Why are 1500m runners so dumb?

rixctf wrote:

maybe

Q should be based on place

q should be based on flat time, like world b. nobody runs the flat time, nobody gets in on a q.

Not sure how this would work out in practice--I'd have to take some time and think about it, which I find hard work--but I find this a really interesting suggestion.

ronner wrote:

Drafting is overrated in running. Leading or following is not that big of deal. It is a mental thing that too many runners have that they think they are spending more energy leading.

Amen, brother.

I'm with you on this. It's definitely a problem.

So, is it better to just not bother and not make the final? Did you do Jimmy Wyner any favors? No.

Shit happens. You can't win them all.

What about Jordan McNamara? He ran 3:42.09 in the NCAA heats. Season best for the last spot in the final. 3:42.42 in the final. Two best times of the year. Should he have not bothered making the final? He is in the USATF final now with another season best. It's not a bad thing that those guys in the last heat ran good times. That's smart. They deserve to be in the final. Rob Myers (as sad as it is) does not.

Well, then you have still made the final, which some guys with something left in the tank did not.

edumacator wrote:

They're just lucky Butzler wasn't in there...incredible footspeed.

This is probably the most accurate post on this thread so far, the thread could have ended long ago and been even more informative than it is now.

rojo, get it together, oooh yeah, dig it, say it the macho madness, ooh yeah, excuses, excuses, dig it, yeahhh!

I actually liked this setup because it raises the stakes. We need guys that will rise to the occasion. How often have we complained about guys like Webb running horribly at Worlds/Olympics because of bad tactics? If you are running in this setup, and aren't smart enough to make your race honest, you're going to fail at Worlds anyways. What in the hell were the guys in Heat 2 thinking? Did they think they were going to outkick a couple of 1:46 guys in Lukezic and Lomong?

Wyco Loco wrote:

If you are running in this setup, and aren't smart enough to make your race honest, you're going to fail at Worlds anyways. What in the hell were the guys in Heat 2 thinking? Did they think they were going to outkick a couple of 1:46 guys in Lukezic and Lomong?

I'm with you on this point. Sure, Webb has won some U.S. titles (i.e. 2007) when he's just the class of the field, but he still can't run well in a tactical race. Where is his closing speed? Does Razcko (sp?) know how to develop it?

rojo wrote: Since there were four heats, it was top 2 and next 4 best times. All of the time qualifiers came from the last heat as ex-CU Buff Stephen Pifer did what he is known for - rabbit the field out. As a result, guys like Darren Brown, who had a seasonal best of 3:41.78 this year and closed in 1:58.35 to run 3:41.60, advanced to the final, whereas someone like Rob Myers, who had a 3:36.66 seasonal best and closed in in 1:55.57 and ran 3:42.35 in heat 1, didn't advance.

Rob Myers finished fifth in his heat with the sixteenth fastest overall time. In no scenario, does he deserve a place in the final with that result. Who cares how fast he closed? Maybe he should have run the 800.

Are you advocating a straight final with the twelve fastest qualifying times? Any other procedure will usually lead to something other than the twelve 'best' runners getting to the final.

And are you really suggesting that Darren Brown, who had a 'seasonal best of 3:41.78 this year'(sic) really took some easy backdoor way into the finals? Maybe Myers and Heath should have tripped over one another and petitioned to be in the finals, since they obviously deserved to be there?

Yeah, the guys in heat 4 were lucky that Pifer was in their heat. Somehow being in the heat with the guy with sixteenth fastest seed time practically guarantees you a spot in the finals. Since that is apparently true, might the other runners in the other heats reconsider their gameplan for heats, if the guy with the sixteenth seed is a lock for making the finals.

and yes, I realize that being in the last heat is a huge advantage.

I think the best solution would be seeded heats with top 3 from each heat qualifying.

To paraphrase Nick Symmonds, you have to get to the final to make the team / medal.

There is no point in saving an effort for a final you never make. If you are coached and trained well, you should be ready to run fast in the heats and the final.

Sit and kick is a totally valid strategy for heats (and finals). But going out too slow only sets up the race for athletes with inferior PRs to have a better chance to win.

Let's look at the heats of the 2008 Olympic 1500 - 5 auto qualifiers then times

Heat 1 - Manzano runs 3:36 to qualify in 6th. 11th is 3:42

Heat 2 - 5th place is 3:42

Heat 3 - 6th place qualifies in 3:36. 11th is 3:41.

Heat 4 - 7th place qualifies in 3:36 (2nd is 3:34, 1st is Ramzi in 3:32) Choge lead the whole race and finished 3rd. He split 800m 10 seconds faster than heat 2 did and 2-3 seconds faster than the other heats.

Only in heat 2 did guys screw around and split 2:05 at 800m.

In the semis, everyone did sit and kick - but at a decent pace 3:37 won both heats. It was also 8th in semi-1 and 7th in semi-2.

2004 Olympics -

Heats won in 3:37, 3:39, and 3:37. Semi-1 won in 3:35 (Lagat leads for over 800m and finishes 2nd). Semi-2 won in 3:40 by El G. They split 2:07 at 800m. But guess who lead wire-to-wire? El G. (Sort of like Lomong in his heat this year). No one makes the final on time from semi-2.

2000 Olympics -

Heat 1- 3:38 wins, 3:39 is 7th. Heat 2- 3:40 wins 3:41 is still 10th. Heat 3- splits 4 seconds faster than heat 2 at 800m. 3:38 wins and 3:39 is 11th. All but one place one time comes from heat 3. In the semis, semi-1 is slower but is lead by Noah Ngeny (has the lead before 800 has gone by) and he wins the race in 3:39. Semi-2 is won in 3:37 with 8th place Marko Koers running faster than Ngeny yet not making the final.

In the Prisoner's Dilemma, players reconcile mixed-motives; they end up worse off if both decide strategy based solely on individual interests. There are three basic kinds of Prisoner's Dilemma Games. A qualifying round would correspond to a game with a loss condition (punishment for cooperation), so cooperative behavior would be diminished compared the standard mixed-motive game.

A 1500m qualifying round is actually more complex than the standard Prisoner's Dilemma: to begin the race itself is dynamic -- certain circumstances are everchanging, so a multistage game containing many subgames; the basic payoffs are asymetric (each player gains or loses differing amounts depending on how the race unfolds); information is incomplete (payoffs are not common knowledge unless say Lagat is racing but ambiguity is common); players' respective strategy sets do not have a one-one corespondence (faster runners have broader strategy sets); and the game of advancing and succeeding in the competition is really a repeated game. Nash would say the first round is only part of a one-shot game.

I do agree though that the qualifying round can be a social dilemma of sorts, but a strong dilemma for some and a very weak dilemma for others. Recall also that many games have multiple Nash equilibrium outcomes.

Would the optimal strategy to be to run as fast as you can?

Yes, running fast or at an "honest pace" helps some of your competitors (in your heat only AND if they can stay with you) but it also helps you by giving you a chance to qualify on time as well. It also hurts the guys who can't hang.

Running slowly and kicking, helps all of your competitors stay in the race until the last moment making it anyone's race and hurts you if you can run faster than them in a quick race.

Rojo's comments, while always welcome, apply more to college athletes, less so to professionals.

nonpartisamism wrote:

because part of being a middle distance runner is believing you have more "footspeed" than everybody else, including other middle distance runners.

That is an awesome analogy. I was a middle distance runner, and thought the same thing. Kudos

Myers was 5th so he doesn't make it with a Q3 or Q4 scenario.

The women only had 24 athletes and still used a Q3.

But still the idea of everyone running as fast as they can to make it in on time doesn't work 'cause it still means a 4th place finish on average doesn't get you through.

And, unless you are superior, it hinders your finishing position to lead.

For 15 years in a row Morceli and El G were a step ahead of evryone in the world yet neither ever pushed the pace from the gun in a Championship race.

All in all, nobody was robbed from being in the final this year. None of the non qualifiers were likely to get top 3.

I am sure though, that if Fernandez and Lagat ran, some contender would have been bumped.

Morceli and El G never had to push the pace in a championship race because they had another countrymen make the final and it was that guy's job to set the pace they wanted.

joiwef wrote:

edumacator wrote:

They're just lucky Butzler wasn't in there...incredible footspeed.

This is probably the most accurate post on this thread so far, the thread could have ended long ago and been even more informative than it is now.

WOW!! We're back to this stuff again! Only one thing to say..... Don't hate the player guys, hate the game!!

When I get back from Afghanistan I will show it off again, don't you worry!

That was only true for ElG.

And only true for ElG in 1999, 2000 and 2001. In 1997 and 2003 he took up the lead just after halfway and had no countrymen in the final. In 2004, he employed a similar strategy but did not use Kaouch. So in 50% of the WC/Oly 1500 races he won, he did *not* use another guy to set the pace.