I'm not questioning their manhood or calling them pussies. I'm merely saying that in a conference championship that was won by ten points, and with the kind of milers that Wisco has, they could have easily run a group race to dust everyone and force them to run fast. I mean, at Big 10's in xc, wisco absolutely hammers from the front in a group and basically tells everyone else to try and hold on. They could have easily done that in this race and probably placed better.
...and that is a great example of what happens when you lead. You end up dying in the end.
Just one word... wrote:
someone wrote:In a championship race no one wants to lead.
PREFONTAINE
I'd rather be ashes than dust!
someone wrote:
...and that is a great example of what happens when you lead. You end up dying in the end.
Just one word... wrote:PREFONTAINE
check out the winds. 6.0 and greater on the jumps
someone wrote:
...and that is a great example of what happens when you lead. You end up dying in the end.
[quote]Just one word... wrote:
[quote]someone wrote:
In a championship race no one wants to lead.
Too soon.
what people do not understand is that most of the athletes in this 1500m final had to come back for another event later that day (See, Miller, Mcnamara, Plotner, Hubers, Desilva). So from a team aspect it is much smarter to take your chances in a tactical race rather than waste your legs in an all out 1500.
haha, YO wrote:
Dude, I'm all for the excitement of a great non-rabbited race. 2:23 though is so incredibly awful and inexcusable for a race like this. That is probably 10k pace for some of these guys and they're running a 1500! I can't even understand how the field could stand to run THAT SLOW for over half the race.
The runners in the race and their coaches had some objectives that they were trying to balance. A fast time did not serve any of their objectives directly, so it only matters if it furthers their objectives.
The Wisconsin guys had either already run a couple of races (Gaspar) or run one and were looking at running another in the 5000 (Miller and maybe others). So, the Wisconsin team did not want a race that was fast from the start. A couple of the other runners might also have not wanted a race that was fast from the start (See, who had won such a race as this in the indoor mile?). Thus, if you are one of the other runners in the field do you want to take it out in 60 and let everyone sit on your tail and have no chance of picking up points, or at least a reduced chance of picking up points.
You do know that the objectives in the conference race are to pick up points, don't you? You do know that not a single one of the coaches cares if you think that the objective of this race is to get a mark that makes you happy, right?
Note that race closed in 51, which is VERY fast at this level. And, by the way, there is not a HS guy out there that could have won this race and probably the only two that could have ever were Ryun and Webb. Also, a majority of the field have run a 1500/mile faster than all but maybe two (or maybe 4) HS guys.
me............... wrote:
why do we have this argument after every single slow race...
oh yeah, its because half the people on letsrun dont understand track...
its perfectly viable to talk about how it was a dumb strategy for some of these guys but the fact that a race went out slow doesnt make it "pathetic" or the runners in it "pussies"...it just makes the ones who placed lower than they should have dumb and the ones who placed well smart...
the guys in the big 10 get it, the guys at NCAAs get it, the guys at the olympic trials get it, the guys in the olympics get it...
why does the average letsrun poster feel that he has the right to question the manhood of real runners after every tactical race
2:23 you stupid ass motherf***er! How can you justify going out that f***ing slow? A mediocre high school conference 1600 will go out that slow if they're going to go the tactical route. The guys in the Big 10 don't f***ing get it.
people act like this never happens...in 2004 Sean Jefferson a sub 4 minute miler won the race in 4:01. Supposedly he closed in 49 that year. This is not the first or the last year this will happen. Get over it
sit and kick wrote:
people act like this never happens...in 2004 Sean Jefferson a sub 4 minute miler won the race in 4:01. Supposedly he closed in 49 that year. This is not the first or the last year this will happen. Get over it
Solinsky was a freshman that year and got rolled in the last lap and didn't place. He learned his lesson.
The 2005, 2006 and 2007 Big Ten 1500's were all won in sub-3:45 (Tegenkamp, Solinsky, Switzer) with Solinsky being the one pushing the pace. He only won the one, but finished second the other two times. It helps to have the strength and confidence of a Solinsky to say "No bullshit, if you're going to beat me it will be at my race". For whatever reason, nobody running the 1500 Sunday felt that way, although a couple probably could have. If it was See, he would have been a sitting duck to the Wisconsin guys. Why would he do that? These guys aren't idiots running their first goddamn race. Jesus Christ.
This issue is getting a lot of play now because it happened both indoor and outdoor. Also around 2003 or 2004 there was a very slow Big Ten Indoor Mile with Willis, one of the Jeffersons, Spiker and other good guys. Yeah, it happens, but not every freakin' year and it has happened with guys with more NCAA titles than anybody who ran in the 1500 on Sunday.