Fantastic Men's 800 at Monaco

Homeless in Seattle wrote:

Simmons ran on the outside of Lane 1 most of the way, the distance that he ran in lane 2 was very nominal. The OP either has not watched the race, or is exaggerating. Good race by both Solomon and Symmonds, both appear to be peaking at the right time.

Ventolin has a point. I just looked at the race which I recorded and I calculate that Symmonds ran between 6 and 6.5 m further than 800m, which would have given him an 800 time of c. 1:43.0 had he been able to run on the inside of lane 1. Rotich on the other hand was pretty much on the inside of lane 1 all the way.

In other words, there isn't much between them over 800m.

The worst bend for Symmonds was the first one after 200m, where he ran about 70m of it on the inside of lane 2, and the remaining 30m just on or inside the line with lane 1. Had he run all the bend in lane 2, then that is running an extra 3.5m, so I would suggest he ran about 3m more than necessary. Interestingly he ran that curve 100m in 12.8 (compared to Rotich's 12.6) , but in essence he was running faster than Rotich (around 12.4 for 100m). Looking at all of Symmonds 100 splits, he really needs to go off a bit faster in first 200m, get a better position and then just hold the curb, regardless of how fast the others are running around him. He tends to run more even splits, so the others will come back on the 2nd lap anyway, but he can't afford to give away a few metres on each curve.

He was not as wide on the 2nd curve, after 400m, as he stayed in lane 1 all the way riund, albeit on the outside of the lane. I'd estimate he ran about 2m further than necessary here. Again, this bend was run in 12.8 (compared to Rotich's 13.1!) by Symmonds, but it would have felt (been) like 12.6 due to running wide.

His last bend from 600 - 700 wasn't too wasteful, and it's often expected to run a little wide at this stage, but he still ran about 1 - 1.5 m further than necessary. Here he ran the curve in 13.4, compared to Rotich's 13.3, but by this stage Symmonds had run an accumulative total of 5m more than the Kenyan.

Here are the two's split times: -

Rotich - 50.2/52.9

24.9, 25.3, 26.3 (1:16.5), 26.6 = 1:43.13

His 100s went ~ 12.4, 12.5, 12.6, 12.7, 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 13.3.

The classic example of sustained slowing gradually over each successive 100m.

Symmonds - 51.0/ 52.7 ( had he not run wide, then it was equivalent to 50.6/52.3)

25.4 (too slow, he should be able to manage sub 25.0 without any effect to his lactate threshold later on), 25.6, 26.0, 26.7 = 1:43.78

His 100s were 12.8, 12.6, 12.8 (3m extra so more like 12.4!), 12.8, 12.8 (2m extra so more like 12.6), 13.2, 13.4 (1.5m wide, so = to about 13.2) & 13.3

So Symmonds has to change his pace at different times during the race, which makes him less efficient.

Excuses Excuses Excuses. Man up and say he got beat, those Kenyans will never whine when they loose, they just move on to the next race and try to do better. Ooooh he should have done this, or that or this, nonsense, the race started with all runners having an equal chance to win, the best runner won the race and the worst runner came last. Running tactics is part of a race, if he miscalculated it, then its his foul and he needs to rectify that in the next race.

Yes, I agree with you. Tactics is probably more important and crucial than any other event. The purpose of my post was not to make excuses, (I don't think Symmonds is good enough to medal in London), but to point out that he needs to re-think his tactics. By not running so wide he at least gives himself a fighting chance of a better result in the final.

Someone like Rudisha could get away with Symmonds tactics and still win, but Symmonds isn't good enough to afford such luxuries.

That's why Kenyans and Ethiopians beat win. Right here we are over analyzing everything. For example, when reviewed the video, the winner of the race was tripped or by Kaki or someone at 150 m to go, he did slowed somewhat and went on with what he was supposed to do.

The only way to win a race... is to ran faster than your competion. Just do that

While I appreciate Homeless in Seattle's assertion that either I did not watch the race or I was exaggerating, I appreciate deanouk's analysis much more. My point was a simple one: ONE CANNOT BE IN LAST PLACE AT 200 METERS (I just rewatched the race on Universal), and one cannot be in seventh at 360, and one cannot run turns in the second lane and be forced out to the third lane down the final straight, and expect to be able to contend in a world-class 800. Solomon on the other hand, despite having vastly less experience than Symmonds, ran a beautiful tactical race--getting out fast, running on the rail, not getting boxed, etc. Indeed, at 29 seconds into the race Symmonds was about seven meters behind Solomon; at 1:13 he was no more than two meters behind him. Furthermore, Symmonds ran faster than Solomon from 100 to 800. However, this is Symmonds' move--start in the back, run through and around traffic, and try to outkick people. This is not a winning strategy an the international level.

coach d wrote:

Looking good doesn't quite cover it. Duane is now the 5th fastest in the world this year, and USA now has a realistic shot at a medal. He just ran several tenths faster than Symmonds' PR, which Nick has plateaued at for the past 4 years.

Enough of the obnoxious BS boasting from the Oregon trash. The simple fact is that Solomon ran 1:43.44 and finished third, while Symmonds didn't and finished fifth.

Symmonds can run 1:42-point when he steps onto a track and does it.

If he hasn't done it by now, he never will. Symmonds will never f*cking run sub 1:43.