MCGORTY AND YORKS 3:53!!!!

vdawg wrote:

video:

http://www.gohuskies.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?id=5091441

Thanks for posting the video, very nice running.

Distance Rumble wrote:

I really do not understand what York and McGorty were thinking. Why would you run a 3:53 (5 seconds faster than the next runner) when Nationals are less than two weeks away? This seems like typical University of Washington coaching, but that does not explain McGorty. Unless these guys opt out and run the 3K, they are likely to blow up at nationals--too much too soon, and as they say, run fast early, run slow late.

So wait, they ran fast too early, but they ran fast too close to Nationals? My poor lizard brain is confused!

And if they run fast at NCAAs, Ches will just sit on them and mow them down.

Also, they didn't give the obligatory "I've done no speed work" in interviews, so they are toast for sure.

Wait, these guys are not being coached by Johnny Gray are they? OK, then they didn't run a stupid "ego" race two weeks before nationals like Gray's runners always do. They are coached by someone else so putting in a stupid "ego" based race less than two weeks before nationals won't be a problem at all...they are going to be super sharp. Speaking of lizard brain, let's just wait and see. Some of you guys haven't seen this a dozen times before, have you?

jamin wrote:

That UW indoor track is like the Monaco track of the West Coast. Add about 5 seconds to one's mile time in there to get the equivalent mile time on an average outdoor track. I'll be working out there tomorrow and probably won't time my splits because they'll give me a false sense of where my fitness is at.

So when Solinsky ran 3:54 there he was only in 3:59 shape? Give me a f*cking break bro.

coach deez nuts wrote:

jamin wrote:

That UW indoor track is like the Monaco track of the West Coast. Add about 5 seconds to one's mile time in there to get the equivalent mile time on an average outdoor track. I'll be working out there tomorrow and probably won't time my splits because they'll give me a false sense of where my fitness is at.

So when Solinsky ran 3:54 there he was only in 3:59 shape? Give me a f*cking break bro.

The Flat Earth Society has declared that neither wind nor temperature can affect times run on outdoor tracks, therefore any PRs set indoors are due to the assistance of daemons, ghouls and evil humours.

Why are you talking about Fisher?

This thread is about York and McGorty.[/quote]

Because Fisher was just bored that weekend and decided to drive up to see the Husky. Didn't even bring running stuff. Then he borrowed some stuff and jumped in the 3000 and blew the #1 Isaic Yorks away. A Freshman, and all silence, not a peep.

This puts Fisher's fitness in perspective. He outkicked Yorks in the 3k a couple weeks ago with both of them closing in 4:04. I bet Fisher could run 3:53i now too[/quote]

Easy there. Yorks is more of a mid-d guy, and Fisher was better than him in xc. Fisher is certainly good for well under 4, but 3:53i is out of this world for a freshman--Fernandez blew everyone's minds with a 3:55 as a freshman. I think Fisher is probably in shape for 3:56-7.

Regardless, amazing performance by Yorks, and McGorty.[/quote]

Don't agree. Fisher likes the mile and can fly in the mile. You will see, that 3000 does exactly reflect his mile time. Just like everyone else.

Today, I hope a few of you neophytes finally learned a lesson. Cheserek cleaned York's clock, not because he is a faster miler than York, but because the Oregon coaches know when to peak and max-race their athletes. So, good for York, he ran a really fast race when it meant nothing. Problem is he did it two weeks ago, and didn't have the snap he needed when Cheserek went around him and ran away from him. We're talking about the difference betweenb a good athlete, with substandard coaching, going against another good athlete with coaches who know what they are doing.

Yorks did OK, considering he was forced to lead, but McGorty was a disappointment (I admit I didn't see the race, so if he got impeded or something, I understand).

That's been the point all along Yorks and McGorty flat out blew it by running their guts out in that race two weeks ago. When will these guys learn to save something for the championship races?

Factoring in that it was a relay, Yorks ran essentially within probably a second of the time he did two weeks ago, which was a big PR for him. Assuming that is about as fast as he can go right now, I don't know what people were expecting him to do yesterday. Yes, we would all like to keep dropping our PRs by a second or two everytime we race, but it rarely works that way.

The unfortunate thing for UW was giving up close to 2 seconds on the 800 leg when they have the Pac-12 outdoor 800 champion from two years ago who was injured all last year and still isn't running well enough to even make the relay team.

Inexperienced guys reaching a dramatic new level have a hard time sustaining and managing it. A single mile race two weeks ago should, if managed properly, actually enhance the peaking process. It is what you do in between the races that matters.

This is where an experienced coach is key. Look at the Oregon sprints: Cunliffe had a breakthrough two weeks ago (same meet as Yorks and McGorty) and yet she is at ANOTHER level this week. THAT is amazing coaching in action, and the reason the ducks are so dominant.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Yorks have a big race today. The pressure is off and the fitness is there.

Considering no one was even talking about Yorks until 2 weeks ago, I think the UW coaches and Yorks himself have been quite remarkable with how the indoor season went for them.

Two weeks ago had zero negative impact on Yorks' run last night. He was beat by arguably the greatest collegiate distance runner.... Ever. I did not see the race but everything I read says Yorks led basically the entire leg. So running within a second of what he did two weeks ago with zero help whatsoever is about an equivalent performance in my book.

Coaching should not be brought into this. Both athletes were ready to run last night and the bottom line is the better athlete won the race for his team. Yorks is an incredible talent, but, again, he was beaten by arguably the greatest distance talent in NCAA history. Nothing he or his coaches should hang their heads over.

It is reported that Cheserek ran his mile in approximately 3:55 (adjusted to the running start, handoff point, etc.). When Cheserek took the baton, he was in 5th place, a couple seconds behind Yorks. At the end of the race, he had Yorks beaten by a half second. The conversion time for Yorks is then about 3:58 for his mile. Yes, he paid the price for his insane mile on the oversized Washington track just two weeks before the championships. This is not a new phenomenon to anyone with a memory and any experience with milers. As they say, run fast early...run slow late, and if the shoe fits...

Really? The results I am looking at have Yorks running 3:54.24 for his split and Oregon getting the baton 0.7 seconds behind Washington at the final exchange.

http://www.rtspt.com/ncaa/d1indoor16/d1m_res.htm

'Run fast early, run slow late' doesn't really add up to me in this scenario. Yorks splits 3:54 (not much slower than 3:53) after leading the entire thing and going out in 55 for the first quarter. How would you explain Cheserek's 7:40 he ran back on February 20th or the 13:35 he ran on February 12th? That was really F'ing fast and earlier than Yorks mile......

It's comical that people think a hard mile would legitimately impact a performance two weeks later when they have had the opportunity to rest/taper. 10K-yes, 5K-maybe, 3K-not really, 1 mile-no.

Again Yorks and the rest of the field got beat because Cheserek is on a different level than every other collegiate distance runner, and what they did or did not run two weeks ago had anything to do with that.

Not to mention, Yorks' almost-3:54 was run on a larger track so you could probably make a case that his DMR split was superior. He can hold his head high.