Rudisha lost because of TACTICS, not fitness.

You are quite wrong on this.

His tactics are almost what enabled Rudisha to win this.

They had Amos in a box with 100m to go.

Rudisha had separation and Amos had to hit the brakes, step to the side and then accelerate to catch Rudisha.

Amos' superior fitness enabled him to pass Rudisha despite Rudisha's much superior tactical run.

In Monaco, when the pace was very fast, Amos beat Rudisha by a lot.

Star wrote:

You are quite wrong on this.

His tactics are almost what enabled Rudisha to win this.

They had Amos in a box with 100m to go.

Rudisha had separation and Amos had to hit the brakes, step to the side and then accelerate to catch Rudisha.

Amos' superior fitness enabled him to pass Rudisha despite Rudisha's much superior tactical run.

In Monaco, when the pace was very fast, Amos beat Rudisha by a lot.

Wrong. He didn't "almost" win anything.

As we saw, Amos had the ability to deek 10 feet straight to the right at 710m, kick off of low momentum and still crush Rudisha. He was five meters back and turned the tables in about five seconds. That is how good his kick is.

Relying on a box of 2-3 men at most to hold in a runner with that explosive ability is POOR TACTICS. As shown in...um...the result.

52.7 is slower than Rudisha ran in semis. Trying to go slow and tactical against someone who can outkick you from a slow pace 10 times out of 10 is NEVER a good tactic. No matter how decorated the user is.

Just wondering , but why do you think Rudisha's regular tactics would work? He's tried that twice against Amos this season and it hasn't worked. To do the same thing here would be POOR TACTICS as well.

He might as well try something different.

A Deek wrote:

Relying on a box of 2-3 men at most to hold in a runner with that explosive ability is POOR TACTICS. As shown in...um...the result.

Amos won despite the excellent tactics of Rudisha and team Kenya, not because of it.

Amos won because he is more fit. Way more more fit right now.

You are suggesting that Rudisha should have run a faster pace to take the kick out of Amos.

But that has already shown to not work because Amos can run a faster 800 right now.

There aren't many tactics you can use to beat a superior runner.

And setting a fast pace certainly isn't one of them.

It's your thread.

I'm waiting for you to stay that Rudisha would have had a better chance if he went out in 49.

That Amos would struggle to keep up with that pace.

A Deek wrote:

First 400 in 52.7!

In all of Rudisha's successes against Amos, he has run away from him, with Amos closing him down but not enough on the last 100. Amos's close is ridiculous, and at this point unbeatable off of a slower pace.

Rudisha would have had a better chance by sticking to his game plan.

Great race by both of them, and OLIVIER, too! (I am pretty sure Olivier was posting about he and Amos's training early this year, which is very cool.)

rudisha has beat Amos 1 time in 4 head to head races. It's one success, not successes. If I were rudy, I would take it out in 51.5, sprint between 500m and 625m, and then just hold on for dear life.

juir57 wrote:

Just wondering , but why do you think Rudisha's regular tactics would work? He's tried that twice against Amos this season and it hasn't worked. To do the same thing here would be POOR TACTICS as well.

He might as well try something different.

Fair question and fair point. You could argue, as the Letsrun race report did, that Rudisha went out fast at Pre and Monaco and was run down by Amos, so why not try changing things up and make it an even-split race with a hard finish.

But let's look at that idea in a more detailed way:

What was Rudisha's 400s split in Eugene? 49.8 (rabbit)

What was Rudisha's 400 split in Monaco? 49.4 (rabbit)

So yes, Rudisa front-ran and was caught by Amos in Eugene and Monaco, but he was clearly opening those races beyond his current ability given that his second laps were around 54 in Eugene and 53 in Monaco.

But we all recognize there are {b]three seconds between 49-high and 52-high, right? It isn't as if Rudisha has only two choices: blaze a 49 or try to run 52-52.

He could have still frontrun the race at a fast pace, just adjusting a bit with the knowledge he isn't fit enough for the 49-52 races we know him for. Going out in even 50-high would have put Amos under a different kind of pressure, whereas a 52-high lap basically handed the race to the hardest kicker in mid-d running right now.

Would Rudisha won with a faster opening lap? Maybe, maybe not. Obviously we'll never know. What we DO know is that 52.7 didn't work.

This thought pattern is common, and I knew this post would bring debate for that reason. Please see my post above on this.

Again, yes we have seen that 49 didn't work, but that doesn't mean the only other option is 52.

I assume you're a distance runner. Say you race a sprinter at 800, go out insanely fast and the guy catches you. Is your move next time to jog with him and see how that works? No, you need an intermediate strategy BETWEEN the two failing ones, not an extreme application.

You assume that Amos has superior 800 fitness right now. I disagree. I think that if tomorrow afternoon Matt Scherer flew to Glasgow and in separate time trials paced both guys to the 600 split of their choice, Rudisha would run a faster 800 than Amos. In any case, it would not be a blowout.

There are tactics you can use to beat a superior kicker.

And setting a slow pace certainly isn't one of them.

Star wrote:

It's your thread.

I'm waiting for you to stay that Rudisha would have had a better chance if he went out in 49.

That Amos would struggle to keep up with that pace.

Huh?

I have said repeatedly that clearly hasn't worked for him this year. He simply hasn't been in 101-102 shape, so a 49 lap has been followed by 53+.

Again, you get that there are numbers between 49 and 52, right? Do you?

As I already said, 50-point would have had a better chance than the doomed strategy he employed.

Please note I am probably one of the biggest Rudisha fans/followers here. I am also able to say that not everything a given runner does is perfect.

You might even be right, "A Deek." Possibly, 50.5-51.5 for the first lap was Rudisha's best strategy. But say you're in 2:00 shape yourself. It's really hard to tell the difference between a 58 59 or 60 first lap. For Rudisha, a 49 or 52 are far apart, but not so far apart that it's easy to gauge to the tenth how fast he's running. Maybe that's what he tried to do. Who knows. I'm glad he showed up yesterday and gave it his all. He was already one of my favorites but now he takes the top.

EvanJ wrote:

You might even be right, "A Deek." Possibly, 50.5-51.5 for the first lap was Rudisha's best strategy. But say you're in 2:00 shape yourself. It's really hard to tell the difference between a 58 59 or 60 first lap. For Rudisha, a 49 or 52 are far apart, but not so far apart that it's easy to gauge to the tenth how fast he's running. Maybe that's what he tried to do. Who knows. I'm glad he showed up yesterday and gave it his all. He was already one of my favorites but now he takes the top.

Good point. It is hard to gauge small differences in that "just off the gas" zone, which is I guess part of why pacers like Scherer are so special.

Rudisha definitely scores big for showing up and racing his eyes out on the big stage even being out of top fitness. Probably my favorite runner out there.

I don't think it mattered what tactic of pace Rudisha ran Amos was going to destroy him. There is no way Rudisha is in the kind of shape Amos is in, which may explain why he decided to change things up a bit and see how the race would go. So he led and decided on a slow first 400, and then push hard the next lap. Well, Amos handled that one too. Rudisha also seemed overly nervous to me at the beginning.

Tommy2Nuttz wrote:

I don't think it mattered what tactic of pace Rudisha ran Amos was going to destroy him. There is no way Rudisha is in the kind of shape Amos is in, which may explain why he decided to change things up a bit and see how the race would go. So he led and decided on a slow first 400, and then push hard the next lap. Well, Amos handled that one too. Rudisha also seemed overly nervous to me at the beginning.

This ^ is the right answer.

All the rest is just so much noise.

I am not a distance runner.

I was an 800m runner in college.

If 49 doesn't work and 52 doesn't work then there is not a sweet spot in between to beat him.

51 flat is still going to feel fine for Amos after they went out in 49 in Monaco.

Rudisha would have less separation. Amos should have more reserves. And there may not be a Kenyan teammate on the final curve for Amos to deek around.

Talk about tactics.

In Monaco, Amos had moved into second behind Rudisha with 200m to go and pass him coming out of the turn, running one of the fastest times in history.

At Commonwealth, Amos was in a box with 100m to go and Rudisha still had a good lead on him with less than 50m to go.

That's a huge tactical advantage and he still lost.

You're insinuating that there is a perfect middle pace where Rudisha would have more left in the last 100m than Amos.

"I assume you're a distance runner. Say you race a sprinter at 800, go out insanely fast and the guy catches you. Is your move next time to jog with him and see how that works? No, you need an intermediate strategy BETWEEN the two failing ones, not an extreme application."

Everything about this analogy is wrong.

Speed based 800m runners tend to go out hard and hang on where distance based ones run more even.

And Rudisha and Amos is not a sprinter vs. a distance runner. It's an 800m runner vs an 800m runner.

And they both have great 400m speed.

Here's how your idea could have worked:

Rudisha goes out in 51 flat.

The second Kenyan goes out in 52.7 and Amos decides to follow the second place guy, giving Rudisha enough of a gap to hold on for the win.

But come on, Amos would just pass that guy and keep up with Rudisha.

Tommy2Nuttz wrote:

Rudisha also seemed overly nervous to me at the beginning.

I noticed this, too, but then if you go back to the London 800 he looked about the same. It's just his pre-race demeanor.

Answers R Us wrote:

This ^ is the right answer.

All the rest is just so much noise.

LOL.

A load of vague conjecture is not an "answer." Tommy does make a good point, though.

Star wrote:

Everything about this analogy is wrong.

Speed based 800m runners tend to go out hard and hang on where distance based ones run more even.

And Rudisha and Amos is not a sprinter vs. a distance runner. It's an 800m runner vs an 800m runner.

And they both have great 400m speed.

True, but Rudisha consistently runs his last 100 more slowly than Amos. Even in London he did. His strategy today was like Duane Solomon racing Nick Symmonds by going out slow. Bad idea.

Star wrote:

Here's how your idea could have worked:

Rudisha goes out in 51 flat.

The second Kenyan goes out in 52.7 and Amos decides to follow the second place guy, giving Rudisha enough of a gap to hold on for the win.

But come on, Amos would just pass that guy and keep up with Rudisha.

Um...interesting theory. But it's a theory. Nice story I guess.

Way too much is being made of the "box" that was formed by the two Kenyans side by side. Two guys running staggered at 700 meters is not a serious "box." Amos rolled up Rudisha from five meters back, in the space of bout 50 meters; he could have been "boxed" like that until 750m and still won. If there was a tactical benefit to bunching the top three it was obviously not nearly enough.

Why can't you accept that a slow start against a superior kicker was not only predictably going to fail, but in fact did fail? Because that actually happened. It really did. You know that, right? You do know that we can say we absolute certainty that the tactic failed, right?

Like I said, do I know that going out in 50.7 (not 49.7, not 52.7) could have won Rudisha the race? Of course not. Just like you don't know, no matter how nice of a story you make up.

What we actually know is that going out in 52.7 didn't work.

You know what I know?

If I raced Amos, any tactic I use would fail.

Let's say I race him, go out in 52.7 and lose. (I once could do that)

That doesn't mean there is a better tactic that I could have used to beat him.

I tried to write a scenario using your somewhere in the middle idea.

It didn't look like it would work.

Why don't you write out a scenario that would provide the best tactic for Rudisha?

My point is, just because someone loses a race, it doesn't mean there is a better tactic to win the race.

Sometimes one runner is just better than the other on that day.

After seeing Amos get totally boxed, have no momentum, and then still destroy Rudisha the last 50, going out slow was clearly not the right strategy.

When he tried it I thought, "well this is at least something different". I didn't think running away from Amos was going to work.

Once the gun went off, I started wondering what strategy Rudisha could use to win. I don't think there was one. If he really wanted to be different he could have let someone else take the lead at 200. I think we would have seen the same result.

If you told me before hand it will be a slow race, 50 meters from the finish Rudisha will have a 5 meters lead, I would have bet a lot of money he'd win.