Men’s AUS and GB 1500 teams harder to make than US team? Discuss

notting wrote:

Brazier won the weakest WCs ever. Won't win anything again.

Teare won't go under 3:30.5. I'll bet on it.

2017 World's begs to differ

DeeksQuarters wrote:

Looks like my opinion isn't a very controversial one? Thought I might stir up a bit more patriotic sentiment from our American friends? :-)

Meh, we’ve been kicking their asses in middle distances for years. If we need to sit in the backseat for an Olympic cycle as we reload, it’s not the end of the world.

walter j wrote:

DeeksQuarters wrote:

Looks like my opinion isn't a very controversial one? Thought I might stir up a bit more patriotic sentiment from our American friends? :-)

Meh, we’ve been kicking their asses in middle distances for years. If we need to sit in the backseat for an Olympic cycle as we reload, it’s not the end of the world.

That’s the spirit, Walter!

walter j wrote:

DeeksQuarters wrote:

Looks like my opinion isn't a very controversial one? Thought I might stir up a bit more patriotic sentiment from our American friends? :-)

Meh, we’ve been kicking their asses in middle distances for years. If we need to sit in the backseat for an Olympic cycle as we reload, it’s not the end of the world.

Yes, America did quite well in the EPO era.

DeeksQuarters wrote:

I’m probably not very objective as an Australian, but:

Stewart McSweyn, Ollie Hoare, Matt Ramsden are already all world class and in form.

For team GB:

Josh Kerr, Jake Wightman, Charlie Grice could all take the top spot if they raced at the US trials.

I just can’t see the depth to stack up against these groups on the US side?

Aus has 5 guys under 3:37 (i.e. about as slow as I could imagine have a break through and running 3:34.x this year) in the past 2 years. The US has 14. If you are a 3:36 guy in Austrailia you just need 1 or 2 guys to get hurt or have a bad race to make the team. In the US, you would have to survive the rounds, and then race a final with twice as many contenders. The US team will be much harder to make.

That isn't to say that those guys wouldn't be the favorites if they could run the US trials.

They would be. It is simple stating that they aren't deep enough to make it hard to make those countries teams as it is all about how good the 3-9 guys are not how good 1 and 2 are. The US definitely doesn't have any high end guys (well Centro if he was healthy) that can compare with McSweyn, weightman, or kerr in terms of being medal threats but the depth of 3:35-3:37 guys is very good these days. Will have to see who shows up and becomes a 3:34 guy this year or if anyone can break through to being a 3:32 guy.

Not sure if someone has mentioned it but is Ryan Gregson gunning for the 1500 too?

The 1500 is fairly weak right now in the U.S.... Centro on the decline, and not many stepping up into that role. We've got a whole bunch of guys in the 3:35-3:38 range but that doesn't really get you anywhere. Hocker and Teare can probably run 3:33 on the right day, but that's not going to beat the top guys from across the ponds. And I am not convinced they can run a tactical race and win. Engels is probably our U.S. champ this year because of his 1:44 800 speed, but he can't hang in a fast race.

Sadly our top 1500 guys are probably Brazier and Hoppel, but they'll be busy trying to win olympic medals in the 800, while the people focusing on the 1500 are just trying to qualify for the olympics, and medaling is not realistic.

For the 800, I think we'll have multiple 1:44 guys sitting at home this summer.

Guys...Guys... Guys... Championship racing is what counts. Time trialing does not count. Medals is what counts. If you had to pick one runner to be on YOUR Olympic team who would u pick Alan Webb at his best or Nick Willis at his best? Medals is what matters. Hocker and Teare May medal someday but right now they only have fast times

Yeah I agree with you - US has a lot more guys knocking on the door of being elite, but I think Australia has pretty good depth considering their population is about the same size as Florida. Realistically they will never be able to produce the kind of depth in the 3:35-3:37 range as the US does

michiganrunner55 wrote:

Guys...Guys... Guys... Championship racing is what counts. Time trialing does not count. Medals is what counts. If you had to pick one runner to be on YOUR Olympic team who would u pick Alan Webb at his best or Nick Willis at his best? Medals is what matters. Hocker and Teare May medal someday but right now they only have fast times

I feel like the fact that Nick Willis’s 3:29.66 1500 is equal to a 3:46.4 mile kind of spoils your point.

The issue is not depth. 3 men make a team. In the 800, USA has two locks for the foreseeable future; one may be the best in the world, the other finished 4th in the 800 after a college season. This make the USA team tougher to make.

On the 1500 side, the USA has had a few locks in recent years, including the last gold medalist. That group is aging but still relevant. The younger crew looks tremendous and has not had the same opportunities as some of the crew in Europe. Right now, you have to go with AUS and GB but it may not hold.

Bic Nideau wrote:

Yeah I agree with you - US has a lot more guys knocking on the door of being elite, but I think Australia has pretty good depth considering their population is about the same size as Florida. Realistically they will never be able to produce the kind of depth in the 3:35-3:37 range as the US does

There is no argument that the population wise they are very good. Now the very top end can be a bit of luck but if you look at the number of 3:35-3:40 guys that they are getting out of 25 million people it is awesome. I have to assume there is some cultural aspect that gets more kids into running than in the US and gets those kids decent coaching. I always wonder how many great milers the US loses because they run 1:55/4:30 in HS off 30mpw and stop the sport at 18.

Admittedly I don't know a whole lot about the US high school system, but my understanding is that everyone uses their high school coach and only runs with their high school team?

In Australia, you go to your local club, so I think that it is more likely you will have a lot of talent training in one club as they don't all have to go to the same school. This helps with motivation and pushing each other along. It also allows for people to seek out the best coach for them, rather than getting dumped with whoever the school hires.

This allows to foster a bit more of a running culture through generations. Juniors in Australia are often training with adults from when they are 14-15.

The small size of Australia also helps have a successful running culture breed throughout the country. Mona and Deek were very big influences on the running scene in Australia, and the country is small enough that most coaches would have probably had a fair bit of direct personal influence from these guys. Because of that, I think there's a lot of trust in what people are doing, and trust in a program is a big thing for success - "It's what Mona did, so it'll work for me!"

Correct. There can be a high school kid who runs 4:05 in the mile and the next best kid he has to train with runs 4:45.

DeeksQuarters wrote:

I’m probably not very objective as an Australian, but:

Stewart McSweyn, Ollie Hoare, Matt Ramsden are already all world class and in form.

For team GB:

Josh Kerr, Jake Wightman, Charlie Grice could all take the top spot if they raced at the US trials.

I just can’t see the depth to stack up against these groups on the US side?

You are probably right at the moment, but the difference is you pretty much know who your top-3 athletes are, in the U.S. we don't. We have about 20 world class middle distance runners and if you manage to make the U.S. team, you will be tested and ready for global championship competition. Being able to run fast times is important, but at the end of the day, you have to line up and race. Centro and Willis for example have routinely beaten out athletes for medals with faster PRs. With that said, I do agree with you that GB and Aus middle distance is looking really good. Btw, you don't need a negative to make a positive, you can state how well you are doing without putting down another team. Just becasue you are doing well at the moment; it's kind of silly to criticize a nation that routinely wins middle distance medals at Global Championships.

Jus Saying wrote:

walter j wrote:

Meh, we’ve been kicking their asses in middle distances for years. If we need to sit in the backseat for an Olympic cycle as we reload, it’s not the end of the world.

Yes, America did quite well in the EPO era.

...Just as Coe did very well in the blood doping era

Fasterer wrote:

Jus Saying wrote:

Yes, America did quite well in the EPO era.

...Just as Coe did very well in the blood doping era

No. Don’t get me wrong, I like cooper... but no?

Fasterer wrote:

Jus Saying wrote:

Yes, America did quite well in the EPO era.

...Just as Coe did very well in the blood doping era

“America did quite well in the EPO era” is totally inaccurate, anyway. The EPO era is when the best we had to offer were guys like Michael Stember and Gabe Jennings. Apart from Bob Kennedy and that one 3:31.9 from David Krummenacker, the EPO era was a pretty dark time for U.S. 1500m+ running. We were doing pretty well from about ‘07 to ‘16, decidedly post-EPO era, with Webb/Lagat/Manzano/Lomong/Wheating/Centrowitz/Andrews/Blankenship/Tegenkamp/Ruppand probably a couple others who could be included.