I know both seem a little far fetched (things have changed since the great Emil's era), but I'm curious to see what people think. Which is more realistic?
I know both seem a little far fetched (things have changed since the great Emil's era), but I'm curious to see what people think. Which is more realistic?
5,10, Marathon traditionally - Mo could certainly have given it a go last year.
I don't see a 5k guy no matter how good being able to win the 1500 in a tactical race or in a flat-out race so for the 15, 5, 10 double you're basically looking for a 1500 guy and the rest of the field being utterly stupid and letting them sit and kick.
Marathon is a bit like the 1500 in that it tends to be a crapshoot - the limit to 3 Kenyans makes it much easier.
There will never ever be an Olympic triple in the same disciplines simply because the schedule does not allow it.
Some events have their trials with in minutes of each other, such as the 100 and 400. Even something as simple as the 100m and 110h would be difficult or the 200/400. The 100/200, 5K/10K and LJ/TJ are the easiest and that's by design. The only possible triples I could see is in the 4 throwing events, even in that, you would have to one event where qualify quickly because there is always 2 throwing events going on the same morning or evening.
As was suggested, the marathon/5K/10K would be the best chance, but you would have to start with a tactical marathon.
The 5,000, 10,000 and Marathon, as it's already been done.
None of the above. 100, 200, 400 is the ONLY one even remotely possible.
Haha, YO (super cereal) wrote:
None of the above. 100, 200, 400 is the ONLY one even remotely possible.
The 5,000, 10,000 and Marathon, as it's already been
done.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2012/jun/22/50-olympic-stunning-moments-emil-zatopek