"Tactical Races" make no sense to me

Star wrote:

If you are racing Farah (and that means if you are any one in the world), you're not going to be able to get away from him because he can keep up with whatever pace you can maintain.

Then none of the tactics matter. If Farah can run faster than you at your best, of course he wins.

Star wrote:

The only way you can maximize your finishing place by running fast from the front is if you are clearly better than anyone behind you that you are trying to beat.

Anyone who is near equal to you will catch you and beat you.

That is why the tactic of going out slow in a championship race makes sense.

And the only way you can lose to an inferior athlete is by running slow from the start and giving them a chance to out kick you in the end.

just sayin ...... wrote:

Bottom line, the fastest runner wins the races, UNLESS HE SCREWS UP. It doesn't matter what your competitor does. He could start out slow, he could start out fast, just run YOUR FASTEST Pace.

Utterly wrong. And all the statistics as well as common knowledge show that you have no clue. Yes, there are exceptions. But the exceptions go the other way. Like Meb in Boston who ran at his goal pace while the better runners screwed up.

dasfasdf wrote:

just sayin ...... wrote:

Bottom line, the fastest runner wins the races, UNLESS HE SCREWS UP. It doesn't matter what your competitor does. He could start out slow, he could start out fast, just run YOUR FASTEST Pace.

Utterly wrong. And all the statistics as well as common knowledge show that you have no clue. Yes, there are exceptions. But the exceptions go the other way. Like Meb in Boston who ran at his goal pace while the better runners screwed up.

Common knowledge is wrong on this. Yes it feels this way to racers I put the hammer down, I pushed him early to negate his kick, etc. etc. etc. Its all nonsense. Show me your proof or as you say your "statistics". The fastest runner wins the race unless he screws up. And you know how he screws up....... trying to use race tactics that causes to run at a pace that is not his best.

Focus on your own running, your own best pace, your own timing of your kick and you will have the best chance of winning. Other stuff will only hurt your performance. I always ran my race and did well.

just sayin ...... wrote:

Yes I have and when I was racing I believed all the BS about tactics. When to make my move, when to push it, when to hang back, at the time I thought it made a huge difference just like you do now.

I always ran my race and did well.

At least try to get your lies coherent, even if your logic isn't.

Btw, was it you who allegedly ran a 3:11 marathon?

It wasn't until my senior year that I gradually realized that focusing on my running was more important that thinking about what my competitors were doing. You can keep worrying about your opponents, what their pace is and whether you are pushing them or slowing them waiting behind them, if you really think that helps you run faster then great. A runner who is mentally strong doesn't need that.

dasfasdf wrote:

just sayin ...... wrote:

Yes I have and when I was racing I believed all the BS about tactics. When to make my move, when to push it, when to hang back, at the time I thought it made a huge difference just like you do now.

I always ran my race and did well.

At least try to get your lies coherent, even if your logic isn't.

Btw, was it you who allegedly ran a 3:11 marathon?

You make an excellent point. It's stunning that not even a single response thus has has explained, not why running quick will probably still lead to defeat by the likes of Farah, but why it is MORE LIKELY TO RESULT IN DEFEAT.

It needs to be the worse tactic for it to be smart not to do it. If you cannot kick but do a very high average pace, it seems clear, depending on where your kick and your average pace ranks amongst the top 10 runners in the world, you might be better off running quick.

Seems like lets runners should have devoted some time to game theory inc college, not just mindlessly sitting, kicking, losing and then working in a shoe store afterwards.

HRE wrote:

it's well established that for whatever reason, taking the lead early in an elite field almost certainly means you won't win. You could count on your fingers the number of Olympic or WC races won by someone who went hard from the start and lead and still have fingers left over.

That's just what I was talking about before. Your perspective is skewed and leads you to false conclusions.

Think of it like this. There have been, between 1980 and now, 12 olympic men's 5000's. At least one of them was one by tactical breakaway, Ngugi 88. There may be more, but even omitting them, 1 out of 12 is better than average for a field of more than 12.

There have been, between 2008 and now, 5 olympic and WC men's 800 finals. 4 of them were won by the man leading at the bell. In the other one, the leader took silver. In a field of 8, that's a great result.

The last WC men's 1500 was won by Kiprop leading from the bell. Not fast, but leading nonetheless, and while he's a great kicker he's certainly not unbeatable in the stretch. His win alone makes up for 11 or 12 frontrunner losses.

Kiprop leading most of the race, that is.

Let's not make this more complicated than it need be. Maybe the guy leading at the bell was just the fastest guy.

Maybe those who took the lead at the start, didn't pace themselves. Not that complicated.

just sayin ...... wrote:

It wasn't until my senior year that I gradually realized that focusing on my running was more important that thinking about what my competitors were doing.

You can keep worrying about your opponents, what their pace is and whether you are pushing them or slowing them waiting behind them, if you really think that helps you run faster then great. A runner who is mentally strong doesn't need that.

If what you're saying is true, there's no reason to have races. We could all just run on our own and then email our times in and rank them.

just sayin ...... wrote:

[quote]Bad Wigins wrote:

Let's not make this more complicated than it need be. Maybe the guy leading at the bell was just the fastest guy.

Maybe those who took the lead at the start, didn't pace themselves. Not that complicated.

Sorry to confuse you with all those big words and numbers. I will simplify it. Frontrunners actually win lots of times, compared to how many other runners there are.

teenage wasteland wrote:

just sayin ...... wrote:

You can keep worrying about your opponents, what their pace is and whether you are pushing them or slowing them waiting behind them, if you really think that helps you run faster then great. A runner who is mentally strong doesn't need that.

If what you're saying is true, there's no reason to have races. We could all just run on our own and then email our times in and rank them.

Not at all. First its more exciting to watch head on head races. Also conditions of each race different. And lastly, I did say if you are mentally tough and you run at your best pace you will run the fastest.

Very few, even elites, are tough enough, not to be negatively affected by competitor paces. On the other side, some also are not that tough mentally and need the competition to run faster.

It's because you are not a winner. Racing is about winning, not a fast time.

What most here are forgetting, is that the fastest time WINS!

So run the race to get your fastest possible time. Few tactics come into play. Basically, don't get boxed in.

As far as a race tactic, how about just running a race at YOUR best pace. Shocking idea right?

just sayin ...... wrote:

As far as a race tactic, how about just running a race at YOUR best pace. Shocking idea right?

Yes, you're shockingly stupid. If there were any truth in your babbling most PRs would have been set in solo time trials.

All races are tactical. Tactics are what we do to achieve our goals. I think your frustration lies in the fact that their primary goals and your expectations do not coincide.

I think the whole concept is difficult to grasp for those people who only competed in high school, or college. In those kinds of races, it's much easier to do your own thing and run away from the competition at that level. The talent and fitness gaps between competitors are much bigger.

Think about it like baseball. A talented high school pitcher can throw nothing but fastballs and dominate his competition, but no way that will work in the pros.

Leading at the bell is a lot different than leading from the gun.

A 12:50 can't run 12:50 on his own. That is the reason, if he is gonna run a 12:50, he doesn't want to do all of the dirty work the whole race. He wants to make sure he isn't using extra energy by leading, that is where tactics come into play. Not always does Mo Farah out kick his competitors, he has been out kicked numerous times by guys with less closing speed than him.