Hey OTC, Sit + Kick = Cheap, Boring

You play to win the game. Hello, you play to win the game.

Ralphy wrote:

In the 'Results' and 'Start List' Galen Rupp's affiliation is listed as 'Nike' NOT OTC. Nick Symmonds is listed as OTC.

He wore an OTC jersey in the race, Holmes.

If Rupp had given an "honest" effort, it's quite likely it would have been a solo race. In other words, no race at all. Pretty much the same thing as running up the score in another sport, which is generally looked down upon. If he pushed it and took a 30 sec win, people would criticize him for beating up on a weak field.

There are still 3 months left in the season and I'm sure Rupp will give some "honest" efforts in races where he needs to. This meet was about showing up, getting the win, and getting paid. Mission accomplished.

newwwzzzz wrote:

hardset nipples wrote:

Maybe because we're fans of other sports and are used to expecting to see athletes in those sports, great or not, give an honest effort when they compete? Rupp gave anything but an honest effort tonight.

i would call it a pretty honest effort when someone does what they thinks will make it most likely that they win...

soccer players don't do unnecessary sprints up and down the field just to make themselves work harder... why should do anything other than what will make him most likely to achieve his goal of winning?

Soccer players are some of the softest athletes on the planet, with all their flopping around on the ground like they just got hit with an IED after getting touched and then bouncing up moments later and running along like nothing happened. Nothing they do should be automatically applied to other sports or athletes. Anyway, soccer players for Brazil never running in a game would be a more apt comparison.

Soccer players flopping doesn't exactly mean they are "soft". Afterall, if they get up and bounce around like nothing happened then clearly they've taken the foul pretty well, no? So they are bad actors. Manipulative perhaps. Not soft. Soccer is a tough sport.

Because Pre said so, man! That's not a pure guts race. That's a chicken**** way to win! C'mon man, Pre, with all of his Olympic titles and success on the world level, would have never let the race be that way! Letting someone else do all the work is a candy way to win, man. That's something like Lasse Vieren would've done. What'll that get you? Nothing! Nothing at all! Oh, except wins in races and medals around your neck. But nothing else! Go Pre!Pre rules! Pre lives! Premature! Predestined! Preordained! Prediction! Pre! Pre! Pre!

The Answer My Friend wrote:

I don't understand these letsrun people who think anyone has an obligation to lead in a 10,000. Where do you get such an idea?

Galen likes the BACK!!! That makes him my favorite runner ever bros!

you ever see a regular season basketball game?

ggghgh wrote:

The problem here is simple.

Nothing wrong with the sit and kick approach.

What's getting old is the disparity of talent and lack of competition in these races, relatively speaking of course.

Exactly. If the race was boring, it was boring because one guy in the race was so much better than everyone else. The only thing that Rupp could have done tactically to make the race interesting would have been to run with such poor strategy as to needlessly give someone else a real chance of winning.

ggghgh wrote:

The problem here is simple.

Nothing wrong with the sit and kick approach.

What's getting old is the disparity of talent and lack of competition in these races, relatively speaking of course.

This is the right answer.

ggghgh wrote:

The problem here is simple.

Nothing wrong with the sit and kick approach.

What's getting old is the disparity of talent and lack of competition in these races, relatively speaking of course.

Yeah, this is the problem.

These two races have been pretty good for Rupp. He got a great time in one and a tactical finish in another. That bodes well for upcoming races.

Do letsrunners really think running hard would have made the race anymore fun? What's so great about watching Rupp 300m in front of the "chase" pack to run a 27:40? Big whoop!

Last time I checked being "classy" doesn't win races. Coming in 1st does.If you want "classy" take up ballroom dancing...

Piccolo wrote:

I remember watching the Winter Olympics for cross-country skiing, and Italy sat on the tail of Sweden or one of the other Scandinavian countries the entire race and let them do all the work, then kicked by them at the end. Sure, it was a legal move (and maybe dumb on Sweden's part). But it was far from classy, especially considering the etiquette of that sport. I'd rather not see elite runners leech off other runners, even if it is a championship race.

The goal is to cross the finish line first. Everyone knows the various strategies that can be employed in order to do this - go hard from the gun, sit and kick, mid-race surges, kick from far out, etc.

However the race plays out it is going to be dynamic, because you've got a whole field full of people who are at various fitness levels, have different strengths and weaknesses (fast twitch vs slow twitch), and may choose to use various tactics. Lots of variables swirling around.

Rupp chose a strategy that he thought would work - it did. Everyone else in the race could have tried different tactics if they thought it would have improved their odds of winning. Or if it was not a matter of tactics, and simply one of fitness, I guess it's time for them to go back to the drawing board and train harder or smarter.

You cannot fault Rupp's combination of fitness and tactics in leading to a victory here. He won. The goal is the cross the finish line first.

The tactics had a lot to do with the dearth of legit contenders. No one doubted Rupp was appreciably better than the rest of the men, and no one doubted the women's race was going to be Begley and Koll and nobody else.

Rupp has other plans against stronger competition at less sweltering venues. There was no need for him to do any more than he did.

Yanqui wrote:

The tactics had a lot to do with the dearth of legit contenders. No one doubted Rupp was appreciably better than the rest of the men, and no one doubted the women's race was going to be Begley and Koll and nobody else.

Rupp has other plans against stronger competition at less sweltering venues. There was no need for him to do any more than he did.

Exactly, the only way this race could have been interesting is if:

A) Rupp wasn't in it

B) Rupp was in it but so were Solinsky or Ritz or Meb or Abdi or someone who can run near 27:15 and kick.

None of this is Rupps fault.

the point of the race is to win, not make the race interesting and entertaining for you

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot wrote:

Ralphy wrote:

In the 'Results' and 'Start List' Galen Rupp's affiliation is listed as 'Nike' NOT OTC. Nick Symmonds is listed as OTC.

He wore an OTC jersey in the race, Holmes.

All Nike athletes that live in Oregon wear the OTC jersey. Nike is trying to brand "OTC" . Rupp does not train with OTC in Eugene at all.

There is nothing wrong with pounding a solo 10k, but when you look at what Rupp's goals probably were for this race, it makes little sense to me. The comment about the real problem being the disparity of talent was right on. The race would have been more interesting if there were people that had any realistic shot of beating Rupp in the field.

It's always interesting when there are all these people whining about someone sitting and kicking, but when you watch these races the majority of the athletes are doing the same thing and happy with a tactical race. Does everyone that complains about the sit and kick strategy really pound every race they run?