Symmonds lost this race the only way he could...

113 wrote:

A Duck wrote:

Dude, please stop your juvenile delusions.

You think he didn't know he needed a PB to win with Aman in the race?

He then went and did exactly what he said was suicidal for him, he went out in 24ish and then paid for it in the last 30meters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR0SVCbS_bI

He didn't need to PB to win the race. He needed to run 1:43.30. His best time is 1:42.95. Instead, he ran his second fastest time ever-- 1:43.55. Somehow that doesn't seem suicidal to me.

By the way, the one time Symmonds did break 1:43 he went out in 24.8/50.4. His splits today were 24.2/50.0. I wouldn't call that suicidal.

Again, the race plan he revealed he and coach Rowland had was for him to run a PB, 1:42flat and a new American record to get the win.

That's what they believed he needed to do to win. Even faster than I thought, but still under 1:43.

--Symmonds own words have been that going out in 24/48 or 49 is "suicidal" for him.

A Duck wrote:

I mostly agree with you, but you can make a case that he lost the gold to win the silver. Irony.

--There are perfect races. Ask Rudisha.

And the perfect race is any one you win. Ask Aman, who hugged the rail alot, didn't worry about being boxed, came free, and won.

Here's another thought, if Brandon runs a tad faster in the semi's, Aman is not in the finals, and Symmonds is gold.

Little things.

Hilarious to see your change in behavour when called out on it. Its like RCP!

A Duck wrote:

Listen to Symmonds tell you the same story in detail.

It's a simple story, he went out too fast, it hit his legs in the last 50 meters. I posted that opinion here, an a few hours later Flotrack posts their interview with him where he says the same thing in granular detail:

he shares that the race plan was to run a less hot pace the first 400, and run a new American record to win the gold -- but that he went with the hot pace and didn't follow the plan -- which resulted in silver (which he's happily accepted).

My issue is not your opinion, which may or may not be accurate, but your insistence that it is right and your selective reading of Symmond's post-race comments to make it seems as if he completely agrees with your assessment. That simply isn't the case. He says he has no idea what would have happened if he'd been buried in 5th with 100m to go (as he probably would have been off a slower pace), he says this race his focus was on having a clear shot to the line with 100m to go, he said he ran for gold not silver, etc.. Right after he talked about a less hot pace and the American record (a comment which you are focusing on) he goes into the quote posted above where he's talking about why that changed and why he thought it was important to focus on position versus time (which you seem to ignore).

I think what you're missing, and applying faulty logic to, is the statement "the hot pace kind of gripped my legs with 20 to go, and I couldn't quite get to that line." That comment isn't an indication/admission he lost the race because of that strategy. It's not proof there was a better strategy that would have lead to a victory. It's a statement of what happened the last 20m. Souliman didn't tie up the last 20m, but he also didn't get the silver. You're taking a narrow listen to his interview. The main theme of what he says, is he went for gold and came up short, but he's happy knowing he took a shot.

I normally agree with your posts, but your narrow listening to Symmond's post race comments, and insistence that he admits his strategy cost him the gold, doesn't make sense to me.

webby wrote:

A Duck wrote:

Symmonds lost this race the only way he could.

Not to nitpick, but there were an infinite number of ways that Nick Symmonds could have lost, and quite possibly zero ways for him to win. So you just established a new low for accuracy the only way you could.

Well "webby," any time you use the word "but" in a sentence it serves as a minus symbol does in mathematics.

So you are nitpicking in idiocy.

Let us know when you want to step into the real world.

This is ridiculous, they're different runners with different abilities. Aman has handled those paces fine before, Symmonds has not.

Which is why Aman won. Duh.

[

I mostly agree with you, but you can make a case that he lost the gold to win the silver. Irony.

--There are perfect races. Ask Rudisha.

And the perfect race is any one you win. Ask Aman, who hugged the rail alot, didn't worry about being boxed, came free, and won.

Here's another thought, if Brandon runs a tad faster in the semi's, Aman is not in the finals, and Symmonds is gold.

Little things.

I almost put an asterisk for Rudisha's race but then you have people saying "well he would have run faster if he had been paced to 600". My point is that no race meets all the standards of "ideal". And I don't think we should say well "if this then this". Brandon didn't make the final but Aman did. What happened happened

I've not been a Symmonds fan historically, but hats off to him today. Great race, smart tactics. He just got beat, but I never thought he'd do as well as silver in a major championship. Great day for him, great day for US track.

I do feel bad for Solomon, but he made the race, and he's going to be a contender for years to come.

smell the coffee, wrote:

Your original post "Symmonds lost this race the only way he could" is way off the mark. There are dozens of ways to lose the race - from going out too slow, to getting dq'd, to running too wide around 4 curves, to getting boxed in, to getting tripped from behind (a la Ulceny, or Ryun or Viren) etc.

I'm sure there are others you could add.

Symmonds grabbed the bull by the horns and determined that if anyone was to beat him, he'd have to do it by over taking him in the home straight. That took courage.

He did not win the race, but he won a medal and he won a world of admiration for the gutsy effort he made in the heat of world championship competition.

He lost THAT race in the only way he could. Not some other mythical race in your mind. THAT race. That race was the race that happened today/last night and of which was being written.

I just wish he had executed the original race plan, 50/52.

I'm sure he does too, listen, it is possible for two things to be true at the same time, he understands that he paid for the hot pace when it hit his legs in the last hundred, and he is thrilled to get silver.

Dude, you're just wrong here and making yourself look bad.

Criticizing and joking about Symmonds lame ideas, is completely different than the relentless personal attacks on Rupp before every single one of Rupp's races.

Are you really so stupid as to not know the difference?

Agreed.

A duck has officially lost his credibility if he ever had it and the in-fighting amongst the various nike groups is officially at an all-time low. Isn't the guy a friend of Salazar. Can u ever imagine him saying anything about Rupp.

I love how he says Symmonds blew the race. The guy who won was a guy who was out ahead of Symmonds at 200. It wasn't too quick for him.

It's hard to win a race as you often have to run to win. I guess Symmonds could have gone out in sixht and tried to gun everyone down

If we look the actual distance Symmonds and Aman ran (Aman ran tighter curves), Nick hit 400m before Aman.

He ran a good aggressive race and lost to a slightly better runner. In hindsight, he should have stayed back longer and avoided running in lane 2 for so long. He definitely made it tougher on himself. However, you can't guarantee that he could have sorted through the traffic if he did stay back for another 200 or so. I think you congratulate the dude for a fantastic silver.

Barakus Obama destroys A Duck.

A Duck wrote:

Well "webby," any time you use the word "but" in a sentence it serves as a minus symbol does in mathematics.

I couldn't let this one slide. This is some of the dumbest shit I've ever read on this board, and that's saying something. You apparently aren't very well versed in either English or math.

A Duck wrote:

He lost THAT race in the only way he could. Not some other mythical race in your mind. THAT race. That race was the race that happened today/last night and of which was being written.

What the fvck are you talking about? There is some crazy pretzel logic going on in this thread.

A Duck wrote:

This is ridiculous, they're different runners with different abilities. Aman has handled those paces fine before, Symmonds has not.

Which is why Aman won. Duh.

This is the first thing you've written today/tonight that makes any sense. Aman is faster than Symmonds, and therefore he won a race in which both of them were fit, sharp, and tactically sound. It's not complicated.

Grow a pair? Are you 14 years old? C'mon little fella -- try to have an adult conversation here.

Good post. "Aman is faster than Symmonds, and therefore he won a race in which both of them were fit, sharp, and tactically sound. It's not complicated."

=============

I think Symmonds understands this quite well. I was amused by one post on this thread--the one from coach d. He says that he called it that Solomon would blow up in the final. What a joke! Coach d, a guy who likes to re-write history, has been a big Solomon fanboy throughout, predicting Solomon over Symmonds, and probably the gold medalist. Anyone with real track and field IQ knew that he was going to run consistent with all of Johnny Gray's students. They run great time trials, but come into big championship races, with too much already expended.

So the 4th ranked (fit) athlete in the world comes second in the WC and you complain?