The others wrote:
Is 4th place "good" for Allie Ostrander or is that also a let down?
very good, she got better every race and coming back from missing a season, people here think its first or nothing(explains why they're failing at life I guess), also should be taken into account there was a 26 year old in the race which is to old so she was 3rd
Reponding to your nonsense wrote:
vivalarepublica wrote:
What is this nonsense? Any runner is going to feel the hurt from breaking the wind, regardless of build. She had to stay near the front if she wanted to compete for the win, as Kurgat wasn't exactly tucking in behind the back waiting to make a move. I was at the race and Schweizer was tucked behind the women right in front until she dropped off. The splits show that she was caught in no-mans land for a bit at 4k after she dropped of the 3 woman lead pack, so that may have taken something out of her for the finish.
Schweizer was in 4th a few yards behind the three leaders the first 2k, then lost them and was 7 seconds back but continued to lead the chase pace, LEADING the chase pack, and then kept falling back. I personally think the issue for her was trying to run too fast too early, and trying to be in front a lot more than she needed to be. Comparing her splits and positions shows that Neale ran a much smarter race. I think Schweizer would have placed much higher if she had done something similar, and your premise is wrong. Just because Kurgat ran from the front after 2k, doesn't mean that everyone else in the field could do the same thing.
Have you ever competed to win a race? If so, you might realize that hanging back 15-20 seconds from the best in the country and hoping they come back to you is not a great strategy to win that race. Scheweizer, along with others in the lead pack, were competing for the win. They paid for it at the end as many runners passed them in the last K. Maybe they would have benefitted from a strategy like Neale’s, but they also would have never been in contact with Kurgat and had no chance of winning. Schweizer and others went for the win, bonked in the last 1k or 2k, and paid for it. They may have had a higher place if they employed Neale’s strategy, but they never would have had a chance of winning. It was hard to tell that Kurgat was going to be so strong on race day that she would grind up the competition.
Neale had a great race and deserves props, but it also reminded me of Manzano in the 2012 Olympics when he picked off everyone at the end because they went too hard. 9 Times of 10, Manzano is not getting that silver medal. He benefittec because everyone was hyped up in that race and ran too hard too early. Same thing happened with Neale at nationals.
Who knows what the future holds to all these women. Good luck to those that continue to race in their futures.
The others wrote:
Is 4th place "good" for Allie Ostrander or is that also a let down?
If we want discuss other let downs, there were much worse than the 4th to 11th slide of Schweizer. But the defending national champ gets more attention, perhaps deservingly so.
The fact that she had this interview after her disappointing race shows her class. A few professional runners could learn a thing or two from her. Well done Karissa and go get 'em in track.
post checks out wrote:
Thanks pics guy for your service to Letsrun.
Thumbs down. The other pics poster showed us more skin.
nope. she was first because she was first american :)))))))))))
You mean like the race Schweizer ran last year? Yeah she finished higher but she didn't go for it from the start and thus didn't have a chance to win.
Gotta bee wrote:
The others wrote:
Is 4th place "good" for Allie Ostrander or is that also a let down?
very good, she got better every race and coming back from missing a season, people here think its first or nothing(explains why they're failing at life I guess), also should be taken into account there was a 26 year old in the race which is to old so she was 3rd
+1
I bet her coach didn't lie to her for full year either. "Allie, tour the best in the world"
+1
I bet her coach didn't lie to her for a full year either. "Allie, your the best in the world"
http://www.newsweek.com/straight-and-ncaas-allie-ostrander-americas-next-running-phenom-435227Gordon Wack wrote:
+1
I bet her coach didn't lie to her for a full year either. "Allie, your the best in the world"
Nah because Newsweek already did that...
Indoor? wrote:
You mean like the race Schweizer ran last year? Yeah she finished higher but she didn't go for it from the start and thus didn't have a chance to win.
Yeah, like you would understand just how hard they went out at, right?
Both races went out HARD, too HARD for many and some had a day where they could hang on, while others couldn't.
It's called racing.
Indoor? wrote:
You mean like the race Schweizer ran last year? Yeah she finished higher but she didn't go for it from the start and thus didn't have a chance to win.
You don't know what you're talking about. Last year, she went out as hard as anyone else. She was in or very near the lead pack and beat them in the home stretch. It was the exact same thing that she tried to do this year. It was not this miraculous come from 20 seconds behind stalking over the last 2k. The difference was Rohrer and Finn went hard just a tad too early and Schweizer had more in the final 400m. At least that is what the splits and the actual race video show.
http://www.ncaa.com/2016-cross-country-championshiphttp://www.flotrack.org/video/1014643-full-replay-2016-womens-di-ncaa-xc-championships-6k-race-karissa-schweizer-pulls-off-the-stunning-upset#.WhS1t3aYFhEDifferent Source wrote:
http://www.newsweek.com/straight-and-ncaas-allie-ostrander-americas-next-running-phenom-435227Gordon Wack wrote:
+1
I bet her coach didn't lie to her for a full year either. "Allie, your the best in the world"
Nah because Newsweek already did that...
Allie O. only reads the WSJ.
vivalarepublica wrote:
Have you ever competed to win a race? If so, you might realize that hanging back 15-20 seconds from the best in the country and hoping they come back to you is not a great strategy to win that race. Scheweizer, along with others in the lead pack, were competing for the win. They paid for it at the end as many runners passed them in the last K. Maybe they would have benefitted from a strategy like Neale’s, but they also would have never been in contact with Kurgat and had no chance of winning. Schweizer and others went for the win, bonked in the last 1k or 2k, and paid for it. They may have had a higher place if they employed Neale’s strategy, but they never would have had a chance of winning. It was hard to tell that Kurgat was going to be so strong on race day that she would grind up the competition.
Besides Kurgat who won, Neale had the best strategy in the race for winning.
All the others went out too fast, and she beat them.
I am amazed at how little attention has been given to Amy-Eloise Neale. What a rocket!
Try using your brain wrote:
vivalarepublica wrote:
Have you ever competed to win a race? If so, you might realize that hanging back 15-20 seconds from the best in the country and hoping they come back to you is not a great strategy to win that race. Scheweizer, along with others in the lead pack, were competing for the win. They paid for it at the end as many runners passed them in the last K. Maybe they would have benefitted from a strategy like Neale’s, but they also would have never been in contact with Kurgat and had no chance of winning. Schweizer and others went for the win, bonked in the last 1k or 2k, and paid for it. They may have had a higher place if they employed Neale’s strategy, but they never would have had a chance of winning. It was hard to tell that Kurgat was going to be so strong on race day that she would grind up the competition.
Besides Kurgat who won, Neale had the best strategy in the race for winning.
All the others went out too fast, and she beat them.
Lol, I'm done.
vivalarepublica wrote:
Indoor? wrote:
You mean like the race Schweizer ran last year? Yeah she finished higher but she didn't go for it from the start and thus didn't have a chance to win.
You don't know what you're talking about. Last year, she went out as hard as anyone else. She was in or very near the lead pack and beat them in the home stretch. It was the exact same thing that she tried to do this year. It was not this miraculous come from 20 seconds behind stalking over the last 2k. The difference was Rohrer and Finn went hard just a tad too early and Schweizer had more in the final 400m. At least that is what the splits and the actual race video show.
http://www.ncaa.com/2016-cross-country-championshiphttp://www.flotrack.org/video/1014643-full-replay-2016-womens-di-ncaa-xc-championships-6k-race-karissa-schweizer-pulls-off-the-stunning-upset#.WhS1t3aYFhE
You don't know what you're talking about. They went out harder this year and that "fact" was echoed by those who didn't do so well. Yes, they actually went out harder and held it longer than last year, believe it or not, and many paid the price.
Gordan Wack wrote:
Allie O. only reads the WSJ.
I like it. Catchy. Should be a LR meme.
Just listened to a podcast by Schweizer's coach. He credited her improvement and lack of injury to her slow buildup and multiple breaks in training. She was running 40mpw out of high school and they took her to 50 and then 60 and now 65. She takes a bit of time off after XC and also after indoor.
Former Iowa Great wrote:
Just listened to a podcast by Schweizer's coach. He credited her improvement and lack of injury to her slow buildup and multiple breaks in training. She was running 40mpw out of high school and they took her to 50 and then 60 and now 65. She takes a bit of time off after XC and also after indoor.
link?