Making the Team

Since Kendra Harrison didn’t make the Olympic team despite setting an American record in the women’s 100m hurdles prior to the US Olympic Trials, a lot of people – inside and outside of our sport – have been asking whether or not the United States’ method of choosing its three athletes for each event should be modified. Those in favor of making modifications argue that if we want our best three athletes to represent us at the Games, then selection shouldn’t come down to one performance on one day. Those who oppose any changes argue that the United States’ system is the fairest system in the world, as inclusion on the Olympic team comes down to how you perform on the track, with no politics or favoritism involved.

As Keni’s high school coach from back in the day, I have been asked by several people where I stand on the issue. Despite my personal bias in regards to her situation, I am a bit torn on the issue, as I realize that my stance on it should not be based on who I’ve coached in the past and who I’m rooting for. Honestly, I’ve had thoughts on this issue for years now, and I’d like to provide them in a full context in this article.

My biggest problem with the US system is that it demands athletes peak twice in one season, with only two months between the peaks. Physically and psychologically, as many athletes have remarked, the US trials are even more demanding and stressful than the Games themselves. That makes sense, since dealing with the pressure of making the team is where the real challenge lies. I’ve often wondered how much the performance of US athletes would improve at the Games if they could focus their training on the Games sooner in the outdoor season, instead of being forced to put all of their focus on making the team first.

In this past year’s Olympics, not only Harrison, but also Johnny Dutch (another former athlete of mine), and Shamier Little were highly favored to make the team (and win their respective events), but ended up staying home. And this was just in the hurdles. All of them would have been favored to medal, and to compete for a gold medal, at the Games. In every US Trials, potential medal winners get left behind because they didn’t perform well on that particular day, or because they got injured at the wrong time. David Oliver, for example, would have surely represented the United States’ best chance at a gold medal in the 110 hurdles, and he was looking very good in the Trials prior to straining his hamstring at the end of his semi-final heat, which he won. Oliver didn’t have a chance to compete in the final, though he most likely would have finished in the top three had he been healthy. Did America benefit from not having Oliver at the Games? No. Was America hurt by not having Oliver at the Games? Yes. So if you just look at his situation alone, you have to figure that some type of change should be in order. Perhaps an injury exemption, like the one Usain Bolt received for Jamaica.

And Bolt’s situation, when coupled with Harrison’s, is why this topic is so hot this year. Bolt didn’t have to peak for the Jamaican trials. He gave it a go, realized he wasn’t fit to compete at the level he is accustomed to, and was given an injury exemption so he could focus on training for the Games. Using Bolt as an example, it seems obvious that allowing him the exemption gave him the time he needed to peak at the right time, as he went on to win gold in three events. If Jamaica, like the US, had stuck rigidly to the doctrine that the top three in each event go on to the Games, Jamaica would have been without its best sprinter, who also happens to be the best sprinter in the history of the sport.

Of course, Bolt’s status lends to an easing of the rules. The greatest ever should be given the benefit of the doubt. Yet were he an American, he would not have competed at the Games. The question is, is that how it should be? What if Bolt had had no choice but to compete at the Jamaican Trials in both of his individual events? What if he had made the team in both but hurt himself in the process? Would he have won those three gold medals at the Games? Jamaica seems to place more emphasize on sending its three best athletes in each event to the Games, whereas the United States seems to place more emphasis on being fair. And yes, the US system is definitely is as fair as it gets, but then again, does having the fairest system equal having the best system?

The problem I have with Harrison’s situation is that breaking the national record should count for something. It makes sense to me that an athlete who breaks a national record in an Olympic year prior to the country’s Olympic Trials should get a free pass to the Games without needing to compete at the Trials. It’s funny, because when talking to her after many of her early-season races, she would always point out that “these races don’t count.” She knew that none of her victories and blazing fast times would mean a thing if she didn’t perform well at the Trials. My point would be, the early-season meets should count for something. Just like in school, where students who earn an A in a class all year long are exempt from the final exam, athletes who go undefeated in Diamond League meets prior to the Trials, or who set a national record in their event prior to the Trials, have likewise earned the right to skip the Trials and focus on preparing for the Games. If they want to compete at the Trials, fine, but it won’t be a make-or-break situation for them as it is for everybody else.

I also believe that injury exemptions should be considered. Someone with David Oliver’s track record, and who was having the best season of any American up to that point, should be allowed on the team if he is healthy enough to compete.

Of course, if Diamond League leaders, national record holders, and athletes with injury exemptions are given a pass straight to the Games, then that means that someone who finishes in the top three at the Trials doesn’t make the team. And yes, that’s a problem. Perhaps I’ve been too entrenched in the American system to see clearly outside of it, but I do feel that the top three finishers at the Trials have earned the right to compete at the Games.

So, all that to say what? I don’t know. I don’t know what changes should be made, or if any changes should be made at all. The beauty of the American system is that you know going in what you have to do to make the team. There are no exceptional cases, no politics involved, no committees or governing bodies determining who can go and who must stay at home. Yet the problem with the American system is that there are always going to be exceptional cases, but those cases are not going to be taken into account.