Congrats to Shannon Rowbury!!!

Does anyone have the 2000m split? It started with a 3:15.73 at 1000m, but I don't have the next split. All I know is that Dibaba averaged about 2:45.85 for the last 2000m (4:25 mile pace), while Rowbury averaged about 2:50 (4:33 mile pace).

Dibaba's 2014 world record splits from 2014 are 2:48/2:46/2:42. After jogging a 3:15+, most of the field should have been capable of running the last part a bit faster to at least stay in better contact with Defar.

Molly Seidel's 8:57.86 at NCAA's would have put her 5th in this race.

Nevertheless, Rowbury medalled, so congrats to her!

It was the 64 second 400 meter surge in the middle of the race that made this effort so hard for everyone except Dibaba

That's about 4 flat 1500m pace and it started the lactic acid build up mid race

Rowbury closed in 61 to run 8:55 at the USA nationals a week earlier. That looked very easy for her

She ran the same time (8:55) at worlds and said in her interview that she was definitely feeling the burn and working hard to keep form

The arm chair critics on this board spout at the mouth and make statements that clearly show their ignorance about the sport.

Middle race surges wrote: The arm chair critics on this board spout at the mouth and make statements that clearly show their ignorance about the sport.

Here's a challenge, try posting just once without being an a-hole.

Everyone on this board is an "arm chair critic." It's the whole point of this. Yes, I saw Dibaba's 64 second surge. I also saw that the field did not respond. No one else was running 64 seconds, they let her go. Everyone in the field are pros and they generally know how to balance that line of lactic acid threshold. I understand that no one had what it takes to challenge Dibaba.

But my point was that Defar was not in top form, and I still think the field could have tried to keep better contact with her. Feel free to disagree, but I've followed the sport for 30 years and am hardly ignorant.

Chill out. I wasn't referring to you as an arm chair critic. It's obvious you understand pace given the nature of your question about it in your post

It's the other "a holes" on this thread who are being critical of the athletes without any consideration of the effect that the hard surge in the middle of the race had on their performance

And yes, Rowbury did split 64-65 in the middle of the race which would explain why she felt the effort was so much harder than the week before

Official leader to leader 1000m splits were 3:15.73, 2:47.1 (6:02.83), 2:44.6 (8:47.43). So that would put Dibaba around that, though the first and second would be slightly off since Sviatlana Kudzelich was in the lead at 1000m, so Dibaba had to be slightly slower on the first and slightly faster on the second.

It's kind of hard to say Seidel's 8:57 matters at all. Would Seidel have run 8:57 and placed 5th off a 3:15 first km? Doubtful. Sheila Reid, for example, has run 8:56 this year, and placed 12th in 9:19. Betsy Saina ran 8:43 last year and 14:57 for 5000m this year, and finished in 9:01 in this race, slower overall than her earlier 5000m. Dibaba has run 8:16 and finished in 8:47. Previous times in other races really don't really tell you where someone who wasn't in the race would finish.

True. I was just mentioning Seidel's time, not really predicting what she would have done in the actual race. It certainly isn't uncommon for NCAA championship races to be close to world championship times.

There was certainly no chance of anyone beating Dibaba that day aside from Ayana or if Defar was further along in her training. I still think the field were running for third. Defar is certainly intimidating, and trying to beat her does involve risk, but that's what was necessary to get a silver. If Rowbury did pass Defar, she might have hit a wall and ended up 4th or worse. I'd guess that she has mixed feelings about it, but certainly happy to get a medal.