Lagat wins in a rediculous time......

Times are one way of measuring performance, rank is another. In a championship race, everyone wants to place as high as possible. As Lagat was the unbeatable favorite, the others focused on beating each other.

Pre was a charismatic runner that spoke english (the official language of letsrun) and was generally better than his countrymen which let him use those tactics and waste energy showing off. Pro runners these days can't afford to waste energy.Running "guts races" against equals gets you nowhere, if you don't have a kick then I still think try to do what Paul Tergat did in 2000 would be the way, train to drive hard from way out.

Michael Scott wrote:

Not to be a Pre-hater, but I'd also like to point out that Pre's running got him 4th place when it mattered. When he was leaving the track in disgust, I doubt he was thinking, "At least I ran some really good time trials in the past when it didn't matter as much."

Deer bladerunner,

Rediculous is right!

I want to summarize a couple of facts that seem to be unclear to everyone.

First, I don't think anybody blames lagat for running a slow pathetic ass time. If he can win the 5000 in 16 min, good for him. It is almost pointless to argue about his performance. He did what he had to do to win.

Second, Fans pay for this sport. Who cares what the fans want? huh? The NFL and NBA care. MLB didn't care about the fans until they lost a ton of market share. Then they picked up the pace of the game like the fans wanted. People are bitching about ESPN not showing track. If we don't have any fans, why would you show it on TV. You don't have to be a business major to understand that. I will continue to pay for tickets to track events but I can't expect to see it on TV unless most of us are moderatly entertained. I can't expect fans to be entertained by a sorry ass 5000 meter race.

My opinions:

To the person that said that most of don't understand competition.

Reply: You call that competition. Many of us don't know how a car works, but we know a car when we see one. Also on competition, all of us who have played any kind of sport or game understand some kind of competitive strategy. We all should understand that there are people with a kick and people without a kick (you know who you are). All those people without a kick choose to sit in the back of that race and wait for the last lap. They had 0% chance to outkick the field. That is NOT competition. I don't know what that is. What is that?

We have no quarterback so where going to keep throwing the ball.

We have no shooters so were going to keep shooting the ball.

Commentators rip apart every other team that plays like shit, why should track be any different. I would never criticize anyone who has tried their best. Those runners did not try their best.

Someone posted that if the runners don't run a certain time, they shouldn't get the medals and cash. Somebody else called him an idiot. I don't think it's that idiotic.

I love track. I just want what is best for the sport. 13:54 for a national championship is not good for a sport. Someone has to think out of the box to fix that. Put in a rabbit if needed. Do something.

That was a mouthful

jsl wrote:

Deer bladerunner,

Rediculous is right!

That's funnie! My horrific spelling aside, my point was not to slam Lagat. Every other runner in that field knew they would lose if it came down to a kick in the last lap and none of them did anything about it.

How is it a tactical race if the guys with no kick just sit back and let the race turn into a kicker's race?

Plus, it's BORING!

There is NO reason why Quigley, Dobson, Nelson, etc. should have run this race. Running a tactical race with a sub 13 minute runner is not competing. If any of them had sense they would have pushed the pace...make Lagat run. Instead they let the 1500 and 5000 star walk through his championship. And none of them are walking away happy with a 14+ time at a championship race. So much preparation goes into one night. Nelson came in with a 13:24 and a 27.31 from Stanford. This should have been him hammering out 64s.

Brent Vaughan must have really backed his big kick.

PointMaker wrote:

Nelson came in with a 13:24 and a 27.31 from Stanford. This should have been him hammering out 64s.

Should have, would have, could have...

If all of those came true, the "US distance resurgence" would be known outside of the US.

BigJohn wrote:

bladerunner wrote:

13:54 - that's even worse than the 10k last night. If these guys are going to do tempo runs at collegiate paces, then I don't blame espn for cutting away.

I agree - really pathetic to the point it's acutally disgusting, truly disgusting. Hell, nearly 35 seconds slower than what Pre ran in friggin' 1972 at the OTs final. Nearly 40 yrs have passed and we can't even match that.

Yeah it's a shame we've only had 4 Americans run under 13:00 in the past year.

3200guy wrote:

BigJohn wrote:

I agree - really pathetic to the point it's acutally disgusting, truly disgusting. Hell, nearly 35 seconds slower than what Pre ran in friggin' 1972 at the OTs final. Nearly 40 yrs have passed and we can't even match that.

Yeah it's a shame we've only had 4 Americans run under 13:00 in the past year.

3200guy... don't worry about about these guys' posts. They have gathered a LITTLE knowledge by reading, but they have never competed themselves. They simply don't understand...

BigJohn wrote:

I agree - really pathetic to the point it's acutally disgusting, truly disgusting. Hell, nearly 35 seconds slower than what Pre ran in friggin' 1972 at the OTs final. Nearly 40 yrs have passed and we can't even match that.

Really? I thought that Pre's AR had fallen long ago. I also thought that there were a good number of currently active runners who have bested that mark.

Oh, you want them to run 12:58 at EVERY track meet. I see.

reality... wrote:

[quote]3200guy wrote:

[quote]BigJohn wrote:

3200guy... don't worry about about these guys' posts. They have gathered a LITTLE knowledge by reading, but they have never competed themselves. They simply don't understand...

There's some fine logic. If you don't agree with someone, just write that they just "don't understand". Yes. I understand. The guys with no kick just coasted along and hoped they would find a kick in the end.

Just remember the trials in 2008. Solinsky went hard with about 1k to go. He knew he couldn't outkick Lagat and some others so he took a chance and tried to burn the kick out of them. It didn't work but at least he took a chance.

But maybe that's why the stands are empty. There are not enough of us who "understand" to come out and watch a 4800 meter tempo run with a sprint at the end. We're just too stupid to appreciate the tactical chess games going on out there.

There are VERY MANY reasons why track meets are not big draws for fans, but tactical races are not one of them. Sprints are by far the most popular events at track meets - so by your description - more of the "lay" fans would appreciate those races with sprint finishes even more.Now - your analysis of Solinsky is interesting. He did the tactic YOU want people to use... LOST... and Lagat still wins. So regardless what the pace was - Lagat does what he needs to win - and he does. Yet he still catches flack for it.

Just remember the trials in 2008. Solinsky went hard with about 1k to go. He knew he couldn't outkick Lagat and some others so he took a chance and tried to burn the kick out of them. It didn't work but at least he took a chance.

But maybe that's why the stands are empty. There are not enough of us who "understand" to come out and watch a 4800 meter tempo run with a sprint at the end. We're just too stupid to appreciate the tactical chess games going on out there.

PointMaker wrote:

Nelson came in with a 13:24 and a 27.31 from Stanford. This should have been him hammering out 64s.

Nelson should have been in the 10k, -21 off Rupp's 10k PR, versus -30 off Lagat's 5k PR. No reason to race the 5k, unless you wanted to be in a race where nobody could expect you to win.

Officializer wrote:

I think the cult of Pre is finally dead. Good riddance, and about time too!

[/quote]

Pre went for it, dude.

analysis wrote:

There are VERY MANY reasons why track meets are not big draws for fans, but tactical races are not one of them. Sprints are by far the most popular events at track meets - so by your description - more of the "lay" fans would appreciate those races with sprint finishes even more.

Nonsense, sprints are a draw because they are explosive and the competitors go all-out from the gun through the finish. A fast 600 to finish a 5000 or 10,000 is relatively explosive, yet the 10-20 minutes of jogging "lay" fans have to sit through to get to that isn't going to keep their attention long enough for them to even potentially enjoy that fast 600. They'd get up and go home, for the most part.

hahsjjsjdjd wrote:

Indeed, and since there were multiple threads complaining about Rupp, some pages deep; we must spend more time complaining about Lagat

You guys are all a bunch of morons, except for those who aren't.

None of the blame goes to any of the competitors with a real shot at top three in a kickers race.

It all rests on the pussies who had no chance and still sat.

If you aren't going to place, and you aren't going to try hard, then don't race. It's simple.

Pre ran t-trials in practice, not in races. Only one American has won a distance medal on the track since 1972 so I'd say for a 21 year old to finish 4th was fantastic. Pre was only a few seconds off the 5k and 10 k record when he died.

Competitors can run far fewer all out distance races in a year than sprints/middle distances and there's still a lot of months left in outdoor track. In modern times no one will run a world record in distances at the Olympics with the semi-finals. That's also why the fastest 10000m runner in history has only competed at the distance 11 times.Competition is always much more interesting when there are people in the race who can at least hold a candle to each other. El Guerrouj was interesting because he often raced people on his level.