why did that london 1500 go out in 70?

Berlin 1500 wrote:

Alminova beat all of the Americans at Pre

How did Alminova's 4:01.44 beat Barringer's 3:59.90?

Berlin 1500 wrote:

I think all three Americans have a very good shot at making the finals, but I'm not sure about any medal hopes.

Dobriskey was fourth last year and without the Ukrainians she's the silver medalist. Jamal could go backwards in the last 150m again. And it was around this time last year that Soboleva, Chizenko and Tomashova all went down. Wait and see.

Correction: Alminova beat all of the American women who will compete on the 1500 meter team in Berlin at Pre.

I wasn't considering Barringer, because she won't be lining up at 1500 meters in Berlin.

why did race go out in 70? Probably to simulate a "Final"

Ruth Wysocki wrote:

Therefore, we get really excited about "early" season times (& well we should with the great marks this year), but while many think we're on top, others are training to peak in Berlin.

Thanks, Ruth

That is exactly my point. Willard has been running very well since very early in the track season.

Rowbury has made it known that she is training to peak in Berlin.

I still think Rowbury will have the advantage over Willard at World's given the fact that they have to run three rounds.

Time will tell, but I am going to wait until the END of this track season before I decide which American I think is on top at 1500 meters.

captain oblivious wrote:

why did race go out in 70? Probably to simulate a "Final"

The race went out in 70 because the Rabbit did a really, really bad job. I have heard from what I consider reliable sources that the pace was supposed to go out in 2:07 - 2:08 and earlier in this thread, someone quoted Twell as saying the pacer didn't do her job.

Mark my words: Shannon Rowbury will will win the gold at Worlds.

Ruth, the photos of you, Tom, and all the other California veteran greats at the reunion were heartwarming. Very nice to see for all us old timers.

BTW, running as a pacer at 60 to 68/lap should be a piece of cake for any experienced runner with any pacing sense at all. A lot of these rabbits are pathetic. Absolutely don't pay them or hire them again if they miss by that much.

Ruth Wysocki

...but right now, the edge goes to Willard.

Vindicated! Thank you Ruth.

I'll say it again, Willard > Rowbury. Pretty obvious now.

S, Heater wrote:

Ruth, the photos of you, Tom, and all the other California veteran greats at the reunion were heartwarming. Very nice to see for all us old timers.

BTW, running as a pacer at 60 to 68/lap should be a piece of cake for any experienced runner with any pacing sense at all. A lot of these rabbits are pathetic. Absolutely don't pay them or hire them again if they miss by that much.

Glad you enjoyed the photos. The reunion was awesome. For those who are wondering what we're talking about, you can look in the "historical" part of the message boards at Track and Field News.

As for the pacing, when I was racing, women pacers were notoriously bad and there were very few good ones. I would much rather see Mary Decker Slaney on the starting line than a pacesetter any day! Besides, since most of them did such a poor job, they helped me late in my career when I was able to continue traveling, mostly as a pacesetter. It's a great gig - you run an even pace and you get to drop out before it starts to hurt!

Absolutely agree on Mary's style. Same for Jim Ryan and now German, for whose style I have the utmost respect. Just consider the NCAA 1500 final.

Which is it wrote:

Let's wait and see how they handle the rounds at worlds. Rowbury has more of a strength background and I think that will serve her very well in Berlin.

So Rowbury has more strength and should handle multiple rounds better than the girl who doubled the 1500 and steeple at USA's(both which had multiple rounds)? You sir, are a track genius.

And running less races does not mean you have a strength background. You need to look at your book of track lexicon. Judging from the fact that Willard is a steepler, most people would agree that she has more of a strength background than Roebury.

Pontificate all you want. The rounds affected Willard at usatf. As stated earlier, I will wait until the end of the season before I crown anyone at 1500 meters.

No one is questioning your logic of waiting till the season is over to name the best 1500 runner. However, claiming Rowbury has more of a strength backround than Willard is wrong. In fact, Rowbury could go on to win the gold and break the world record and your statement would stil be full of shit. And no, you were not vindicated by Ruth, she did not agree with you that Rowbury has more of a strength background. Fight your own battles, little man.

Beg the obvious -- you were treated well because you were a better athlete than your husband.

Norman was the typical bully ahole type that only wanted premier runners and did not understand the concept of helping some athletes develop up to that point.

It is the worst thing about track and field, only now, with all the African elites etc, most American runners don't get a chance to run in Europe and have that experience and work their way up.

Fortunately there are fewer coaches of that same "what can you do for me now" attitude, although it has long been a problem.

The genius coaches, the Lydiards, the Bowermans and their breathren. Take very good athletes and sometimes turn out unexpected gems that would otherwise be thrown out...

Let's be mature adults and refrain from name calling and swear words "little man". Unless, of course, you are not an adult which would then explain your childish statements.

Please reread what I wrote. Did I say Ruth was agreeing with me about Rowbury having more of a strength background? No, I didn't. What I said was that I agreed with her comment about athletes not racing early in the season and instead focusing their training to peak at worlds.

Do I think Rowbury was doing more strength training in the early track season rather than racing? Yes, and I know this to be true based on stories and interviews I have seen from her.

Everything that I have said is based on fact. I am not speculating or fantasizing.

If you feel the urge to respond yet again, I challenge you to do so without swearing and name calling. Come on, I know you can do it!

Pardon, you esteemed dignitary of message boards. Will you be "man" enough to admit that you do not know what the hell "strength background" means? Can you at least give us that? Or will you continue to peddle your B.S. defense?

Poor Shannon- last year at this time she was being freed from the competition of the doped Ruskies, now she has to catfight for place with American girls. I think she'll do well at World's, but it can't be good for her psyche to see Anna and Jenny ripping by her in the last 100.

Some of the women in the London 1500 have already put in some terrific marks this season, and the conditions were expected to windy because they were the previous day. I don't think many were looking for "best times" in London. The 1500 in Tuesday at Monaco is going to be packed, with quality close to the World Champs final (from what I hear, with Jamal and Burka but probably not the Russians). From Willard's post-race comments in London, she expects Monaco to be a fast race.