Women pacemakers botch it again in Lausanne?!

The pacing numbers don't mean much of anything when it's Hodgkinson in the same race as Moraa. I don't know why that isn't more readily accepted. Keely is not relaxed vs. Moraa. She is a bundle of nerves. It's been evident well back into last season. Hodgkinson has now lost 4 consecutive outdoor 800s to Moraa, when Mu is not in the race.

Moraa is so terrific at repelling challenges she knows that all she has to do is get the lead then settle until she senses someone is trying to pass. Then let out just enough. Wait for the next attempt then do it again.

Once I saw that work against Faith Kipyegon last year I knew Moraa would pull it off against virtually anybody. Keely Hodgkinson is not an obstacle at all. Moraa's biggest problem is not to laugh.

Athing Mu, now that's a different matter. Just like Hodgkinson is intimidated by Moraa, so far Moraa has not been wiling to even threaten Mu's general location. She's loitered well back.

Ugh, follow wavelight which is set to run evenly?

To run a 57 I would think it's very reasonable and not too difficult to run 28.0 (allowing for actually being at the front of the field) and hit 300m in 42.5? Even 27.5/42.0/57.0 would be reasonable judgement. The lights are literally set to enable those paces. Why do you think it is so hard to do this - especially when then men now can do it with absolute ease?

Also where are you getting these splits from? If the pacer crosses 280m in 38.2 seconds and she then hits 300m in 41.4 then she's slowed down from 13.0s/100m pace to 16.0s/100m pace in the space of 20m? That's the math (20m travelled in 3.2 seconds) So if what you're saying is correct her deceleration is even worse.

Furthermore your 200m split for Lausanne is way off. On the broadcast the pacemaker is visibly already rounding the bend and the clock says 25.5 seconds so she is well under 26 seconds through 200m and at 27.0 seconds into the race we for the first time really see her in comparison to the blue light where she is around 6 meters up. The first 250m killed this race - what is the obsession with defending this?

I don't have any obsession : ) and I also don't think anything is hard to achieve here :) I'm just comparing data and as I see first 250 didn't kill Paris race after all, that race ended with very solid 1:55.77. But I don't defend this rabbit.

Splits are from official DL data that you can download as a zip archive on their website. If you know of a better source of Reliable data for DLs you can enlighten me.

So far I have more faith in this data than in your 'investigative visual calculations', which I haven't verified. But I can change my mind : )

No need to emphasise Wavelight advantages. SPORT Technology, Jos Hermens, Bram Som (Faith Kipyegon, Beatrice Chepkoech) - the world is very, very small : )

But I don't know how these lights were programmed (data please, data please, I want to know : ) ). Although I understand that probably they program them for a good, expert pace.

Wavelight system is useless for the 100, 200 and 400 I think too. You know what I mean?

In the 800 there is a very special pacing system: Mary Moraa system. She is pacing herself perfectly to ~1:57 without any lights and she doesn't care about them at all. In Lausanne rabbit went out hard probably also just to be ahead of her/them.

Of course I say nothing about 3000 SC as these lights are excellent to show setpoints for pacer & runner at longer distances and simple metronomic splits.

We may don't understand each other but I have no time to elaborate so just these thoughts.

+1

The pacers in an 800 should look left after 100m and assess where the lead runner is then ease to the front up the back straight as is usually the case in male DL 800s. Instead it seems they often just care about hitting the designated 400 time to collect their pay.