Serious question - Why do East Africans seem to get race strategy so wrong?

I honestly do not know but I remember reading they go by effort and feel instead of pace. They run whatever they feel like they should be, something like that. I always wondered the opposite, why do the top dogs take it out at 29 minute 10k pace? Thats sub 2 pace and it wasn't even sustainable in nearly perfect conditions.

RejectRunner wrote:

I honestly do not know but I remember reading they go by effort and feel instead of pace. They run whatever they feel like they should be, something like that. I always wondered the opposite, why do the top dogs take it out at 29 minute 10k pace? Thats sub 2 pace and it wasn't even sustainable in nearly perfect conditions.

I can see that if they go by pace, but 2:33 pace for Keitany must feel incredibly easy.

Maybe they're really jet lagged or dislike the food here and haven't eaten well in days

Because they are being paid to take a dive so the Americans can win and keep the shoe companies selling to slow fat asses like the people on this board.

I feel like Kam and Kipsang got it pretty right today, don't you?

They definitely run better in Europe.

Mary just had her worst day. Most of that race must have felt like a jog to her and she just couldn't shift gears to match Shalane at the end.

She's probably kicking herself for not starting faster.

Everyone has bad races. Most years Keitany would have dominated anyway whether it was fast or slow.

So that's why East Africans never win races.

You can't argue with their overall success but the tactics/strategies of their top runners often seem questionable to say the least (Kiprop at Rio?).

That said, given how much Rupp dropped everyone over the last 5 miles at Chicago it's pretty clear he would have won no matter what on that day. But had his fitness been a little less, the other contenders could have at least maximized their chances by taking it out harder.

Quiet observer wrote:

That said, given how much Rupp dropped everyone over the last 5 miles at Chicago it's pretty clear he would have won no matter what on that day.

I disagree with this.

At the pace they took it out he was fresh enough to run at nearly what he could do a 10k in at the end of the race. There is a huge difference between how that race was run rather than going out in the first half in say 1:01. He has yet to prove he can handle that.

I really don't think they train on tactics at all. You see people like Centro, Coburn, Rupp, Shalane winning because of tactics and racing skill. East Africans have more raw speed and talent and they train to get faster, not stronger so they have bad tactics. Why do you think Mo kept winning for so long?

AlabamaRising wrote:

I get that Chicago and New York don't have pacers, because it's 'a race', but I can't help that feel that if in both the men's race in Chicago and the women's race in NYC that top Africans went out at a much faster pace they would have stood a better chance.

Like if Keitany tried to get to half in 1:12 or faster, as opposed to 1:16, it would get rid of any chance that someone like Flanagan could run low 5 minute miles near the end. Same in Chicago, if the men had gone out in 2:07 pace (and I think that's being conservative given the field), it would have got rid of Rupps finish.

It just seems like a dumb race strategy. Like they are clearly good at sustaining a hard pace, so why not play to that and make the race a time trial?

Thoughts?

You're definitely the dumbest non-runner whose opinion on runners I have seen in recent times. Get yourself into a lifestyle of racing where you're expected to win 70% of the time and that should shut your loud and crappy @ss. Instead of recognizing the incredible achievements of Flanagan and Kam on this day, you go off on an incredibly silly tangent that has no merit in this race.

Wiseass, East Africans get race strategy right more than anyone in the world. Take that to the moon, to Mars, heck even to the demoted Pluto if you wish, and it will not change as a fact. We don't win by not racing, dumb@ss.

At least for non-rabbitted races, most of the East Africans are vested in running as slow as possible so that they can come back fresh in their next marathon.

Most of these guys and gals run a minimum of two and sometimes three marathons a year with all out half marathons interspersed. The last thing they need is to push the pace if they can get away with an all out 10k after a 20 mile tempo run.

It is a gamble but Kipsang and Ketaney still finished in the money and are at the end of a long season so no harm no foul.

If an African wins everyone assumes it's because the African was the best runner.

If an American wins, it's because the Africans used bad tactics.

Jefe in the CO wrote:

At least for non-rabbitted races, most of the East Africans are vested in running as slow as possible so that they can come back fresh in their next marathon.

Most of these guys and gals run a minimum of two and sometimes three marathons a year with all out half marathons interspersed. The last thing they need is to push the pace if they can get away with an all out 10k after a 20 mile tempo run.

It is a gamble but Kipsang and Ketaney still finished in the money and are at the end of a long season so no harm no foul.

A "long season"??? From what you just described they have an incredibly SHORT season. Which is it?

it's because of lack of race experience. An elite U.S. distance runner has many more races than a Kenyan. Through highschool, an athlete might race 50-60 times or much more depending on the school. A Kenyan, by the age of 18, might have even gone to the wcs, but still won't have that many races on their legs. Add in college and you have 120+ races (and that's conservative, I'm sure numbers are higher than that). At the beginning of their pro carreer, having 120 races vs, for some of these east Africans, less than twenty, the American has more race experience and therefore better strategy.

Glorfindel wrote:

I really don't think they train on tactics at all. You see people like Centro, Coburn, Rupp, Shalane winning because of tactics and racing skill. East Africans have more raw speed and talent and they train to get faster, not stronger so they have bad tactics. Why do you think Mo kept winning for so long?

Mo Farah is also East African