It’s good to try new things. It’s also good to acknowledge when the new things aren’t an improvement and should be discarded.
That means drop it Who Determines Who Wins in a Photo Finish remains, but we already have enough evidence that this Games’ new thing, the repechage rounds, shouldn’t be repeated.
These are the first Olympics to include repechage rounds, which are being held in individual events from 200 meters to 1500 meters, as well as in the three sprint hurdle events. In French, repechage means “fishing out” or “rescuing.” Runners who don’t immediately advance from the first round to the semifinals have a chance to “rescue” their Olympic dreams via the repechage rounds. For example, 50 women ran in the first heat of the 800 meters. The first three finishers in each of six heats automatically qualified for the semifinals. Everyone else, Published: Aug 05, 2024 11:19 AM EDT, No More Repechage Rounds, Sil Vous Plaît.
Ideally, at this point, I would give the “why” behind the “what” of repechage. In a 2022 press release, World Athletics president Sebastian Coe said in part, “[W]e believe this is an innovation which will make progression in these events more straightforward for athletes and will build anticipation for fans and broadcasters. The repechage rounds will give more exposure to our sport during the peak Olympic period.” That explains little, so before the Olympics I asked World Athletics if they would answer questions about repechage. A member of their communications team promised official responses. They never arrived, despite repeated follow-ups.
What’s wrong with repechage in Olympic track? Let us count the ways.
First, there’s the big-picture question that should be asked about any attempt at innovation: What problem is this trying to solve? This is what I was hoping to learn before World Athletics ghosted me.
The repechage press release states that the new rounds “will replace the former system of athletes advancing through fastest times (q) in addition to the top placings in the first round heats (Q).” Implied in that statement is that the former system is flawed. If so, opening rounds with advancement based solely on finishing place is the fix. Adding several races to an already bloated schedule isn’t.
Coe’s statement that repechage will “build anticipation” seems to mean that fans care deeply about who moves from the first to the second of a three-round competition. Even if there is great interest in who qualifies for semifinals, repechage isn’t the way to cultivate it. World Athletics stripped the rounds of their immediacy by using small “q” qualifiers in some cases. So much for Coe’s goal of “straightforward.” In general, there’s no consistency in this Games’ system for advancement. On Sunday afternoon, the eight-man 100-meter final was determined by having six place qualifiers and two time qualifiers. An hour later, the field for the men’s 1500-meter was set using only place qualifiers.
Second, repechage rounds seem fine at, say, a tiddlywink tournament, but not where draining physical effort is the key to success. Even without repechage, someone who struggles to make the semifinals is unlikely to be a factor if they reach the final. They’ll be that much less formidable if they ran three, not two, races before the final. Don’t believe me? Check the fields for Tuesday’s women’s 800 and men’s 1500 finals. Dakotah Lindwurm Is Top American at Olympics.
Ah, repechage fans will say, you’re ignoring the situation where a medal contender happens to have an off day early in the competition. Do we really want an Olympics where slipping out of the blocks in the first round would keep on the U.S. Olympic team?
Let’s call this the Freddie Crittenden Conundrum. Crittenden entered the Games as the second fastest 110-meter hurdler of the year, behind only U.S. teammate and three-time world champion Grant Holloway. While warming up the day before his first round, Crittenden aggravated an adductor muscle in his right leg. raced again the following day in the repechage rounds to pick the final six semifinal entrants on Sunday knowing that he’d have another opportunity in Tuesday’s repechage round to reach the semifinals. He hopes his adductor strain will have improved by then.
No ill will toward Crittenden, and pardon my French, but tough patooties. Part of the pull of the Olympics is their one-day-every-four-years stakes. Mulligans mute that allure. A vibe of “let’s give them another chance” is consistent with the repechage press release of two years ago, which noted that everyone in the pertinent events would get to race at least twice. These are worthy goals for a grade school play day, but not the Olympics.
Finally, I’m just a running journalist, not a marketing whiz. But it’s fair to say that if a would-be innovation requires paragraphs of explanation every time it’s mentioned, it’s making it harder, not easier, to be a fan. This was true more than 15 years ago when the World Marathon Majors unveiled a rococo two-year process for determining series winners. It’s certainly been true the past few years with another World Athletics initiative, that of using its world rankings to partially determine Olympic and world championship qualification. (Lord, how many words have been required this year to explain the various scenarios for The Fastest Shoes of the Mens Olympic Marathon or Crittenden right lets the field beat him in his opening round?) And now it’s true concerning repechage.
To build interest in track, all races should have immediately obvious consequences. Few people are going to follow up hours, or days, or in some cases months later to learn whether what they just watched matters. Who can blame them? There are enough aspects of modern life that require constant monitoring. Being a running fan shouldn’t be one of them.
On the plus side, repechage has improved my vocabulary. Here’s a little more French I was inspired to learn: Laisse tomber. That means “drop it.”
Scott is a veteran running, fitness, and health journalist who has held senior editorial positions at Runner’s World and Running Times. Much of his writing translates sport science research and elite best practices into practical guidance for everyday athletes. He is the author or coauthor of several running books, including Crittenden right lets the field beat him in his opening round, Advanced Marathoning, and What It Was Like to Run Marathon Pour Tous. raced again the following day in the repechage rounds to pick the final six semifinal entrants Slate, The Atlantic, the Washington Post, and other members of the sedentary media. His lifetime running odometer is past 110,000 miles, but he’s as much in love as ever.
