Imagine sitting on a cardboard bed in the Olympic Village, staring out at the City of Light, torn between going for glory the next morning or holding back to protect your chances for another event. You have a strategy that could win the race -- but if it fails, you'll be too fatigued to perform in the next few days. Instead of getting full support, those around you warn that pursuing your dream could cost your teammates on the track. What do you do?
This was the dilemma that double gold medalist Kristen Faulkner faced before her Olympic road race. Why she almost didn't take to the start line for fear of making the wrong decision -- one that could affect her teammates on the track and her relationship with USA Cycling.
When Bicycling spoke to Faulkner last week, she shared something that felt shocking: When the Olympic road race slot opened up, and she was the next person in line to participate, USA Cycling asked her not to take the Olympic berth. She added that even the day before the race, she wasn't entirely sure she'd be starting.
According to Faulkner, USA Cycling staff sat her down and showed her that their simulations gave her a six-percent chance of medaling in the road race. By contrast, the USA Cycling team-pursuit team was expected to medal on the track. Would she potentially sacrifice the track team's chance of a gold medal for a six percent chance? She thought she could win. They did not.
The conversation and subsequent follow-ups plagued Faulkner in the weeks leading up to an already fraught road race. Since National Championships, she'd been on tenterhooks waiting to see if triathlete Taylor Knibb would relinquish her spot on the road race squad she qualified for by winning the time trial. (Faulkner won the road race handily, but the time trial was the USA-sanctioned qualifying event. Faulkner was second in that race to Knibb.)
Now, with an Olympic spot in her grasp, she was being asked to stand down. But she wanted to race.
It begs the question: Where does USA Cycling's authority begin or end? What should (or shouldn't) they be able to tell athletes in the months leading up to the Olympics?
If an athlete has qualified -- as Faulkner did by being the next athlete in line once Knibb dropped out -- does USA Cycling have any right to suggest that she shouldn't race? And if they do, how long should they press the issue before shifting to a supportive role?
The problem, of course, is competing interests.
There are very, very few Olympic athletes who compete in multiple disciplines, even ones as closely linked as track and road. Still, Faulkner's participation in the track events and road race isn't the first time an American has raced two disciplines.
Chloé Dygert competed on the road and track in 2016 and was also on the team pursuit with Faulkner while racing both the time trial and road race earlier in the Games. Dygert's time trial in Paris was also noteworthy. She came away with a bronze. Did USA Cycling encourage her to skip that race? Or the road race, which she also participated in and subsequently crashed out of?
The simple fact is that it does, and should, come down to qualifications, selection standards, and, yes, the fine print. Selections for the Olympics should be based on objective qualifications set by the national governing body; otherwise, the subjective wishes of coaches who've worked with specific athletes will begin to creep in.
It then arguably becomes a pathway to 'pay to play,' where athletes who can train with certain coaches have advantages over those who cannot. Selection criteria can also address USA Cycling's concerns about whether an athlete should race two disciplines: If they don't want an athlete to double up in road and track, that means the qualifications need to be changed -- not that an athlete should be told they have to choose.
If USA Cycling doesn't want racers competing in multiple disciplines (including Knibb as a triathlete), then that should be laid out in the criteria, not discussed after a person qualifies. It's unfair to pressure an athlete to make that kind of decision.
If USA Cycling strongly believes that track athletes shouldn't compete in the road race so they're fresh for the track event, then athletes who've signed on to be part of the Olympic track team selection shouldn't be eligible for the road race. Setting that kind of rule beforehand -- whether you agree with it or not, just like whether the time trial should be a qualifier for the road race -- would be fair. Telling athletes that they 'shouldn't' do something is confusing at best and detrimental to their overall success at worst.
If an athlete qualifies for a race -- and in this case, if a road racer qualifies for the road race -- USA Cycling's job is done. There shouldn't be a discussion of whether she should do it; it should be a question of how to best support her in both pursuits. A lack of belief from the people surrounding you can be as race-ending as a crash on slick cobbles.
Like Ted Lasso, I believe in belief. When Kristen Faulkner rightfully accepted her Olympic berth, USA Cycling should have been one hundred percent behind her. Hopefully, her two gold medals will serve as a learning experience for them.