Sorry, but both my parents have already died. Since they reached the 'finish line' first, I guess they 'won'.
The problem with this entire post is the Running Times is confusing Racing with Time Trialing/Fast Times.
Sometimes you win.
Sometimes you get a fast time.
On rare occasions you get both.
Sometimes you get just one, but not the other.
And the reality (based on my 50+ years of running and racing) is most of the time you get neither, but keep trying.
I was saying that racing against others has no positive purpose. If you are pushing each other to your best time that's different. "Winners" and "losers" don't matter. I meant that if you have someone you are close with, would you try to beat them in a race? If you wouldn't, then why would you against anyone else?
Why wouldn't I try to beat a close friend/family member I was in a race with if we were close to the same running level?
If winning is the only goal, then those with no kick shouldn't just go along with the sit and kick strategy. If you are a grinder with no kick, better to just go for it, even if you do get passed at the end. At least you would be less likely to get tripped and would still most likely have a better chance to make All American.
I was watching the college indoor championship meet and they are not running their best times, but are just trying to stick with the pack and out kick at the end. I don't see the purpose or point behind it? Just try to run your PR and wherever you place is where you place. If there is any winner/champion in this, it would be the person who had the fastest time that season in that distance event, doesn't matter the meet. Seems like a waste of time and nothing is being accomplished if you are just trying to beat the other person next to you. It is a shame they turn it into that and they run so much slower, it looks stupid. It's about running the best time you can, not trying to out run other people. Hopefully they realize it someday that it doesn't matter how fast you are in comparison to other people.
I get the point that you are trying to make. You just expressed it / worded it awkward.
I hate seeing distance races at championship meets where the winning time in the 1500 or mile is 5 or 6 seconds slower than everyone's PR. All of them mistakenly think they all have a superior kick.
How about just run your own race and easily win by 2 or 3 seconds. Problem is that 95% of them achieved their PR's by having a rabbit for 75% of the race and can't do it own their own. So when there isn't a rabbit...95% just take it slow and try to be tactical. If you know you don't have a kick (like many female 5K or 10K runners), just run your own race at your pace.
This thread is hilarious. Remember, runners do not have to sit and kick. They can take the pace and keep it honest if they think it’ll benefit them.
There may be a few old heads here that remember the 1999 (I think… it was at Clemson) ACC Championship 10,000 meter race. It was super slow, like 7:30 pace, and that freshman kid from NCSU - I do not remember his name - just started sprinting at like 2,000 meters. He went all out for 450 meters and no one went with him because it was so surprising. He ended up lapping 100% of the field and just tucked back into the pack after he lapped everyone. He ended up winning.
It worked. I’m not sure he would have been on the podium otherwise. But he was smart and I wish more people would do those kinds of things.
This thread is hilarious. Remember, runners do not have to sit and kick. They can take the pace and keep it honest if they think it’ll benefit them.
There may be a few old heads here that remember the 1999 (I think… it was at Clemson) ACC Championship 10,000 meter race. It was super slow, like 7:30 pace, and that freshman kid from NCSU - I do not remember his name - just started sprinting at like 2,000 meters. He went all out for 450 meters and no one went with him because it was so surprising. He ended up lapping 100% of the field and just tucked back into the pack after he lapped everyone. He ended up winning.
It worked. I’m not sure he would have been on the podium otherwise. But he was smart and I wish more people would do those kinds of things.
You should find that race for us as it sounds like absolute BS.
I might be contrarian here but, when I am watching the Super Bowl, I hate it when teams try to win.
Winning the coin toss? That's high IQ right there! Connecting on a 60-yard pass for a TD in garbage time? Beautiful! I could watch that highlight over and over. How about a record long kickoff return? That's a record!!! Much more stylish than grinding out a win with boring run plays and screens.
This thread is hilarious. Remember, runners do not have to sit and kick. They can take the pace and keep it honest if they think it’ll benefit them.
There may be a few old heads here that remember the 1999 (I think… it was at Clemson) ACC Championship 10,000 meter race. It was super slow, like 7:30 pace, and that freshman kid from NCSU - I do not remember his name - just started sprinting at like 2,000 meters. He went all out for 450 meters and no one went with him because it was so surprising. He ended up lapping 100% of the field and just tucked back into the pack after he lapped everyone. He ended up winning.
It worked. I’m not sure he would have been on the podium otherwise. But he was smart and I wish more people would do those kinds of things.
The problem is that if someone is not one of the best 2 runners in the race, your strategy is almost guaranteed to backfire. Finishing on something like 5th is far better than the humiliation of being passed by most of the field during the last lap.
all due respect to "they could run in their lanes the whole way," or "why don't they run as fast as they can from the start," i don't think any race past about 200 is a pure drag race. some mix of pacing and tactics. i mean i figured out as a HS kid how to pace a 400 right, until then i was a kamikaze, but i guess you would have been proud of junior high me bravely sprinting from the blocks before holding on for dear life.
you're also ignoring the chess match aspect of longer races. it's all, they know that x race suits y runner but z race suits a guy. x, y. and z have a kick. a will hurt you if it's just one long gallop. they are in a pack because some guys in there decided that's their chance to win, and the favorite played along. if you don't like it you can take off yourself, but this too is a chess gambit with a response and consequences.
let's be scientific, how many times do you see some lonely jackrabbit who takes off alone from a slow pack start, finish in 1st? it's like the guy in the breakaway at tour de france stages. they tell stories about you if you make it to the line, but often enough it ends up with you hoovered up a mile from the line and then a sprint finish among the peloton members who rested and hid from the wind while you rushed off.
as i said earlier, there are some folks who are good one-off at a single fast time, who set WR at diamond leagues but probably can't win the olympics or worlds because they can't handle heat racing.
and when you say "finishing 5th" in the bunch sprint is better than being blown out at the end, you won't know that til it's over. you do it so you are in the bunch sprint deciding the day. it's a percentage play but you don't know exactly which spot. vs. to me if you go off alone the percentages of failure near 100%. emotionally brave and perhaps true to some idea of the sport, but not well-calculated.
and it's mis-calculated 2 ways. (1) you aren't winning, you will get caught. and (2) to me WR tend to come when everyone is in a mood to get out and hustle that day. the pack is brisk, you have competition pushing you, and then you go even faster than that.
i say that because if your goal in theory is a fast time and the heat wants to pack race, you might as well give up on the fast time, as you're running alone in the wind. you can stick to your scruples and run a hard-effort time but without the pack pushing half the foundation of your alternate premise is gone. it would be like setting up your slalom skis like it's 20F with a certain type of snow out, because you like those type courses and races, when it's really 45F and a different type of snow.
the game if you want a sincere pace is to figure out when to burst out of a dithering pack when you can hold it to the end. it's not to take off lap 1 from naive fury.
this thread also reminds me of the one where it was like "if everyone had their best race on championship day, who wins?" except this is counter-factual. some of the folks in the final ran their best race back in december after showing up to camp super-ready, but peaked months ago. they aren't capable of running that time anymore. it sounds cute to harp on their december '23 time but they left it on the field long ago. you get what you get on the day.
i say this because there is a hint of "i could have won this with my time back in january" whine about this. we all knew the final was in march, no? even if it's about "fast," it's about fast in march. that time in january could have been some relaxed meet you were supposed to win easily. ok, now everyone's here. do it again. and with everyone present it may not be as simple as run your fastest splits ever every lap and somehow hold it. that sounds like a good way to blow up and get beat by disciplined high quality competition who giggle as they watch you throw away your shot.
I might be contrarian here but, when I am watching the Super Bowl, I hate it when teams try to win.
Winning the coin toss? That's high IQ right there! Connecting on a 60-yard pass for a TD in garbage time? Beautiful! I could watch that highlight over and over. How about a record long kickoff return? That's a record!!! Much more stylish than grinding out a win with boring run plays and screens.
If you actually knew anything about football you would know that any team or coach will do what it takes to win.
If that's grinding out run after run then that's what they'll do.
and when you say "finishing 5th" in the bunch sprint is better than being blown out at the end, you won't know that til it's over. you do it so you are in the bunch sprint deciding the day. it's a percentage play but you don't know exactly which spot. vs. to me if you go off alone the percentages of failure near 100%. emotionally brave and perhaps true to some idea of the sport, but not well-calculated.
and it's mis-calculated 2 ways. (1) you aren't winning, you will get caught. and (2) to me WR tend to come when everyone is in a mood to get out and hustle that day. the pack is brisk, you have competition pushing you, and then you go even faster than that.
i say that because if your goal in theory is a fast time and the heat wants to pack race, you might as well give up on the fast time, as you're running alone in the wind. you can stick to your scruples and run a hard-effort time but without the pack pushing half the foundation of your alternate premise is gone. it would be like setting up your slalom skis like it's 20F with a certain type of snow out, because you like those type courses and races, when it's really 45F and a different type of snow.
the game if you want a sincere pace is to figure out when to burst out of a dithering pack when you can hold it to the end. it's not to take off lap 1 from naive fury.
At the top levels, you are what you are, and if you try to push the pace against better runners, it will never turn out well.
I wasn’t suggesting they go alone, but rather PR pace which is what the OP suggested.
I was watching the college indoor championship meet and they are not running their best times, but are just trying to stick with the pack and out kick at the end. I don't see the purpose or point behind it? Just try to run your PR and wherever you place is where you place. If there is any winner/champion in this, it would be the person who had the fastest time that season in that distance event, doesn't matter the meet. Seems like a waste of time and nothing is being accomplished if you are just trying to beat the other person next to you. It is a shame they turn it into that and they run so much slower, it looks stupid. It's about running the best time you can, not trying to out run other people. Hopefully they realize it someday that it doesn't matter how fast you are in comparison to other people.
Racing is about winning. Do you think they cared about time when racing first started and they raced from one church in one town to another? (Churches have steeples, hence they were steeplechases).
Pure racing is beautiful and fun.
On the old wooden how ever many laps to the mile indoor tracks it was impossible to run a fast time, so we reveled in the race to be the first across the line.
I see the guy celebrating holding up a number 1 sign and the guy next to him pulled his hamstring, or in a 400, the guy fell after the first 200m, that doesn't seem fun to me.
I might be contrarian here but, when I am watching the Super Bowl, I hate it when teams try to win.
Winning the coin toss? That's high IQ right there! Connecting on a 60-yard pass for a TD in garbage time? Beautiful! I could watch that highlight over and over. How about a record long kickoff return? That's a record!!! Much more stylish than grinding out a win with boring run plays and screens.
But they are willing to injure the other team just to win. It is animal like and immoral
OP is absolutely correct and the mob of drooling fools trying to vote it down are a mob of drooling fools.
It is not remotely interesting who is in the best position, or the best tactics. Even if they weren't going slow, it's just not interesting. If I wanted to see who was good at weaving through traffic I'd watch football, which I do.
Track races are supposed to be about who runs fastest, and this pacts to go slow most of the way make the sport look terrible. You may not realize it, but normal people laugh at that and change the channel. There's a reason a commentator has to always say "oh it's tactical" to try to explain it to them.
And then, how "tactical" even is it? There's very little intelligent tactics possible. Most runners who end up in a decent position at the bell are either A) lucky or B) in way better shape and can spare a bit of extra effort to surge their way up from 500 to 400 out. Neither of those is "tactics."
The reason this happens is because A/ there isn't space on the track for everyone to run on the inside at the pace they want to and B/ someone always has to be in the lead and, therefore, everyone behind is at an advantage because of drafting.
Hence, we get "tactics" (i.e. the most basic racing tactic possible which is to avoid being in the lead). And one thing leads to another and there we are. Unless you're significantly stronger than everyone else (e.g. perhaps a couple of seconds over a 1500m) frontrunning is pointless and you will lose.
Good for you, sign up to be a commentator and make these excuses to the bored viewer! If you think it will make any difference.
A "tactic" isn't something everyone does, i.e. not front-running. There is no element of each runner having some clever plan and interestingly playing their cards lap by lap. Admit it! They all stay where they are the whole way, then the fittest assert themselves starting 500m out to be near the front at the bell, and in the lead or at the shoulder by 200 out. No "tactic" can favor any but the fittest here.