dumbassMF wrote:
crwnikeboy wrote:
Cole Hocker to run 3:27 later this year? That’s the best laugh I’ll get all day. 3:28 has only been broken by 5 men, 17 times, in history. A 3:31 runner doesn’t even enter the conversation of running 3:27 a year later.
Hicham EL GUERROUJ dropped nearly 3 seconds from 1997 to 1998 to set the WR.
Assuming that Hocker is equally talented it might be possible.
Yeah, maybe he'll find the same "training manual" as El G, too
ya. unfair to Mu. SHe is among the fastest CLEAN (basically?) WOMEN ever.
though she still appears to have potential to take down the drug cheats and DSDs over the next couple years.
C'mon Wheating was talent, but Hocker is an Olympic finalist and 6th placer. He has an instinct for the win to go with his superior kick.
I was a doubter last year, wondering on these boards if he could even make the team after a long college season. Now I'm a believer, hey I'm one of the guys that Cole was talking to with his "shush" at the line in the Olympic trials. I'm in your corner now Cole. Rock on.
Making an Olympic final is great.
high school xc coach wrote:
ya. unfair to Mu. SHe is among the fastest CLEAN (basically?) WOMEN ever.
though she still appears to have potential to take down the drug cheats and DSDs over the next couple years.
+1
We all watched the races last year. Hocker was a breakout talent, shocking most fans and experts given where he started in 2021 to where he finished, but his breakout year pales in comparison to Mu’s. Yes, there are other runners who had even better years, like JI or Hassan, but these are long time pros building on years of prior success. What they accomplished was thrilling, but expected and so not shocking like Hocker and Mu. Hocker appears to be a great talent, he may become one of the best or best American 1500 runners of all-time. Mu is ALREADY the greatest American 800 meter woman runner of all time and next up for her is running to be the greatest 800 m women runner of all time regardless of testosterone levels. She’s at least a full step ahead of Cole on the journey to becoming a legend.
the macdaddy og yoo wrote:
OozmaKappa wrote:
Even Mu is not great. Mu is great for her age, but she's not great overall just yet.
If you take a look at 2021 top 5 lists for every event, the womens 800 is one of the weakest events currently. That detracts from the novelty of seeing teenagers dominate the event and win gold medals. The field is just much weaker than that of any other event to the point where a couple of teenaged phenoms can win medals.
To put it in perspective, an athlete of Mu's current caliber would not have medaled in the women's 10000m or 100m, and would have gotten bronze in many other events. But in the 800m, this year, she was all it took for a gold medal.
What a terrible take.
Every bit as whacky, distorted, and irrelevant as all his other takes.
I do not think this is a fair view. Since rule changes the women's races are cast in a different fashion meaning times will be slower overall. Less drug abuse overall (and Eastern Europe) will also reflect this as well. Mu is not (in my opinion) an all time great, but she has achieved a lot as a runner in her young life and certainly carries herself very well as a teen. And she is great mover.
High hopes wrote:
OozmaKappa wrote:
1:55 is one of the weakest leading marks of 2021. It's about as weak as the 100mH, which doesnt get talked about much. It doesn't matter if she could have run faster, she didn't. Youre thinking completely backwards. There's no reason to assume someone could just go faster when they didnt. That's not "faulting her because of her competition," that's refusing to give her special treatment over the athletes that did deliver outsanding marks in 2021.
1:55 is not great, even if it wins medals, for the reasons I already explained. She certainly seems to have the potential to run a 1:53, but until she does Im holding off on calling her great and putting her in the same category as the Gideys, Hassans, and Thomson-Herahs of our sport.
Assuming this isn't just a troll, it's like you have no idea of the history of the event. The only people who have run faster than Mu are DSD athletes, known drug cheats, and Pamela Jelimo. That 1:53 record is as ridiculous as Flo-Jo's 10:49. Mu is an awesome talent and had to beat another 1:55 athlete to win gold. She's not a legend yet but she looks likely to be the most dominant athlete in any track event for the next 3-5 years
And yet Mu's 800m PR, the leading time for 2021, is only worth 1253 points on the scoring tables. If the rest of the all time top 10 is illegitimate, then that just proves my point further because it demonstrates that, not only is the womens 800m weak right now, it's also weak hisorically.
The leading marks for the 2021 season on the womens side for nearly all the running events are rated above 1270 points, and these events' top 3s are mostly around there as well. The exceptions are the 100mh, 3000mSC, 5000m, and 800m. But you can cross out the 5000m from that list since we know for a fact Hassan is much better than a 1250 based on her recent 10000m pr.
So the most competitive womens running events are: 10000m, 100m, 400mH, 200m, 1500m 400m, 5000m
The least competitive are:
800m, 100mH, and steeple
What Mu can do in the future is irrelevant to this discussion. I'm just telling it like it is. She won gold against a weak field in a historically weak event. Out of the 10 running events, 7 are more competitive than the 800m. A runner of Mu's caliber wouldnt have won Gold in 7 out of the 10 running events, and wouldnt have even medaled in 5 of the 10.
True but she is still great.
webber wrote:
True but she is still great.
At least you acknowledge what I'm saying is true even if you disagree with my conclusion.
Will somebody define great. For example, it is difficult for a European to see American footballers as great because American football isn't a true - or anything like it -international sport. Now "soccer greats"...that makes sense because that is a true international sport.
I agree with your conclusion.
OozmaKappa wrote:
webber wrote:
True but she is still great.
At least you acknowledge what I'm saying is true even if you disagree with my conclusion.
Are you a data scientist or mathematician? Care to explain to us the scoring table methodology? I’d be cautious about determining greatness one way or another based on a 20 point difference is scores. You may be well versed in the methodology, but I’m pretty sure the women’s 800 m dataset differs considerably from the 100 m or marathon and I’d be skeptical of assessing a performance one way or another based on a fairly narrow point spread. Do you really think the men’s 100m world record deserves 40 more points than the marathon wr?
OP needs to understand what HYPE is. Hype is a belief that an athlete has a bright future despite a shortage or total lack of evidence to suggest it. Cole Hocker has already gotten 6th at the Olympics and he can’t even drink legally. He has run fast times and done well at the highest level of competition. Those are pure results, not hype.
This is one of the most objective sports out there and it’s pretty easy to tell who is for real and who’s not. If you think Cole will never improve upon these performances than that’s a fair take and maybe you will be right. I doubt that. But even if Cole never ran a step again he has objectively had a better running career than almost everyone ever.
there have been threads here about how relatively weak women are in the 800. it is an interesting discussion.
with Mu's speed and strength, she would seem to have the ability for a 1:52 or 1:53. no problem.
Ok, so that raises the question of "is the point spread significant and is it the result of a bias in the scoring tables?" I don't want to get into road racing bc that leads to a whole other discussion. Let's stick to the 100m and 800m.
In the womens 100m, ETH's 10.54 corresponds to a score of 1302. Exceptional, all-time level performance.
A score of 1253 corresponds to a 10.77. Fast enough to medal at championships and, until very recently, fast enough to contend for Gold. But by todays standards, a touch slow for a Word Leading time.
For reference, here's a list of the World Leading times last season and their respective scores:
10,000m | 29:01 | 1303
100m | 10.54 | 1302
200m | 21.53 | 1288
400mH | 51.46 | 1286
1500m | 3:51 | 1278
400m | 48.36 | 1272
*5000m | 14:13 | 1255 (Gidey and Hassan couldve run faster)
800m | 1:55.0 | 1253
Mu's WL of 1:55 is rated at 1253. You tell me, is that underrated? A score of 1280 would be equivalent to a 1:53.6. A score of 1290 would require a 1:53.06. That's a significant difference, right? It's not exactly a small gap between these times and Mu's time.
There's no doubt that new technology has made many events faster in the last couple years. But the 800m has seemingly been left behind by the other events and has yet to "catch up." It could be that Mu just needs one more year to bring the women's 800m to the level of the other events. Or it could be that the scoring tables simply underrate 800m performances. Idk, but for now, theres a noticeable gap thats unaccounted for and I'm attempting to account for it with some sort of explanation.
Exactly sore loser… Cole Hocker will break American records in the 1500, Mile and maybe 5000m.
Much talented than any other American athlete at this age by far, even than Rupp which till now the Best American born Long Distance Athlete.
Why not another Seneca Lassiter, instead?
i don't have enough of an understanding of how the tables are created. if the scores are strongly based on times that have been run by DSDs and major drug cheats, they would be skewed low. maybe 10 or 20 points.
if Mu is not capable of 1:53, minus anything going terribly wrong, you have to wonder what women's limits are in the event.
I hope not Wheating ran 3:30.94 A few weeks after he ran NCAA's and never ran under 3:34.00 again, He was a One Hit Wonder, I hope Cole Hocker is more like Steve Scott, Lots of years of being one of the best.