Interesting comment by Nick Symmonds about David Rudisha after semifinal

Yes, you agree with me. The standard has been a big positive split. Why not negative splits, or even splits?

I wouldn't say "big positive split" as according to the article the average difference was only around 2 seconds.

Reaper wrote:

I think Symmond's quote is very telling and shows why he races the way he does. He has absolutely no confidence when racing Africans. He stays at the back because he's afraid to push himself. He goes into every race thinking that he won't/can't win and that 3rd or 4th place is good enough.

That's why he'll never medal or be a champion on the world scene. He doesn't believe in himself.

With better racing tactics he could have broken the AR and won the bronze last year. He needs to grow a pair and try to match the Africans. I wish he'd just have one race where he goes out in a 49.xx and sees what happens.

Symmonds could have always run a 1:42, but his lack of confidence and stupid tactics hold him back. It's a shame really...

I think Nick's comment is very telling and shows how intelligent he is when it comes to racing. He knows it would be suicide to go out with Rudisha at what would be Nick's 400 PR.

Belief in yourself is important. Running smart is more important. Running your 400 PR in a 800 race is not smart.

Two seconds is a big positive split for 800m, in my opinion. Two seconds faster for the first lap pushes most athletes to their limit, with still another lap to go.

lololololololol wrote:

Rudisha in an 800 can split Symmonds' 400 PR.

In a nutshell,..yes

Dr. Know wrote:

One way of going about it wrote:

... They have come to believe that trying to run negative splits will result in slower times, always. Don't know why that has become the belief, but it has.

Don't know? Empirical data much?!

Ummm...show me some "empirical data" that demonstrates anything other than that it has become the standard belief and therefore, since everyone tries to run this way, basically ALL 800 times are positive splits (and then, surprise, surprise, the fastest ones are as well).

I'll be waiting for your "empirical data".

Much.

NHUI wrote:

stuff you like to pee out wrote:

wtf?

please explain.

rea lololololo's post just above for explanation

yes, i understood that. but i still fail to see how that is remotely close to being anything interesting.

Ummm . . . wrote:

Reaper wrote:

With better racing tactics he could have broken the AR and won the bronze last year.

Do explain, as I'm pretty sure Symmonds positive split the race.

Yes, he did positive split

1st lap - 50.44

2nd lap - 52.51

Look at the way he ran that first lap. Symmonds ran a 50.44 WITH NO DRAFTING. He put himself so far back that he basically ran a 50.44 opening with no help making it a lot harder than it should have been. If he went out in a 49.8-.9 and was behind somebody it would have been easier. Big mistake #1

From 400-600 he continued to keep himself back from Osagie. Again he didn't receive any drafting help. Symmonds ran a ~1:16 600 by himself! Only until about 120 meters to go did he finally start moving up.

I think there is huge room for improvement if he would have been closer to somebody for those 600 meters.

To put yourself so far behind that you don't let yourself have any draft or pacing help is ridiculous.

I bet he could have dropped half a second and gotten the bronze if he placed himself better instead of racing for 5th.

As far as I know Rudisha has never gone out faster than a 49.xx first lap. I have no idea where he gets this "he goes out in my 400 pr" idea from. Sounds like an excuse to me.

Symmonds has to be the only sub 1:43.00 800 meter guy who has not run under 47.00 in the 400 meters

Reaper wrote:

G Reaper wrote:

I think Nick's comment is very telling and shows how intelligent he is when it comes to racing. He knows it would be suicide to go out with Rudisha at what would be Nick's 400 PR.

Belief in yourself is important. Running smart is more important. Running your 400 PR in a 800 race is not smart.

As far as I know Rudisha has never gone out faster than a 49.xx first lap. I have no idea where he gets this "he goes out in my 400 pr" idea from. Sounds like an excuse to me.

Rudisha is probably faster than Kipketer over 400m. Kipketer took it out in 48.2 one time...

ABSURD STUFFFFFFF

Yes, believing in oneself is the problem.

I have trouble recovering from mistakes. I want to be someone who never hurts others. I want people to like me. I've had so many experiences with people who don't like me. Going pro would open me up to that pain point. what drives me is my need to be great. What comes with that is a little, self-correcting voice that constantly nags for me to be better. Don't know what to do about that.

Giles Corey wrote:

Symmonds has to be the only sub 1:43.00 800 meter guy who has not run under 47.00 in the 400 meters

Not at all. Steve Cram for example, was slower than Symmonds over 400 meters. Of course, he also ran 3:29/3:46/4:51. Peter Elliott (3:32/3:49/4:52) was also slower, and stronger than Symmonds. I'm sure there are others.

You are absolutely right. It doesn't help that Rudisha can run 45.0 and Symmonds 47.40 but its not everything. Symmonds is a 3.36 guy (and probably faster in a big European race) and Rudisha might struggle to run that.

To me the thing that is surprising is no one attempts to take this advantage away from Rudisha. By that I mean don't let him get out in front, get in his stride and dictate the course of events by running easy sub 50 laps. If you were Symmonds why wouldn't you get to the front, slow it down - make Rudisha chop his stride and try and make it a 150m race. I've yet to see someone do this.

The thing is - as great as Rudisha is, I'm not sure I see him as bulletproof in huge kick-down. As it stands if you let him get in front after 200m the race is essentially over.

What were Cram's and Elliott's 400m PBs?

And when were they run?

I suspect they never ran any 400m's as senior athletes if they had slower times than Symmonds.

Symmonds has run several 400ms the past few years

Giles Corey wrote:

What were Cram's and Elliott's 400m PBs?

And when were they run?

I suspect they never ran any 400m's as senior athletes if they had slower times than Symmonds.

Symmonds has run several 400ms the past few years

Cram said in an interview in AW at the end of his 85 (best ) season, that he had improved his 400 speed that year from a competition best of 49.1 in 1982, to a tt best of 48.1 in training. He also added how happy he was with a 47.6 relay leg at the end of the 84 season.

So Cram himself is basically saying he was around 48 for his 400 pb. No way he breaks 47.

Reaper wrote:

Look at the way he ran that first lap. Symmonds ran a 50.44 WITH NO DRAFTING. He put himself so far back that he basically ran a 50.44 opening with no help making it a lot harder than it should have been. If he went out in a 49.8-.9 and was behind somebody it would have been easier. Big mistake #1

From 400-600 he continued to keep himself back from Osagie. Again he didn't receive any drafting help. Symmonds ran a ~1:16 600 by himself! Only until about 120 meters to go did he finally start moving up.

Wrong. He was right on Osagie's tail from 300-600. Any closer and he'd likely get tripped up while running that fast. Split-wise he ran the perfect race. Drafting would not have taken another .5 seconds off.

One way of going about it wrote:

Dr. Know wrote:

Don't know? Empirical data much?!

Yes, YOU should run an analysis. Please report back your findings, and based them on high-level championship races. Those are your parameters. Best of luck.

You're an idiot.

What is more likely, A) that each and every 800 runner out there has convinced themselves that positives splits are the way to go and none of them have ever tried the superior even/negative split method, or B) that positive splits produce faster times and therefore most people have arrived at this strategy.