The OFFICIAL Webb Tactics Critique Thread

What's wrong with the front page poll? If a runner does not do well, they should look at the reason why and make changes to improve.

For what it's worth, a comparison of Webb's USATF splits and WC splits (from track and field news email archive):

Last 100, 200, 300, 400, 800:

USATF: (12.9, 26.8, 40.8, 55.1, 1:53.0)

World: (13.5, 26.9, 40.4, 54.1, 1:51.2)

400m splits:

USATF: 58.7, 57.5 [1:56.2], 57.8 [2:54.0], 40.8 = 3:34.82

World: 58.6, 59.7 [1:58.3], 57.0 [2:55.3], 40.4 = 3:35.69

I don't think PEDs are part of Webb's story.

At first, I thought his tactics were solid -- I mean, he looked like he was in a great place to launch his kick, if he had had a kick.

But wait a second. Isn't putting yourself in a spot where you need a tool you are lacking actually very poor tactics? "His tactics were great, except he couldn't finish" means, simply, BAD TACTICS.

This is just a thought, but could Webb have held on longer and/or had a better kick if he ran higher mileage during the season? Since Lagat is a better 5k runner than Webb, I think his endurance was an advantage.

Webb just wasn't good enough this year.

The only thing he did wrong tactically was to lead at a moderate pace i.e. 58 first lap. if he wanted to cast some guys off he needed to throw down sub 57 opening lap. In saying that he was still in the right place with 150 to go he just was'nt strong enough.

Could be a peaking issue, but the entire top 5 could prob run 3.30 right now, so it's not as if he massively underperformed. 3.30 runners are not favourites for world titles. 3.27 runners are!

Alan said his training was pretty much the same as last year except he did a little more speed tuning this time around.

Of course after the race, everyone becomes a big know-all.

And that last statement includes me, as well.

Webb was handeling it great for a solid kicker, but even before the race (believe me?) I never thought that was the best tactics for him. I think that it was in his interest to have dictated a solid pace of 3:30 and he would have had a much better chance of a medal, still risking being passed by someone that sat on his shoulder. Just looking at the clock you know his chances of winning are low.

His best races this year were a great kick off a fast pace, which just isn't the same at a 5 second slower pace.

Does anyone buy my theory?

Hmm...could it be that his impressive added speed this year came at the expense of putting in the quantity? What are his mileage totals like, anyway?

Easy said wrote:

Webb was handeling it great for a solid kicker, but even before the race (believe me?) I never thought that was the best tactics for him. I think that it was in his interest to have dictated a solid pace of 3:30 and he would have had a much better chance of a medal, still risking being passed by someone that sat on his shoulder.

Does anyone buy my theory?

I honestly don't think he was winning with any tactics yesterday. If he had dictated 3:30, he probably would have finished higher, but at the very least I think Lagat and Ramzi would used him as a rabbit and destroyed him at the end.

And if that had happened, all of Letsrun would be bashing Webb for being so foolish as to lead the entire way.

How did Webb have the exact same race as the guy who won (Lagat)? Webb was leading for 800 meters while Lagat was tucked in behind him, conserving energy and leaving the hard work to Webb. Lagat didn't try to get to the front until he was coming out of the final turn. It is totally different to lead a race than to be tucked in behind the pacesetter. To win from the front, a runner must be clearly the best in the field, like the Kenyan woman who won the 800.

I mentioned this earlier and you are exactly right! Lagat ran the race webb should have.

a lot of that Webb was co-leading with Kiprop. And it wasn't that fast to begin with. I can't imagine being in front like that cost him all that much energy-wise.

What race did you watch? Kiprop was last until entering the home straight to complete the second lap. He then swung wide and passed the entire field to take the lead going into the THIRD lap. Webb was leading for the first 800 meters. And the fact that the pace was slow with Webb on the lead is exactly why it did him in. The slow pace played right into the hands of the runners with the best finishing acceleration (Lagat and Ramzi) who wanted the race to be slow and tactical. The only chance that Webb had if he was going to lead was to make the pace fast enough so that it wouldn't come down to an all out sprint to the finish. Webb's race lacked decisiveness; after deciding to lead, he didn't run fast enough to pressure the field into deciding to either follow and risk getting burned out, or let him go, giving him control of the race. He led, but the runners behind him actually dictated the race. They allowed him to lead because the pace was comfortable for them and put Webb at a the disadvantage of leading at a pace that wouldn't help him to win. He's just not trained for racing, only for running against the clock for fast times. And his post-race interview with Flotrack shows that he still doesn't understand what happened.

His tactics were fine. He was bumped a bit (like others mentioned) and has to learn to run through it. That's it. Nothing else.

Even if Webb was not bumped, he was not going to beat Lagat that day. And by the way, what tactics? Going to the lead in 58 in that field? The only reason for going to the lead at the beginning of a race is to force the pace and burn some of the kick out of the field. Webb's slow 800 was never going to accomplish that, so what was he doing?