Men’s 200, women’s 400 to be Olympic Trials masters exhibitions
Mark Cleary
Mark continues:
“We are working on a women’s 800 for the Drake Relays; it would be the first masters women’s event in history for Drake. …The qualifying standards will be posted for these events shortly on the Masters Invitational webpage.”
Here are the top American men in the M40, M45 and M50 in the 200:
22.55
ALLEN WOODARD
MIRAMAR,FL on 05/15/2011
22.67
ERIC PRINCE
BEREA,OH on 07/28/2011 – 07/31/2011
23.01
BART THOMAS
EARLY,TX on 04/30/2011
23.27
WINSTON CHAMBERS
SAN ANTONIO,TX on 04/08/2011
23.44
WADE HOPKINS
GIDDINGS,TX on 05/21/2011
23.45
JOHN CORMIER
MIRAMAR,FL on 05/15/2011
23.45
MATT DEVINE
LOS GATOS,CA on 06/23/2011
23.52
JEFF MACK
CHARLOTTE,NC on 05/21/2011
23.57
ROBERT THOMAS
BEREA,OH on 07/28/2011 – 07/31/2011
23.60
DON DRUMMOND
CHARLOTTE,NC on 05/21/2011
23.73
BLAIR DESIO
FALLS CHURCH,VA on 08/21/2011
23.76
DIEDRICK JOSEPH
LONG BEACH,CA on 06/11/2011
23.86
DENNIS MCNEIL
NEW YORK CITY,NY on 08/27/2011 – 09/01/2011
24.02
TECUMSEH PEETE
ATLANTA,GA on 05/07/2011
22.69
KHALID MULAZIM
BEREA,OH on 07/28/2011 – 07/31/2011
23.19
FRANCOIS BODA
COPPELL,TX on 05/28/2011
23.28
DAVID JONES
AUSTIN,TX on 02/27/2011
23.35
JOHNNY SPEED
LONG BEACH,CA on 06/11/2011
23.49
LONNIE HOOKER
FALLS CHURCH,VA on 06/12/2011
23.71
KETTRELL BERRY
SAN DIEGO,CA on 07/20/2011
23.76
MARCUS SHUTE
CHARLOTTE,NC on 05/21/2011
23.91
CORNELL STEPHENSON
LONG BEACH,CA on 06/11/2011
22.88
MICHAEL SULLIVAN
PHOENIX,AZ on 04/02/2011
23.61
WILLIE GAULT
SACRAMENTO,CA on 07/06/2011 – 07/17/2011
23.87
MICHAEL WALLER
SACRAMENTO,CA on 07/06/2011 – 07/17/2011
Here are the top American women in the 400 in W40 and W45:
57.42
LISA DALEY
SACRAMENTO,CA on 07/06/2011 – 07/17/2011
57.76
CHARMAINE ROBERTS
SACRAMENTO,CA on 07/06/2011 – 07/17/2011
1:02.47
VANESSA JUAREZ
BEREA,OH on 07/28/2011 – 07/31/2011
1:03.38
LISA RYAN
BEREA,OH on 07/28/2011 – 07/31/2011
58.71
JAI BLACK
SACRAMENTO,CA on 07/06/2011 – 07/17/2011
59.12
LISA MIKKELSEN
WESTON,MA on 06/12/2011
59.89
RENEE HENDERSON
WEST CHESTER,PA on 04/29/2011
1:01.32
ALISA HARVEY
FALLS CHURCH,VA on 08/21/2011
22 Responses
First, Happy New Year everyone!!
I really want to give a standing ovation to Mark for always finding a way to get masters athletes included in these high visibility meets. Now the Olympic Trials? GREAT job Mark!!
A historical review can be found at:
http://www.mastershistory.org/Invit/1.pdf
The University of Chicago Track Club reports that Dave Ashford M45 broke the World Indoor record in the 55m hurdles (7.93)this month at the Hayden Classic. uctc.org He should get some recognition.
JP.
I was unaware that records were kept for the 55 meters and the 55 meter hurdles for masters athletes as these events aren’t usually run at national or world championships. Can you post a link to a website that shows the records?
This is outstanding news. I may have to dust off my sprint spikes and see if I can hit a qualifying time for this remarkable opportunity.
I didn’t see it in the article, but rumor has it that the Masters Invitational Committee may limit the number of participants per club in future Masters Invitational events. I would be interested in hearing from Mark Cleary or someone else on that committee as to whether there is any truth to this? Has anyone else heard this?
Nice job, Mark! I’ll be there to show my support and root our Master’s runners on…
@Jason Purcell
Way to open up the season David. Good opener for this time of year.
The WR for 60HH is 8.18. No WR for the 55HH. He would have to run a 7.33 to equate to the 60HH WR.
conversion 60 to 55: .925 X 60m time
Men Indoor 60 m Hurdles
(Last update: 24 October 2011)
Age group Mark Name Country Age Meet Date Meet Location
M 35 7.40 Colin Jackson GBR 35 02.03.02 Wien
M 40 7.85 Vincent Clarico FRA 40 19.03.06 Linz
M 45 8.18 Karl Smith JAM 46 25.03.06 Boston
M 50 8.47 Walt Butler USA 51 20.03.93
M 55 8.63 Courtland Gray USA 55 14.02.99
M 60 8.85 Courtland Gray USA 60 10.03.04 Sindelfingen
M 65 9.17 Ty Brown USA 65 27.03.10 Boston
M 70 9.88 Arno Hamaekers GER 70 13.02.11 Erfurt
M 75 10.09 Melvin Larsen USA 76 19.01.01 Ames
M 80 11.10 Melvin Larsen USA 80 12.03.05 Nampa
M 85 13.16 Bruno Sobrero ITA 85 19.03.06 Linz
M 90 15.84 Ralph Maxwell
Ed, this is not new the lanes races have been 2 max per club and 3 max if it’s a non lanes race. This allows athletes to be showcased from all over the country and from several different clubs.
This is great news for masters runners. Unfortunately, though USATF names this program as “Masters Track & Field Invitational Program” it has never been “Track & Field”! It has only been “Track”.
Here here, Henry. Here, here. Would be nice to have the “Field” represented at least one event per year.
I appreciate your clarification on the rule Mark. This year was the first I had heard of it. Your explanation seems reasonable and I’m guessing the rule is a non-issue most of the time. However, I’m not sure I agree with it.
My limited understanding of the Master Invite Program is that its goal is to promote Masters Track & Field. If so, would it not be in the best interest of Masters track to put the best competitors on the track (based on seed time), regardless of where in the country they reside or to what club they belong? This would showcase the best athletes Masters has to offer on that day. Wouldn’t that be the show we want to put on?
I’m not sure how geographic and/or club diversity matters one way or the other. But as far as geography goes, I would think that seeding on time would not favor one geographic region over another (and you don’t ever have to defend it). If club diversity is a worthy goal then, ironically, enforcement of this rule favors unattached athletes over club athletes.
Theoretically, the 3rd fastest runner in the country over 40 could be denied the opportunity to run on one of the largest stages in track & field. I can’t understand how the potential participation of National Champions or even record holders is outweighed by showcasing a plurality of clubs. That doesn’t seem right.
The universal measure of our sport is time (and distance in the field events). We are seeded based on time. We advance to semifinals and finals based on time. We are ultimately awarded victory based on time. Most of us even time our recovery runs. And while the Masters Invite is promotional in nature, it appears to me that limiting events to two athletes per club runs counter to the very nature of our sport and is anti-competitive. Basing the seeding on time would surely produce the most competitive race possible. Isn’t that what we want?
I hope the Committee reconsiders this rule for future meets.
Any 800’s or 1500’s this year? Relays? 4 x 800 or is that jsut Mt. Sac?
Masters Invitational 400m, Long Jump, Shot Put for40+ would be representative, spectator-attractive and workable in a nationals championship.
I am always puzzled about why this program doesn’t see past the 40’s in putting on the masters events.
There is a reason the Penn Relays shows the Masters M70 100m on live TV on Saturday. The others run on Friday.
I have seen back in the day in Dallas when the late Dr. Fred White brought the crowd to its feet finishing the race at age 75.
Even at Senior Games in which I have participated that were conducted along with HS meets, including open events, the spectators were much more enthralled with older guys competing than the 40-something runners.
I am not saying this because I want to be included(I am M65), as my knees now have a different plan for my next few years, but I can assure you that there will be a better showcase of masters when the focus extends past just the 40’s lycra set. Even a mixed age-group with an age-graded format would be an improvement, although I understand that there are problems staging these events. I bet you know who the crowd would be pulling for in the last few meters. It won’t be the young guy.
Just a thought, Mark, expand your vision.
Run an older group 100m and you could probably get 6 masters hall of fame members which would make a heck of a event.
Much easier to introduce. The point is not to make a masters event as close to the real event as masters can be, it is to showcase track (and field) as a sport for a lifetime. Life does not end at 45, contrary to some peoples’ paradigm (probably including mine 20 years ago).
I found myself agreeing to Courtland Gray’s post. In part because I think the event and sport would benefit if more age groups are included in these types of exhibitions. Secondly, the qualifying marks are out of reach for most of us and in a way we (at least I can’t) identify with the competitors. Those times are on a different level so might as well call it The Fastest 40 Year Old’s in the Nation event. No offense to the few 50 year old’s that can still hit those times.
How about 2 events? One race would have 40/50 & the 2nd race would have 60+?
I’m not knocking the MIP it’s just that it only involves very few Masters.
While I don’t disagree with everyone’s comments, an extended amount of exhibition events for masters is problematic for the Olympic Trials.
The Trials is probably the biggest selling event for USATF to NBC. Literally, every event runs in a specified time slot and is “sold” to advertisers. I think we were lucky to have any events in the Trials with no money.
The ideas that Courtland and others have proposed are certainly viable for subsequent championship events
Good job getting those Masters events on the schedule. I have been fortunate enough to race several of these “exibitions” the past decade and the competition & support from the crowds have always been incredible.
Well done Mark
I thank you all for your ideas some of which seem viable on principal, but for instance the field events USATF National will not allow for the Invitational program for Masters-(time and officials).As far as including different age groups there are events like Mt. Sac that has opportunites for athletes older then 50. I have tried a couple events with older athletes and there are inherent additional factors with filling the fields–that’s why we have never done a relay event at the Indoor or Outdoor Nationals–Millrose is the place for that format because it already has a following. Actually some of the bigger meets Like Mt. Sac and Drake have a few masters field events offered just as Penn relays has a slate of events for athletes in the older age groups. We cannot include every high profile meet that offers Masters events in the program. On a second topic the area of allowing only two athletes per club in a lanes race and three in a non-lanes race is presumed to weaken the field it really does not have a significant effect in that regard. There are 12 guys that ran between 22.55 & 23.45-0 the top 9 which is our field size for the trials all ran between 22.55 and 23.44. If you were to bump the # 3 guy that is a member of the same club your number 9 seed goes from a 23.35 to a 23.44 and there are two more guyts at 23.45 right behind him-so as far as hurting the quality of the field it has very little impact. I am getting into far too much detail here.There have been ideas raised and some could work and others are not practical.It’s tougher with older age groups to get firm committments because of injuries and health–we have one event for Men and one for Women and we want it to be quality and we don’t want empty lanes. It’s not as easy as you would think putting these races together from start to finish–really guys I work very hard at this–I know it does not satisfy everybody–but it is far superior to what we had 12 years ago–when they would put one star athlete out there and surround that athlete with a field of local average competitors who were fodder for the favorite. Cheers!
I agree with Courtland’s suggestion. Those of you who were in Sacramento watching the 100M finals, the M60 and M65 races were OUTSTANDING and really wowed the crowd – I feel confident that Olympic Trials spectators would feel the same way.
Great Job Mark! Your efforts are much appreciate. I look forward to compete at this meet.
Thanks for all you do Mr. Cleary….Sully
Leave a Reply