Lol none of the non africans have the ability to make them work for it. I don't particulary like BTC, but come on. The best non african (by birth) in the 5000 was sitting far behind and surged in the end to an 8th. That was probably the best strategy that day for that caliber. I am happy for it, I have no idea why I should be more happy with front running and a 10th.
Since you're "done" with BTC, I didn't realize you were bankrolling the group. They've definitely squandered all the "support" you've given them over the years.
You should probaby stop supporting all the groups that don't have the athletes to beat the BTC runners in the first place. Keep trolling my friend.
Man, you're acting like the American women just totally sandbagged. It's not a loser mentality to acknowledge when the field and other countries are better than we are. Americans rarely get medals in these distance events. I'm sure they would love to see higher places and medals, too! No one wants to run an all out 5K and not place. They're matched up against better athletes, plain and simple. What would you have liked their race efforts to be? Take the lead and then get caught two laps later?
I have no idea why I should be more happy with front running and a 10th.
There are two schools of thought here on the merits of front running. One school thinks it's a matter of honor; the other thinks it's a matter of prudence.
The first school believes that front running is racing -- if you don't front run, you are not racing, you are hobby-jogging. For them, front-running is a matter of honor. If you don't front run, you are behaving badly, and bringing dishonor to yourself, your country and the sport itself.
The second school believes that front running is the key to winning races -- if you don't front run, you won't win. For them, the difference between winners and losers is simply a matter of guts or courage.
Both schools rely on magical thinking about success and failure on the track. Both believe that if Americans would just think the right way about racing, they could be winners.
Ultimately, the root of the problem is that people confuse cause and effect. They see winners front running, and conclude that front-running causes winning. They do not consider that winner front-run for the same reason they win -- they are better runners, who are more fit and more tactically astute.
I really don't understand the loser mentality that so people on here have.
Did any of the American women make the African women earn their medals?
It's ok to beat me but you're going to pay a price to do it.
LOL! You beat yourself up as you are clueless on that level of running. Your handle speaks volumes. Don't watch them again, no one cares especially them---but you know you will. Your jealously of the top female US distance runners is pathetic. You're trying to sound smart. Newsflash: you failed.
I called Tsegay to be the winner 800m into the race. When it went out slow, you knew it was going to play to the advantages of 1500m runners. With Hassan not in top form, it was a good call by the Ethiopians to intentionally slow it down, throw in a few hard surges, and allow Tsegay to utilize her 1500m speed to win it.
I was frustrated watching the Americans. Pre race they kept saying they wanted to be engaged in the race, but they ran the exact same way as Tokyo. Sitting on the back of the pack. When it was so slow, it would’ve been nice of them to move to the front and keep it honest. They both know they don’t have the same type of closing speed as the Africans, so why let it play out that way. If you are in the race, you have the opportunity to impact how it goes. If running a huge negative split 5k isn’t your strength, do something to change your chances. I’d rather have seen an American be aggressive and fade to 9th, than be passive and still fade to 9th.
Go away, you know zilch about running. How ignorant are you or do you just get off getting responses to your moronic threads?
I know more than you do that's for sure.
……. Garbage race.
“I know more than you for sure” - LOL.
Three of their athletes qualified for the final and I seem to recall that the aim is to win the final rather. Alternately they could run like non-thinking idiots Manbearpig15 as suggests, come 4th in the heat, then gone on to come last in the final.
Manbearpig15 my dear fellow, please take this the right way and remember that in the harsh light of day, your comments indicate that most people know more than you.
Your kind is what's wrong with sport, man. It's never focus on growth and what could be better or any acknowledgement of what is accomplished but always criticism and degradation of the athletes. Clearly no effort is good enough for you and that's a shame!
Speaking of the Ethiopians, after watching the race and all the talking Gidey was doing with Tsegay. You have to wonder whether the plan within the Ethiopian camp was to let Tsegay get this gold medal. Gidey holds four world records, three of them very contested and she has front run her way to all of them. If I were Gidey I would be spending time with Ayana discussing racing tactics and the psychology of front running track races. Surely she could put both the 5&10 away by blasting early and doing what she has done whilst in pursuit of her world records. Doesn’t make any sense that she stick with the pack and hope to come out on top in a final lap burn up….
Cranny just said in a Citius Mag interview that Jerry's been having them do 300s with brutal changeups in pace. But only in the last two weeks. So maybe they'll do more of that.
Kyle Merber was super tactful about asking whether there's something one could do about it—in terms of training for a race where the pace is all over the place. Elise said the 5000 felt super chaotic. The pack slows down and you're trying not to step on people but then it speeds up and you're kind of running blind.
If the broadcast constantly showed the pace, maybe we'd understand more why the Americans are so far from their time trialed PBs.
Emily Infeld is in that interview as well and hilarious.
Cranny just said in a Citius Mag interview that Jerry's been having them do 300s with brutal changeups in pace. But only in the last two weeks. So maybe they'll do more of that.
Kyle Merber was super tactful about asking whether there's something one could do about it—in terms of training for a race where the pace is all over the place. Elise said the 5000 felt super chaotic. The pack slows down and you're trying not to step on people but then it speeds up and you're kind of running blind.
If the broadcast constantly showed the pace, maybe we'd understand more why the Americans are so far from their time trialed PBs.
Emily Infeld is in that interview as well and hilarious.
If you have a great kick, slower is better. You win if the race goes slow. Zero reason to do ANY work.
If you're not fit enough, a slow race is also your best chance. It does add some variability. If a race went say, 15:20 on the track you'd have some male college athletes with an outside shot to medal in the men's 5000m final.
I think that case fits the US women. They aren't fit enough to hang with a fast pace, their best chance to medal is a slow, janky race with luck and positioning and being fortunate to have faster people boxed in.
Making it harder/faster just hands the race on a silver platter to the fitter runners.
Slow with fast surges is just as hard as an even-paced fast race. It will run the kick out of fast-finishers.
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.
Dude, I agree with you, but you lose credibility when you can't get her name right. It's Infeld. Put some respect on her name.
The American women are a bit “big” compared to the Africans, who are legit skin and bones. A truly world class athlete should not look like someone I would see at LA Fitness on a random Tuesday. For example, Fred Kerley looks like an absolute freak of nature - true super human - not so with our distance women.
yay another female body shaming post. That aside, your argument is without merit because what happens is when American women, who do not have the natural body type of the Africans who are naturally smaller and therefore healthy at a lower weight, try to overtrain and diet themselves down to a comparable weight, injuries and RED-S abound. We saw that with Elise (RED-S in college and then again this year so did not even contest the USA 10,000), Karissa (Haglund surgery this year, raced back to race 10,000. 5,000, 1500 and stepped off in this race with apparent injury), and Emily Infeld (more injuries than anyone should have to go through including hip surgery in 2018, this race was her first global final since that surgery).
Your entire post is built around the idea that there is a certain body type required for success at the elite level. But you start by saying that pointing that out is "body shaming". The best American at 5k would probably have been Jenny Simpson (won the national title out of boredom). Not exactly possessing your idea of a "body type". But then again she didn't compete in the 5k because she didn't see any medals coming her way internationally.