Jgt11 wrote:
Having two days between the semis and finals instead of one definitely gave an advantage to the speedier guys in the field who medaled. Murphy's endurance plays a better role if everyone only had a day of recovery
Wow, people are really stretching here..
Joaquim Carvalho Cruz wrote:
T&F utility man (200-3000)m wrote:
Murphy doesn't have a F.A.T. 400m on record, or at least not in awhile. Since 2016 Olympics, one or more Achilles injuries for Clayton Murphy. Middle and long distance runners with damaged Achilles can come back and appear to be back to 100%. Most sprinters with damaged Achilles never return to 100%. I doubt Clayton Murphy when he awoke yesterday morning was capable of any faster than 47.75 F.A.T. 400m. With good endurance and stamina for an 800m man, as long as leaders go out sub-51.5 first 400m, Murphy has the potential to appear fast over the final 300m. In sub-51.5 400m split 800m races, Murphy is basically maintaining while some others are falling apart. As some other posters are stating, Murphy could have taken the lead with 450m to go.
Surprisingly he split 45 in the 4x4 at akron before.
Also split 45 at east regionals before.
There's a reason he wears sprinting spikes, sadly he hasn't realized he's better at the mile
You should know: unless relay leg is 1st leg, it does not count. I stated F.A,T. 400m and you brought up a relay leg. No matter, post Achilles injuries, Murphy is not a 45.xx 400m man under any conditions. Four-hundred-fifty metres to go most likely would have been too late. Most likely he needed to have taken the lead with 550m to go. We know though, Murphy does not like taking lead early in 800m races. Looking back, Murphy's European mini-racing season between trials and Olympics did not help. I was on here defending him at the time. Maybe Murphy will try another event, 1500m.
CuriousPerson wrote:
I used to be a couple seconds slower than these guys at 800, and I feel like a lot of posters here don't really understand elite 800's.
A few things:
1: There is no worse thing that getting into a shoving match with a bunch of chopped strides in a pack. It takes *soooo* much out of you. You're f@#$@ed. Murphy lost this race in the first 300.
2. Because of (1), there are two positions that give you a good chance: in the front (either leading, directly behind the person who is leading on the rail, or on the leader's shoulder), or in DFL. Being in the middle of the pack is going to force you to weave, to push and shove, to stutter step. You're F$#@#$ed.
You can win from the back. (Assuming lane one opens up and you can pass almost everyone there in the final 500, but it does more than you'd think. You get precisely one move in lane 2 in the last 600 of an 800, and zero in lane 3.). You can win from the front. Otherwise, if you are not on the rail but are in the middle of the pack, you'd better hope you're just way better than everyone else.
Also, I *hated* people who went out like a gun to get to 200 in the lead and then threw on the brakes immediately to run the next 200 in 30. Especially when those people were sub 46 400 guys who you were frankly just not beating to the pole. (Yes, this happened to me more than once). It's a terrible strategy if there is anyone in the race willing and in position to immediately pass you and take it out through 400 hard, but if there's not, it just completely @#$#s up anyone in positions 4-7 (including frequently causing falls). And you have less control of exactly what position you end up in off the first curve than you'd think if you start out in the outer lanes.
Do you ever get frustrated reading posts here from those that seem to have little clue as to what goes on in racing a non-rabbited race where all are of near equal ability?
Many think it is like high school and whoever they choose is capable of just running away and the pack of Olympians who are not capable of following then kicking off of it. They don't realize how much energy bumping, speeding & slowing, and using moves early takes when it is time to show your cards. Many also don't seem to realize what a small margin it can be from the winner to 8th and if the race was rerun with similar strategies, results could look very different.
I was not anywhere close to this class of athletes but was occasionally high enough on the fringe nationally to understand your post. I also understand that leading in a fast paced 800 against others of equal ability pretty much assures an unwanted outcome.
It is refreshing to hear from someone who understands championship racing at a high level. Thanks for posting.
''Do you ever get frustrated reading posts here''
I get frustrated just reading the thread titles here!
CuriousPerson wrote:
I used to be a couple seconds slower than these guys at 800, and I feel like a lot of posters here don't really understand elite 800's.
A few things:
1: There is no worse thing that getting into a shoving match with a bunch of chopped strides in a pack. It takes *soooo* much out of you. You're f@#$@ed. Murphy lost this race in the first 300.
2. Because of (1), there are two positions that give you a good chance: in the front (either leading, directly behind the person who is leading on the rail, or on the leader's shoulder), or in DFL. Being in the middle of the pack is going to force you to weave, to push and shove, to stutter step. You're F$#@#$ed.
You can win from the back. (Assuming lane one opens up and you can pass almost everyone there in the final 500, but it does more than you'd think. You get precisely one move in lane 2 in the last 600 of an 800, and zero in lane 3.). You can win from the front. Otherwise, if you are not on the rail but are in the middle of the pack, you'd better hope you're just way better than everyone else.
Also, I *hated* people who went out like a gun to get to 200 in the lead and then threw on the brakes immediately to run the next 200 in 30. Especially when those people were sub 46 400 guys who you were frankly just not beating to the pole. (Yes, this happened to me more than once). It's a terrible strategy if there is anyone in the race willing and in position to immediately pass you and take it out through 400 hard, but if there's not, it just completely @#$#s up anyone in positions 4-7 (including frequently causing falls). And you have less control of exactly what position you end up in off the first curve than you'd think if you start out in the outer lanes.
1. You "used to be a couple seconds slower than these guys"? Tell us: Did you run 1:44 or 1:45. Otherwise you are full of sh!t.
2. People win from the pack all the time, and not by a bunch of "hoping". Dobek started in 7th (only ahead of Murphy) and worked up to running in 4th at the bell. It doesn't get any more "in the pack" than that and he ran a PB.
MDBee wrote:
I get frustrated just reading the thread titles here!
Sorry for the blatantly rhetorical question. I could read the frustration in the guy's informative post.
Also, condolences for my addition to your message board induced migraine.
treen wrote:
As I watched Murphy go through the rounds i thought he didn't quite look like he wasin medal form. But he is generally a good tactician and I thought he'd give himself a shot.
But then he misjudged what was happening around him on the break and let that wall form in front of him. I give him credit for using his hands to keep from being held up too badly, but it was always going to be a heavy lift at that point.
Essentially, he was left with two bad options: (a) go out to lane 3 and make a big costly move to get into a better place, or (b) drop back to get to the rail and hope the race would come back to him. He chose B, but as many have pointed out, last place off a slow pace is a bad place to be.
While I don't think he has his best stuff right now, I think he could have snuck into bronze if he had that first 150 to do over. even drawing lane 7 or 8 could have made a huge difference, because it's easier to get into an advantageous position from there.
So yeah, he kind blew it, but I'm not going to slay the guy. Hopefully he's in peak form again next summer and he gets a better result.
Thought his rounds looked excellent. Just didn’t have it in the final.
Perfect race for Nick Symmonds! He wished he'd gotten into something like this when he ran Olympics.
T&F utility man (200-3000)m 2 wrote:
Joaquim Carvalho Cruz wrote:
Surprisingly he split 45 in the 4x4 at akron before.
Also split 45 at east regionals before.
There's a reason he wears sprinting spikes, sadly he hasn't realized he's better at the mile
You should know: unless relay leg is 1st leg, it does not count. I stated F.A,T. 400m and you brought up a relay leg. No matter, post Achilles injuries, Murphy is not a 45.xx 400m man under any conditions. Four-hundred-fifty metres to go most likely would have been too late. Most likely he needed to have taken the lead with 550m to go. We know though, Murphy does not like taking lead early in 800m races. Looking back, Murphy's European mini-racing season between trials and Olympics did not help. I was on here defending him at the time. Maybe Murphy will try another event, 1500m.
that’s why I said SPLIT. Not RUN. Y’all old track fans are weird.