlete on the men's start list as well as all the athletes on the wait list (in the top 15) in the last 12 hours and not a one is not baffled. All of the athletes' previous assumptions were based on guidance given by USA Triathlon. Was USAT misinformed by the ITU? Perhaps. It would not be the first time. Still, USAT's assumptions were incorrect and the outcome unanticipated.

yea thats what it seems like.

Quite funny that USAT didn't know how to qualify athletes to their own Olympic trials....

I will say this: whether it's unclear communications for points in the Olympics, tracking AG'ers rankings and results, officiating, the ever-changing rulebook, and even the difficulty of navigating their website, it's very typical USAT: Unclear, unorganized, and uninspiring. We don't really ask a lot, but we get less. It's unfortunate that they are the national body governing our sport - they're not well run. Bad strategists, with worse execution. If I did my job like they are doing their job, I'd be out.

I'm sorry that some of their finest work has put your dream and others' in jeopardy. I hope that it works out.

---

------------------

- I do all my own stunts

 
If this doesn't call out the ST investigative reporting team, nothing will.

I'd really like to see something on the ST front page regarding this (what appears to be) USAT misstep.

---

"Good genes are not a requirement, just the obsession to beat ones brains out daily"...the Griz

Realise the whole Yokohama issue is only one piece of the puzzle, and it would seems like Fretta is getting right royally shafted here. But we knew in 2011 that the San Diego start list would be determined first and foremost by Yokohama, so it would seem strange that Collins wasn't clear 4 months into 2012. I enquired for my wife back in November as to eligibility and was instructed then as to the Yokohama issue.

wow mark, i gotta say that this just all sounds really bad.

question, if you get bumped for hunter is that it, you're completely out? it seems as if it would make sense to fall back at least on the waitlist in order of points (i.e. next)??

hopefully things will work out and you'll be on the starting line and can stick it to someone by getting a slot!

maybe the ITU will just invite the necessary americans everything will b fine.

Hi Mark,
Thanks for posting & pointing out this truly retarded process. How can USAT think that they're doing you a favor by subbing you this early? The smart and logical way if they wanted to ensure Hunter was on the start line would be inform you that "In advent of no further USA men making the start list when the lists are finalized you will be subbed out, if roll down occurs that person will be subbed instead of you". This way you could train and focus on the race & the very unlikely scenario played out of zero roll downs you'd be forewarned...... I'm shaking my head here in New Zealand at USATs retardness, I've heard and seen TriNZ have issues in my short time in the sport but this one takes the cake.

I second the poster who said something should be on the front page of Slowtwitch about this, it's just plain unjust!

---

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Chicks are like Voltron, the more you can get, the better it is." -Tucker

I find this whole situation absolutely disgraceful to our sport and country. This is beyond unacceptable in the management conducted by USAT over its athletes.

What's most funny to me is just the weirdness of the entire situation. Here we are with the US having our Olympic trials on OUR home soil, and it seems like a mess on both the men and women start list. I guess it's no wonder why we see our federation struggle with getting max starts with the men (great job with the women, I'll add).

Major failure on the entire process that we can't fill atleast 6 spots on the start list on home soil.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

Good grief, what a mess. Just when it seemed like USAT had begun to turn a corner from the dark ages of the Libby Burrell regime (when this kind of stuff was to be expected...), its back to business as usual with honest, hardworking athletes in the program getting royally screwed over....

Also the host nation (USA in this case) is allowed a maximum of 8 athletes.

Does this not explain where USA stands in world rankings? Duh - Leadership?????? Time for an overhaul.

It's important to remember the US isn't the only country using this event to help select it's Olympic Team. I'm not American so can't comment on the USAT but a couple of points to mention. The start list process has been available for a while. In fact the ITU noticed the Yokohama issue and increased the start list from 65 to 70 athletes for both the Sydney and San Diego start lists to help alleviate the potential issue. All National Federations were made aware of this.
From an outside perspective, I'd say as a coach it would be nice for the National Federation to send me all the qualifying information. However, as a professional I would also take the time to clearly understand the entire qualifying process. If you have invested 4 years of your life to qualify what is an extra 5 to 10 hours to do the selection math. Why leave your fate in someone elses hand if they screw up which appears to of happened here. Not directing this at anyone but as a coach of an ITU athlete I had the math figured out prior to the start list being posted so there was no surprise.
It's almost like an athlete getting misdirected off course by an official. Yes the official is wrong but ultimately it's the athlete's responsibility to know the course which overrides the officials mistake. Yes USAT appears wrong but for athletes to be surprissed they didn't make the start list is the same as an athlete not taking time to learn the course. Ultimately knowing the criteria should be part of being professional.

However, as a professional I would also take the time to clearly understand the entire qualifying process. \\

That is exactly what our folks did here, tried to understand the process, but in the end it appears that not one athlete knew what was going on, so the blame has to fall on USAT. Even now at the last minute we are getting an understanding of the process, it is flawed in so many ways that there is no excuse for it. You bring up that old tired excuse that athletes should know the course, that is a copout. Race directors should mark courses so that a moron just showing up on race day could figure it out. It is totally unreasonable to expect an athlete to memorize a 100+ turns on some courses, often going the wrong way on streets, and very often changed just before an event for some last minute call. The same goes here, the rules should have been palin and simple, which they were not. Even our resident expert MR ITU was befuddled, and he studies this stuff like no one else..

Not sure why you are trying to make excuses for USAT as it is clear they fucked up in a major way. To trade out Mark for Hunter is one thing, but to not then put him at the top of the waiting list ahead of athletes he should be ahead of to replace any no shows is complete insanity. And this whole you did not eamil us from athletes that they 100% know are pointing for this one event and the olympics, athletes they pay and support to do just such, athletes thay talk to about it all the time, that is beyond comprehension how they could just now ignore them...

You are a coach, tell me how you would feel if any of your athletes were one of these. Just tell them that you are the fuck up because you did not know that the last minute rules would be so beyond any logical persons thinking? That is what you seem to imply you would do..

Thanks again for you insight, Mr ITU. Really feeling for those guys that thought they would be racing, especially Brown, Billington, Collins and Freta. Can't imagine the heart break, regardless of who's "fault" all of this is.

---

Jason Pedersen
RunPd.com - Running as fast I can since '93
@jasonpedersen

I'm not saying USAT didn't make mistakes. However, the rules in seeding athletes are posted on the ITU site. The 10 spots for the gold group, 30 spots based on Yokohama results. Then using the ITU ranking to fill up to 60 spots (changed to 65 for Sydney and San Diego). Then they will add an additional 5 Wildcard spots next week to fill the field.
This isn't rocket science. Every athlete at this level should be able or have support staff able to calculate this as a Professional. You would think the National Federation would do this for their athletes and have the calculations done but if I invested 4 years of my life on this I would sure make sure I knew what I was doing.
I coach a non American athlete on the San Diego start list and had the points calculated months ago.
I'm not saying USAT isn't in the wrong, but rather that the athlete and coach need to take some responsibility as well if they didn't score enough points to make the start list. The information was available online.
Bottom line, it's all in the details at this level of racing.

Agreed...when medals are decided by mere seconds, it is indeed a matter of details.

BUT, it really shouldn't come down to details for who is on the starting line for a qualifying race when the the talent pool is compressed (many athletes closely matched in ability). USA Swimming and USA Track and Field cast a wide net in allowing entrants into their Trials and whomever goes the fastest at Trials gets the spots. Simple. Obviously its a little different with those being American-only events, but a qualifier is still a qualifier.

There are certainly drawbacks to that approach, but if a race is being used a qualifier then it shouldn't require this much complexity just to figure out who's in the field.

If it's going to be this convoluted, they should dispense with the charade of "qualifying" and just have a committee pick three athletes to send to the Games.

Yes but this race is a World Triathlon Series Race and like all WTS races follows WTS rules. The Americans have chosen to use this race as an Olympic Qualifier for the USA Team as have many other National Federations.
This is not a USA Olympic Qualifying event that they are allowing visiting athletes to compete in.
The same start list criteria is being used for San Diego that they are using for tomorrow's Sydney WTS race or the Madrid WTS race 2 weeks after San Diego.
Seems to be lots of problems with the American selection policy, not with the ITU rules on setting the start list.

Thanks for the clarification re: WTS vs. domestic race w/ foreign athletes.

Agreed. The ITU formula is complex and confusing but as you said, it is decipherable. Seems like those rules have been followed.

However, USAT choosing to make a charade of the selection process under the guise of an objective meritorious qualification standard is ridiculous.

Seems to be lots of problems with the American selection policy, not with the ITU rules on setting the start list. //

I believe that is what everyone has been saying here since the beginning of this thread. I don't think anyone is bashing the ITU here, at least i'm not and it appears the athletes involved are not. It is USAT in the wrong and the ones getting bashed. I think people took offense at you defending them, not the ITU..

coach you are right in most points
but i think the real issue here is that there is a guy that made the start list but that is not going to race (at this stage) because of something is going really wrong here and is defo not best practise.
Than there will be somebody that hasnt made the points but gets in through the waiting list as there will be people not showing up.
they subed the wrong athlete.

Right there - that's the issue. Everything else was explicit I believe, months ago. But the sub'n issue needs addressing - common sense says it's just ludicrous.

WTC read this site, sponsors read this site, ITU come here. Quite clearly USAT must come here too.

Can someone from USAT please confirm you've communicated with athletes that Fretta won't be sub'd now and you've realised the error of your ways?

Or are you that stupid?

In short, this is what USAT says is their job (quoted from a recent USAT press release):
“In addition to its work with athletes, coaches, and race directors on the grassroots level, USA Triathlon provides leadership and support to elite athletes competing at international events, including ITU World Championships, Pan American Games and the summer Olympic Games.”
Regardless of anyone’s thoughts on what a coach or athlete should have known, USAT says their job is to “provide leadership and support”, and that’s in addition to their work “on the grassroots level.” If USAT says that is what they are supposed to do, why are so many athletes shocked at the start list? If it is true that some athletes were not on the start list because of the technicality of not sending in a letter saying they wanted to be in the race, then that is a perfect example of how we let them down. Technicalities are rules and must be met. But the national organization, which is supposed to provide leadership and support should have been proactively making sure all interested athletes had met all requirements, including the necessary emails to get on start lists. They should also be posting regular information of how all the top athletes fare according to the WTS rules. The fact that they sent a clarification email to their elite athletes only AFTER this debacle is a perfect example of a lack of leadership. Yes, they can site the rules and the fact that the rules are posted on their website and ITU's website, but the fact that so many people read the rules and were still taken by surprise is inexcusable. Where's the LEADERSHIP?? Are they here to HELP the athletes or do they just like having a job for which they get paid? They must have known Yokahama would be an issue when those unusual circumstances came up last year with that as a rescheduled race. (If they didn't know, then shame on them!) We should have pointed it out to all elites and advised them all to do whatever they could to try to get on the Yokahama start list. Nothing was ever said as far as I've been told.
And if they did know, why would they have sat and watched as people like Brown and Billington spend tons of money chasing points that would make no difference? They both tweeted saying they were in the trials. Something's rotten in the henhouse!

You can be sure they have seen this thread, and probably trying to figure out who to blame. Unfortunately right now they are blaming the athlete, when it is clear they f'ed up big time. They need to step up and take responsibility now, tell Mark he is 1st on the sub list, and that is the fair thing to do. Sure it will piss off the other guys that now think they are next up, but it should have never been done that way. Someone is going to get screwed becasue of the horrible mistake, may as well make it right now and at the very least not screw the guy with the best standing...

I have no inside information but I don't think it's unreasonable to assume USAT may go to the ITU and ask for a wild card to help them get out of this mess.
I'm not familiar enough with the Wild Card application process to know what the chances of being successful are. There were over 120 entrants for both the male and female races. So a huge waitlist and the USA isn't the only country using this as a Olympic qualifier.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

I'm guessing that will be highly unlikely. ITU doesn't really care if it's US Trials or not. Many countries are using Sydney and San Diego as qualifiers (Canada for one). Others countries have the same rights/concerns about getting athletes onto the start list.

In my Opinion, USAT created this mess, and they are going to have to justify it. It's not up to the ITU to fix their problems. Maybe for 2016 they can create an adequate system

Are you all complaining about the Olympic selection policy? http://www.usatriathlon.org/...l/olympic-games.aspx
Or the USAT WTS entry policy? http://www.usatriathlon.org/...e-qualification.aspx

The WTS entry policy has been the same since the start of the 2011 WCS season for US athletes (and the ITU policy has been the same as well).

Yokohama was the first WCS of 2012. ITU policy has always been to use the 2011 rankings to create the start lists for either the 1st or first 2 WTS races of the season. Same policy used this year, 2011 list created Yokohama and Sydney (the first two WTS races of 2012 season). 2012 list created San Diego onwards.

All USAT elites must send an email to a specific email address to get their names on an ITU start list. You dont send your name you arent put on the list. USAT should not be emailing individual athletes to ask them if they want to get on the list, USAT sends out elite emails showing everybody who has signed up once or twice a month. If you arent on the list maybe you should sign up! USAT has to make a clear policy on this and they have. This has kept athletes out of races in the past because they have signed up too late. Remember you are talking about professional athletes here, not high school kids.

The onus is on the athletes to perform and perform consistently, those athletes will be ranked highly and will get starts.

As for an all US draft legal qualifier, that happened in 2008 in Tuscaloosa with 10 men and 10 women on the start line - quite different than 55 at the Olympics or 65-70 at a WCS. Its not something that USAT should invest their time in again.

And finally look back over the past 2 years and see how many male (don't have time to do female athletes right now) US athletes have raced ITU events and where they have finished:
Chrabot: 11 ITU WCS races (out of 16) Top 10s: 9th, 4th, 5th
Shoemaker: 14 ITU WCS races Top 10s: 8th, 9th, 7th, 7th, 8th
Huerta: 8 ITU WCS races Top 10s: none
Kemper: 3 ITU WCS races Top 10s: 10th
Fretta: 7 ITU WCS races Top 10s: none
Brown: 2 ITU WCS races Top 10s: none
Collins: 4 ITU WCS races Top 10s: none
Billington: no ITU WCS races *****4th place U23 worlds 2011

These athletes raced World Cups, but obviously they were not performing at the races they were at. So now they should be on a start list for a WTS race?
Continental Cups ->World Cups ->World Triathlon Series Races

And a final series of questions for thought:
Is it USAT's fault that the athletes are not performing?
or is it the athletes fault that they are not performing?
if USAT were to give these athletes more money would they perform better, the same or worse?
or should USAT do what they have been doing and target their top performers and wait for their non-performers to perform and then fund them?

Did you not read this thread??If you did, i think you have a little reading comprehension problem..The major complaint is that Mark Fretta did make the start list, chasing points all around the world. He understands that Hunter can bump him off if he choses. He seems resigned to accepting that fate, as it was announced ahead of time. What his major complaint that you did not address in your ass kissing of USAT, is that he now gets thrown into limbo, where non qualified athletes now get to leap frog him if folks cancel their starts. I don't know how to spell it out any simpler, many have said this same thing over and over, but you seem to not get it for some reason. He should be put at the top of the list ahead of all the non start qualifiers, since he actually did qualify for a start. Under this system, athletes that got less points and did not make the start list, could easily end up better off than athletes that did make the list. Now in your apparently expert opinion, how is that fair or equitable???

It's not quite as simple as you're making it out to be. Several of these "non qualified" athletes (Billington, Brown, etc...) are ranked far ahead of Fretta on the ITU points list. Fretta got on the start list in San Diego because he was at Yokohama, not because of accumulated ITU points. Now I'm not gonna say who deserves and who doesn't deserve to be on the starting line at San Diego. All I'm saying is there are a lot of ins-and-outs, and several athletes can make sane and reasonable arguments that they should be on the starting line in San Diego.

The root of this problem is that the ITU and USAT use multiple rankings systems, and it causes mass confusion. One athlete "should" be at San Diego according to one ranking system (WCS points in "2012"... I use quotes because Yokohama happened in 2011), and other athletes "should" be at San Diego because of another ranking system (total ITU points). And then there's Hunter, who just had the bad luck of getting taken out and injured by a yahoo in Myrtle Beach last year. Are you gonna tell Hunter Kemper that he doesn't deserve to be at Olympic trials because some yahoo, who was a lap behind on the bike, got in his way and injured him? I know I wouldn't want to tell Hunter that.

Wow, you are quite the jerk. If you read my post maybe you would understand that the criteria are and have been posted for quite sometime.

Performances = points that could have been earned over the past 2 years. Fretta had enough points to get into Yokohama, he got on that start list and raced (as I'm sure Collins, Brown and Billington could have done). Was he lucky, maybe? Its not USAT's fault that athletes chose to not read the rules implemented by the ITU.

The ITU puts priority on the WCS list, just as they have done in 2009, 2010 and 2011. Its not new. WCS races are the pinnacle of the sport, and thus the WCS list is how the chose the majority of starters for the races, not the ITU points. The points list is for filling in the list after they take 8 gold group and 30 WCS list people.

This same situation has happened every year after Sydney when just one race got a start for the majority of people.

Northeast,

I think the problem is that USAT not only didn't know how the ITU was going to select the field for San Diego, they gave specifically bad and misinformed advice to many of the olympic hopefuls in how they should accumulate points ot get on the start line in San Diego (from what we have heard). That is the root of this problem.

Annnnnd... Brad Perry hits the nail on the head.

They knew last year - ITU emails all athletes and NF's.

Pretty sure we rec'd the email in August 2011.

---

http://www.sweat7.com
Facebook Page: Sweat7
Twitter: @sweat7coaching

I don't think anyone is telling Hunter he cannot race, everyone knew this could happen. My point is that Mark was the "only" one on the start list for whatever reason. He did what he needed to do to have enough points in whatever series or race to actually have his name put on that list. The others did not, that is plain and simple, no name on list, just waiting list. Now in my world, a guy on the real list vs a guy on a waiting list, it is a slam dunk who has priority. I tend to try and keep things simple in my world..

Now because of the cluster USAT has created, you are right in that everyone has their own little argument on why they should be in, that is the real problem. They should not have an argument at all. I feel bad for all the athletes involved, as this process is really about as bad as it could be. It is like they sought out the most complicated, cross over, gray area system to get folks to this race as they could. I hope they did, because then you will actually USAT have succeded in something that set out to do...(-;

Wow, you are quite the jerk. If you read my post maybe you would understand that the criteria are and have been posted for quite sometime.//

And once again you missed my whole point. I understand everything you wrote, but none of it addresses the USAT side of what they are doing to Mark by throwing him into a limbo, only to let wait list folks in before he has a chance. This is my issue, not all the stuff you keep posting, i get it.. Do you get this??

Yes... all of this would be A LOT simpler and more fair if USAT could convince the ITU to use one of their 5 invitational slots on Hunter Kemper. Then Kemper is in, Fretta won't be subbed out (presumably... but as we know, assuming anything with these trials is probably a mistake), Brown gets in via rolldown (which almost assuredly will happen), and Billington may also get a rolldown slot.

I'm still surprised by the women's side. Not sure how 2 top American Females could both forget to register for the WTS race.
It seems like a bit of a stupid system if an athlete could forget to register and then be allowed to get into the race by bumping someone else. Talk about being rewarded for making a mistake. Not only do you get in but you also eliminate one of your top competitors for an Olympic spot in the process.

It seems like a bit of a stupid system if an athlete could forget to register and then be allowed to get into the race by bumping someone else. //

Not seems, is a stupid system. I mean they spent 10's of thousands of dollars on just a small few women athletes, know which ones have a shot at the trials and games, and they do not make sure they have all the t's cross and i's dotted. What do we pay all their managers and national team coaches for? How can it be that one lonley email dooms a person's 4 year struggle to try and make the olympics? And i do not at all feel bad about calling them out on this, as it is mine and your dollars that are helping to fund the olympic side of the sport. To have this many(as is just about all) of the athletes involved in this fiasco caught blind sided, someone in management is to blame. Throwing it onto the athletes is a copout, and will not work anymore. We now have to the power to shine a light on the cock roaches, they can scatter, but we know where they are...

1) Monty, you are cool. Rage on.

2) This process makes selection for the Kenyan Olympic marathon team look straightforward. I don't blame athletes for being confused.

3) USAT stinks. That a governing body could simultaneously nuture its best athletes for Olympic bids, then not allow these athletes to compete for Olympic bids, is absurd. And that said body's own rolldown process screws the people who bothered to follow the confusing rules in the first place is just plain ricockulous.

Good luck to all involved.

mm

Problem is we've had this power and cockroaches already did scatter from the Libby Burrell regime...another set of cockroaches managed to move in and create what seems to be an even bigger mess.

Monty, I agree that USAT should be paying attention to who does/doesn't sign up for these races (on the WTS level where it's only a handful of athletes), but I do think some of the blame needs to fall on the athletes on that specific topic. USAT overly communicates the process of submitting your intent to race directly to their Elite mailing list. For whatever reason, it seems like a few athletes missed that, ignored or forgot about it - for the BIGGEST race of the year (sans Olympics). I'm not saying USAT shouldn't take some of the onus for their few top elites, but the athletes and their coaches are partially responsible.

Has the roll down started yet...any idea which people are getting in?

This is a point I have seen mentioned a couple of times. I don't believe the roll down slots are in USAT's control. It creates a very sticky situation for USAT because it completely eliminates Fretta from the race, but it is not "their own process."

I agree 100% that the best scenario is USAT petitioning ITU to use a wildcard spot on Hunter, and maybe Billington, and then hoping Brown gets a roll down. Or would this put USAT over the men's allowed total for the race?

And I don't know exactly how the wildcard selection works, but I think a multiple Olympian who missed out on qualifying because of an injury would have a fairly strong case for earning the spot.

---

Hoka One One - Field Service Rep

The USA as host country has a maximum quota of 8 athletes. The ITU will name 5 Wildcard athletes on Tuesday/ It will be interesting to see who is on this list. Often they just take the first 5 people off the wait list but are not required to do so. Once the Wildcards are named the field will be up to 70 athletes. As athletes on the start list withdraw they get replaced by athletes on the waitlist. Currently there are 39 female and 60 male athletes on the waitlist for this event.

Like I've said on another post, ITU doesn't care whether it's the US Olympic qualifier or the Khazakstan Olympic qualifier. Everyone has to play by the same rules. It's up to USAT to communicate what was required to get onto the start list for San Diego. It seems USAT messed up here, so be it. That's the bed they made, gotta live with it.

rules are rules. Bring on London!

This reply addresses one thing, and one thing only. That is, the level of communication from USAT, or at least the level of communication of USAT to elites the last part of 2011 and up to this point in 2012.

In the past USAT elites, long and short course, have (to my knowledge) pretty much received the same emails. They included topics from...
- ITU race sign ups
- Prize money lists for various races
- Special requests from races with prize money for pros to race
- Entry processes for races like the Tri-California series
- USAT Elite membership renewal and verification process
- and a lot of others.

We did not receive any information this year about elite renewals. We contacted USAT in early March to renew our licenses. I 'think' that there was an email months ago outline some of the race sign ups, etc.

My point is that the communication to USAT elites FROM USAT has essentially fallen off the face of the earth. Maybe it is different for those athletes with an ITU focus or those athletes with coaches more closely tied in with USAT, but it does not sound like it from reading Mark's (Fretta) replies. But, with our experience of the lack of communication for something as seemingly simple as renewing our USAT elite license, it is no wonder that the topics on this thread have fallen through the cracks. It's a bit ridiculous as mentioned and very unfortunate, but not too surprising. Some of the onus does fall on the athletes, but in this case, there should be little to no guesswork in what needs to be done to get on a start list or signed up for an ITU WTS race!

Edit to Add: Probably a bit of both ends, but I believe that I let my membership lapse and there was an incorrect email address...hence the lack of communication to me!

---

Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |

Seriously. Where's the guy who was calling USADA and USAT to get the scoop on the lack of drug testing in Panama. Hello??? This is a little more relevant (at least to me).

Start lists look to have been updated.

http://wts.triathlon.org/...tart_list/1790/7748/

brown, kemper in. doesn't look like anyone from the US was sub'ed out to let these guys in.

was macca on the list before? he's on it now.

I don't think they gave "all their guys and girls wild card spots". Where is Jillian Petersen? She's ranked 52nd on the ITU Olympic ranking list.
Where is Margaret Shapiro ( the next highest ranked American at 91st?

There are 7 men from GB, yet only 6 from the USA.
There are 7 women from GB, yet only 4 from USA.
Hell, there are 5 women from NED on the start list, and only 4 from USA.

Really, you're telling me the Netherlands should have more athletes on the start line at an event the Americans are using as a "qualifier" for their Olympic team, that is on home soil??

I'm not saying the process is perfect, but certainly ITU didn't "give" wild cards just to Americans because it is one of their qualifying events.

Hasn't the ITU always favored the "host" country with it's events?

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

Where are the wildcard awards posted? is there an updated starting list?

---

Hoka One One - Field Service Rep

5 wild cards went to;

Kemper (USA)
Hayes (GBR)
Pais (POR)
Mescheyrakov (RUS)
Tutukin (RUS)

First 3 make perfect sense to me, not sure why they went with the Russians.

Only one spot has rolled down so far and that went to Ethan Brown (USA)

Billington and Collins are in the top 10 on the wait list.

---

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fantasy Triathlon
http://914419110599774392.weebly.com/index.html

Probably because they knew he was a doper.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

 
When combined with the slap over the wrist from ITU back in 2009 - does seem like there was an attempt at a bit of a cover up.....

Looks like USAT subbing you out was the right call. Doper.