Sha'Carri Richardson might not be on 4x100m because of petty relay dispute

Toilet Poster wrote:

nails a problem? wrote:

Is this certain? I know she finished 4th and will be the first offered the stop to replace Richardson but if I were her I would focus on the 200 and 4x100 only. She has zero chance of placing in the 100 but I think she has a very good chance to medal in the 200. She is currently ranked 38th in the world in the 100 and 4th in the 200.

I hope Prandini turns down the 100 spot and Gabby Thomas takes it. If the online outrage machine finds out that Sha’Carri Richardson got replaced by a white woman all hell will break loose. Gabby Thomas is already somewhat of a media darling (Harvard/epidemiology/racial justice) and won’t be criticized for taking the spot. Or just leave the spot empty as a sign of protest if nobody wants to take it.

There is zero chance that nobody would want to take the spot that Sha'Carri Richardson is giving up. It's the Olympics!

Toilet Poster wrote:

nails a problem? wrote:

Is this certain? I know she finished 4th and will be the first offered the stop to replace Richardson but if I were her I would focus on the 200 and 4x100 only. She has zero chance of placing in the 100 but I think she has a very good chance to medal in the 200. She is currently ranked 38th in the world in the 100 and 4th in the 200.

I hope Prandini turns down the 100 spot and Gabby Thomas takes it. If the online outrage machine finds out that Sha’Carri Richardson got replaced by a white woman all hell will break loose. Gabby Thomas is already somewhat of a media darling (Harvard/epidemiology/racial justice) and won’t be criticized for taking the spot. Or just leave the spot empty as a sign of protest if nobody wants to take it.

Another more likely scenario in the 100 is English Gardner. Prandini and Gabby Thomas focus on the 200 which opens the door for Gardner who finished behind Thomas. There are already PED suspicions with Thomas so it's a fair scenario.

As previously suggested, Richardson will probably run the 4 x 100. With limited practices it is foolish to run her on a leg that requires accepting the baton on a turn and then subsequently handing off on a turn. Therefore, the reasonable decision is to run her on the anchor leg. Where she will only have to receive the baton on the turn. On the other end of the race, Oliver has one of the best starts and should run lead off leg. Thomas is the strongest 200 meter runner and has the best top end speed for the longest leg. So she should run the second leg (if one follows the numerous 400s she ran this year to work on her strength, one would realize that her progression did not necessarily indicate PEDs were required for her trials performance. It bothers me that and athlete's improvement routinely launches suspicious attacks on this discussion board.) That leave Daniels to run the third leg. She earned that spot due to her finish at the trials and she does run a pretty good turn in the 200. Now to see what the coach of the relays decides.

I’m now thinking she doesn’t run at all.

Toilet Poster wrote:

nails a problem? wrote:

Is this certain? I know she finished 4th and will be the first offered the stop to replace Richardson but if I were her I would focus on the 200 and 4x100 only. She has zero chance of placing in the 100 but I think she has a very good chance to medal in the 200. She is currently ranked 38th in the world in the 100 and 4th in the 200.

I hope Prandini turns down the 100 spot and Gabby Thomas takes it. If the online outrage machine finds out that Sha’Carri Richardson got replaced by a white woman all hell will break loose. Gabby Thomas is already somewhat of a media darling (Harvard/epidemiology/racial justice) and won’t be criticized for taking the spot. Or just leave the spot empty as a sign of protest if nobody wants to take it.

I’m no elite sprinter, but if it were me, the media could scream all they want while I ran that 100. Then again, young people these days are vulnerable to stuff like that. Three or four hundred angry posts on Prandini’s Instagram would probably get her to stand aside.

She’s not even in the relay pool.

Prandin is in 100. Richardson is out of relay. Online bullies on the left supporting the person in the wrong like they always do. They are bullying Prandini who is in the right. Disgusting.

The relay coach spoke. Everyone shut up and sit down.

Not the relay coan(es). The OLY head coaches used their discretionary picks for the pool on other athletes. She’s dq’d and out by rule with no place in the trials, and she’s out of the pool because they picked others for the discretionary selections.

Prandini is a 200m runner without a fantastic start, so maybe she should get the third leg unless you opt for Gabby, who runs a great turn and can be better at 100m.

Javianne Oliver had a terrific start at the Trials and was 2nd, so give her the first leg.

Richardson is your obvious anchor leg unless you leave her off entirely out of risk avoidance. But the fact that Dennis Mitchell wants her on anchor makes me second-guess myself, because Dennis Mitchell is a worse relays coach than your typical high school sprint coach.

douglas burke wrote:

A Lot of Coaches put their Fastest Runner on 2nd Leg, I had not heard of putting the best runner on 3rd leg before. Any Experts on the theories for putting the best runner at 4 x 100 on any leg other than anchor?

Controversial idea probably, but the Fastest 100m runner should be on first leg. Why put someone that is not as fast, coming out of the blocks? Give the slower person a running start. I understand there’s other reasons; chemistry, ability to run turns, take/give hand offs etc, but mathematically, the fastest 100m runner should be first leg.

You failed at math. What if the fastest 100 meter runner has the slowest start but better top end speed. What is the slowest has the fastest start?

The fastest runner should be 2nd leg as long as they are proficient in receiving/passing the baton, and do not have a huge ego problem with not running 4th. A few reasons for this:

1. You maximize them running in a straight line for the longest possible distance.

2. By receiving the baton early in the zone and passing it late in the zone, the 2nd runner can possess the baton for about 120m, especially with the exchange zones being extended to 30m back in 2019. Realistically, the 4th runner will not possess the baton for more than 110m because they cannot stand any farther back than the start of the exchange zone, which is 120m from the finish. They need some time to get up to speed so the baton doesn't slow down which is a minimum of 8-10m, ideally a bit longer.

Killers anchor. The fastest runners never lead off. Bolt and Lewis usually anchored.

Why would anyone listen to Dennis Mitchell?

paris2024hawk wrote:

high school xc coach wrote:

why does the relay coach want her 3rd?

Normally I don't get into theories but I think it's a control thing, she is in my mind the best candidate for anchor but even though all legs are important the anchor is looked at as the most important leg. As Rae Edwards put it the Glory leg.

3rd should obviously be given to one of the 200m runners, you know they can run a good bend.

my goodness what a silly post.

Toilet Poster wrote:

I’m now thinking she doesn’t run at all.

Me too.

How we can we trust her not to just use again and get the team disqualified? That would be thought process if I’m on the relay team. What controls are in place for that?

If she’s dumb enough to use at the Olympic Trials when she knew she would be tested, then she’s dumb enough to just use again at the Olympics too.

she should be running 2nd or 4th, but they are not in a position to negotiate. Should take what is given to them and screw dennis mitchell if he is the one who blows this whole thing up.