They all ran hard semis 72 hours before the finals. The winner ran 14:46 which is about 25 to 30 seconds slower that she is capable. If the winning time was 14:20 and cranny ran 14:33 (same margin) would you think differently?
Horrible performance by all the Americans. Cranny wasn’t going to get a medal spot, Karisa couldn’t even finish this slowish paced race and Emily, just happy to be revenant was a dead finish last
You buddy, Infeld is no longer on BTC. This thread is about BTC. Also, she had covid between Nationals and Worlds. Give her a break. She's America's sweetheart!
I do think there's room for some questioning of BTC's meet selection. Specifically, that the nature of championship/world class racing typically differs from medium/small meets (see the post about Cranny struggling with fluctuating pace). Additionally, it can't be a bad thing to get familiarity with your opponents by racing them several times....
Tsegay raced 5 gold-level pro races, World Indoors and a Euro silver-level race. Cranny's schedule is literally that of a collegian (and mostly against collegians). With this difference in preparation, it's not hard to see how a gulf can form between not necessarily two regions of the world, but two mindsets.
I'd add that the benefits extend beyond getting more comfortable running tactical races, or that developing the right mindset. Perhaps as importantly, by racing against your opponents, you learn about your relative fitness for these sorts of races. Knowing that, you can adjust your training to address the specific weaknesses you discover as you race.
As I mentioned earlier, if you read the BroJo's story about Wightman, it's clear he used this sort of adaptive training. He started after Tokyo by asked why he did so poorly in Tokyo. He then figured out how to train so he would perform better this summer. He continuted to adjust his training this spring as he learned more about his fitness from race results.
As I said before, this sort of individualized training does not seem to be the BTC way.
Are you dense? Do you not follow American distance running? As many have pointed out, for whatever reason, historically with the exception of the years, prior to the East African so called invasion, of American-European track and field, Americans have not done well globally. For you to say that it's because they didn't put there nose in it is asinine, and displays your ignorance of distance running. You act as though those women were cowards for "not trying harder." Neither of three had any chance of medaling, much less finishing in the top 7. You ever stop to think that maybe there are plausible reasons why they couldn't match the pace from the beginning? Of course you didn't. So I will help you "Coach." 1) Enfield - She has not been able to train at a level that belies her PB, since she had Covid. Maybe you don't understand that, but it's a reality. Second, as good as Enfield can be, she doesn't even measure up to Cranny and Schweitzer, much les the Gidey's, Tsegay's, etc. 2) Schweitzer - It's been reported that she wasn't 100% going into the final, and then she became injured with 2 laps to go. 3) Cranny - She's a strength runner, she does not have great closing speed, hence her 70 on the last lap. By these estimations, do you seriously think that either of them had a chance against the caliber of athletes that ran in the final? Are you a distance runner? Have you ever been a distance runner? Okay genius you tell the readers here how you would have prepared them to compete? You know so much, enlighten us. In fact tell us why natural born American distance runners, at the 5 and 10, have not had a presence within the last thirty years, outside of Galen Rupp, Todd Williams, Bob Kennedy, Pat Porter (always tough at World Cross Country), Shalane Flanagan, Molly Huddle, Kara Goucher, and if I'm missing anyone, please let me know. And mind you, these runners were highly competitive and put their nose in it, but still fell short for the most part. And the runners I mentioned, in my opinion are much better than the current crop of natural born American distance runners. Paul Chelimo, Bernard Lagat, do not count. Excuse me for going on, but posters like you, who do not understand the sport, are annoying and should shut up.
This is the bind the US women are in, especially the BTC women. They are trained to be time triallers. Everything they do is designed to accomplish good times in even-paced races with a solid last mile. And they get very good results in TTs.
They then go to championship races where Kenyans and Ethiopians bounce the pace around so much. The sad thing is, I listened to a Curious podcast with Elise Cranny and she even said that was the hardest part of racing in Tokyo - they struggled with the changing pace lap-to-lap. And what have they done about it?
They could maximise their performance by doing as you said and trading off 70-72 second laps. This is what they are set up to do, it's what their training is directed towards. But yes, they would still get beat. They also don't want to lead.
So, that's their predicament: lead the race at a good pace, perform well and lose, or tuck in at the back, get run ragged by a yo-yoing pace and lose in a mediocre time.
If they are trained to be TTers, then they need to race like that. Use the race pace and strategy that will result in the best time, and accept whatever place that yields.
If you are doomed to finish 9th either way, at least do it running a PR.
Someone running a personal TT in a WC or Olympic final and going for a PR is not something people do and I don’t know why you are singling out the BTC runners. In the Rio 1500m final, anyone in the he field could have easily run the first 800m in sub-2:00, but no one did. There’s also a bit of a humiliation factor in being passed at some point by multiple runners.
There is something to be said for all glorified time trialing they do. All have impressive PRs but when a race gets tactical they just don’t know what to do. As a fan it’s annoying, they never to get over to Europe a few times a year and learn how to lose.
Are you dense? Do you not follow American distance running? As many have pointed out, for whatever reason, historically with the exception of the years, prior to the East African so called invasion, of American-European track and field, Americans have not done well globally. For you to say that it's because they didn't put there nose in it is asinine, and displays your ignorance of distance running. You act as though those women were cowards for "not trying harder." Neither of three had any chance of medaling, much less finishing in the top 7. You ever stop to think that maybe there are plausible reasons why they couldn't match the pace from the beginning? Of course you didn't. So I will help you "Coach." 1) Enfield - She has not been able to train at a level that belies her PB, since she had Covid. Maybe you don't understand that, but it's a reality. Second, as good as Enfield can be, she doesn't even measure up to Cranny and Schweitzer, much les the Gidey's, Tsegay's, etc. 2) Schweitzer - It's been reported that she wasn't 100% going into the final, and then she became injured with 2 laps to go. 3) Cranny - She's a strength runner, she does not have great closing speed, hence her 70 on the last lap. By these estimations, do you seriously think that either of them had a chance against the caliber of athletes that ran in the final? Are you a distance runner? Have you ever been a distance runner? Okay genius you tell the readers here how you would have prepared them to compete? You know so much, enlighten us. In fact tell us why natural born American distance runners, at the 5 and 10, have not had a presence within the last thirty years, outside of Galen Rupp, Todd Williams, Bob Kennedy, Pat Porter (always tough at World Cross Country), Shalane Flanagan, Molly Huddle, Kara Goucher, and if I'm missing anyone, please let me know. And mind you, these runners were highly competitive and put their nose in it, but still fell short for the most part. And the runners I mentioned, in my opinion are much better than the current crop of natural born American distance runners. Paul Chelimo, Bernard Lagat, do not count. Excuse me for going on, but posters like you, who do not understand the sport, are annoying and should shut up.
Your assessment of Cranny is off. She has very good strength AND speed. Do you really think Gidey, Chebet, Kipkemboi are faster than Cranny at 1500? No, but they are stronger and were comfortable from 2K-4600 due to their superior preparation. They didn’t have to stop workouts for a month due to RED-S. This is where it is fair to criticize BTC. Cranny wasn’t in the shape she was in in March and it meant a 70-second penultimate lap dropped her. She is better than that. And it’s fair to also question if she needs more experience with Fartlek-y races, too.
Our distance runners are doing ridiculously bad so far, and it's almost all done, but BTC has a track record of multiple medals in the past, including one of the three being attacked here, Emily Infeld. Jager and Frerichs won multiple medals. The team won 3 medals at the 2017 World's. Jerry's athletes have won 6 world or Olympic championship medals. Schweizer got a calf injury, Infeld was out of shape after covid, and Cranny had some health issues only recently, so they underperformed. The only woman in the group with the potential to challenge for 5000m medals was Houlihan. She was the only one who had the change of gears with the fast pr to challenge for the podium. At the same time, it is embarrassing to see our runners sit behind at paces they should be able to lead or get in good position at. When the pace slows in the last mile, you get near the front without wasting energy and you're ready to stick your nose in it the last 600m. Grant Fisher in the 10000m squandered his chances, I believe, because he didn't push the pace the last mile and he knew he didn't have the same closing sprint speed as the leading contenders. That race was dawdling until 800m to go, and even the penultimate lap was only at 5000m WR pace before 800m pace on the last lap (53).
US distance runners are have this far been about as good as expected. Only Fisher in 10000 could be considered to have a decent chance of getting a medal. Anyone else medalling would have been a big surprise. Sometimes, when your opponents are superior, you just have to accept the facts:
Nothing like being upset with athletes that clearly did their best. Bro you want them to take it out and then fade? Both tried to stick with the pack and just straight get beat by better runners
If they are trained to be TTers, then they need to race like that. Use the race pace and strategy that will result in the best time, and accept whatever place that yields.
If you are doomed to finish 9th either way, at least do it running a PR.
Someone running a personal TT in a WC or Olympic final and going for a PR is not something people do and I don’t know why you are singling out the BTC runners. In the Rio 1500m final, anyone in the he field could have easily run the first 800m in sub-2:00, but no one did. There’s also a bit of a humiliation factor in being passed at some point by multiple runners.
Surely finishing way down the field at a time 2 seconds per lap slower than you are capable of because you jogged with the rest and still couldn’t handle the surge is far more humiliating than trying to run your personal best and finishing similarly far down the standings having at least given it a dig.
When the US Championships were taking place I made the point that there is a difference between doping and Doping, a difference between taking steroids to train/recover in the context of an at least functional anti-doping system and engaging in a full-fledged EPO program, starting on the program young so as to bypass the biological passport, flying to Spain to get the program administered by experienced doping doctors, and having your nation's sports federation in the tank for you and giving athletes the green light. There is no chance to compete against the latter, and the Houlihan bust sealed it. In cycling virtually every rider doped, but some were specially prepared to compete for the GC. And after the Armstrong bust US cycling never recovered while the rest of the rolling pharmacy just rolled on by.
Someone running a personal TT in a WC or Olympic final and going for a PR is not something people do and I don’t know why you are singling out the BTC runners. In the Rio 1500m final, anyone in the he field could have easily run the first 800m in sub-2:00, but no one did. There’s also a bit of a humiliation factor in being passed at some point by multiple runners.
Surely finishing way down the field at a time 2 seconds per lap slower than you are capable of because you jogged with the rest and still couldn’t handle the surge is far more humiliating than trying to run your personal best and finishing similarly far down the standings having at least given it a dig.
It’s rare for even the best runner to shoot for a PR so obviously the people that actually run these races don’t have the same take as you.
So they didn't go down without a fight? Cranny tried to stay engaged with the pack as long as she could. You say she closed too slow but also went out too slow? Doesn't make a lot of sense. They are just outmatched. Not for lack of effort.
Lol as you don't know more than me:):):) I've run 29:02 and I'd call you extremely stupid with anything related to running at the elite level let alone the hobby jogging that you do 🤣
29:02 isn’t elite even at the collegiate level, let alone pro level . Go to bed, you have no more experience running in elite races as the rest of us.
99% sure I know who the 29:02 guy is. Also 100% sure he knows more than you, a lot more than you. You and the OP probably have never dipped below 40 minutes for 10k, you’re old and I can assure you both that number 1, no one cares if you hobbyjoggers watch them race or not and number 2, you’ll both be watching the next women’s 5000 on tv, guaranteed;). This site gives me some serious laughs!
A poster whose user name is hobbyjogger has no room to talk and should just stay on the sidelines.
This is a national issue, US should increase its Cross Country season for high schoolers and for college athletes too.
Its embarassing how a country that has everything going for it has such horrible performances over 3k and above.
It wouldn't matter, we would still be out-classed by the East African distance runners.
Look at Japan and the emphasis their culture places on HS running...how many of their guys are winning DL and WC meets? Sure, we may get a few extra kids to rise to the top, but unless you're one of the top 10 males/females, there's hardly any financial incentive to run post-collegiately. Why would we expect our top athletes to choose a sport with little to no money in it? We all know that 99% of the time the most athletic kids in HS are not signing up for XC...
Surely finishing way down the field at a time 2 seconds per lap slower than you are capable of because you jogged with the rest and still couldn’t handle the surge is far more humiliating than trying to run your personal best and finishing similarly far down the standings having at least given it a dig.
It’s rare for even the best runner to shoot for a PR so obviously the people that actually run these races don’t have the same take as you.
The best runners by virtue of being the best have a great chance of medalling so will obviously base their tactics around trying to win.
For those like the US and British girls the would need to see half a dozen people trip each other and injure themselves to have even a 5% shot at a medal so strong performance should be their goal and the best way to do that imo is to get in the mix and push hard.