Why I don’t really care about the Mens 1500m Results despite the top 3 doing really well

justanothercuriousdude wrote:

Perch wrote:

And you're impressed that JI tried a strategy that has never worked? And you prefer a failed strategy over strategies that netted medals? Speaking of brain dead takes...

Cheruiyot executed the same front running in WC 2019 with great success.

I think Jakob is around 2 sec better than Cole, Josh and Yared in an all out 1500m with the same conditions for all. But racing and strategy and coincidence matters…

I think Jakob wins with almost all strategies, if they are executed well.

Jakob’s choice of strategy was exactly the same I would have judged as the best -the one with least risks and also a dominant and impressing one…

I think Jakob would have run 3.27 flat if he had done his first lap 1.5 sec slower (still front running all the way). -He would then beaten Cole with around 0.5 sec, and everybody would have praised him for his tactically ingenious race. But he missed out for the reasons he stressed in his post race interviews. No downer at all in my view -and I’m happy for the good pbs Cole, Josh and Yared were pulled to…

Hasharima wrote:

Focus on your own race wrote:

Jakob's 3:27.95 is more impressive than his 3:28.24, because it's faster. If he'd won the olympic final in 3:28.24 I would rank that 3:28 as a better performance, because of the context that it is a win in an olympic final, but that's got nothing to do with him leading, if he kicked the last 100 to run 3:28.24 and win that would be just as good as leading and running that time.

It seems I have finally gotten to the bottom of your disagreement with OP then, as well as our own disagreement. I'll do another breakdown now that I've been able to sleep on it. Thank you for an exciting and illuminating discussion!

You seem to care most about what I call the racing performance, which involves tactics and the better disposition of the athlete's fitness to get first to the finish line. At the same time you care about their time, as you consider a faster race more inpressive. You do not however, care about the athlete's aerobic performance (what I previously called the "pure physical performance" in lack of a better term).

OP argues that he cares most about the aerobic performance as a big Jakob fan, and he weighs this higher than the other athlete's running performances.

Now that I've been thinking about this I have changed my opinion, as I previously was inclined to agree with OP. I appreciate that Hocker put down a very impressive aerobic performance to be able to follow Jakob, and he obviously delivered the best and most impressive racing performance as the winner.

At the same time I am able to appreciate that Jakob's aerobic performance was likely more impressive than Hocker's, though his race was way less impressive as he lost his head getting too excited and failed to pace himself ideally. I sincerely doubt Hocker could front run a 28:24 even if he wanted to.

If we try to determine a "total" performance we have to consider which of these components that matters most. Seeing as the event is a race, the racing performance is definitely more important than the aerobic performance. And in this discussion we haven't even considered how stacked the rest of the field is and so on. The world doesn't care who did the highest VO2 max, but who won the race. Therefore I disagree with OP that Jakob's performance was more impressive. However I won't take from him that Jakob's aerobic performance was dope. Jakob's aerobic performance is in this sense independent from his racing result.

My disagreement with you is your argument that a time is "more impressive" than another time just because the time is faster. If you want to compare people's times as a measure of how impressive their aerobic performance was, it's not sensible to ignore headwind and the other factors. It is a faster time yes, and can be a more impressive race.

I think Jakob's 3:27:95 is a more impressive total performance seeing as he won, but likely a less impressive aerobic performance than a 3:28.24 from the front based on what we know about drafting advantage.

Further, I'll now argue that Jakob's 2021 total performance was more impressive than this year's because he got a gold. Do you think this year's race was a more impressive performance than 2021 gold only because his time was faster? It got higher on the all time list after all?

Let's pretend that Jakob ran the 2021 olympic final in 3:28:24 instead of 3:28:32, so equal to this year's. Then his total erformance would have still been more impressive, but obviously it required less aerobic fitness to draft to that time. Hence, this year's final demonstrated a superior aerobic performance to 2021, not only because it was faster, but also because it was achieved without drafting. To me, this context is important because it gives more insight into the details of the athlete's performance.

If you want to compare times, and only times, you ignore all aspects that go into the performances except the velocity of the athlete. In an of itself I think it's too imprecise to talk only about velocity.

Based on your above arguments, would you also say that a 9:57 100m dash with a 10 m/s tailwind is more impressive than Bolt's 9:58 (which obviously was within the wind assistance rules)? It's a faster time for the 100m dash after all.

Focus on your own race wrote:

Hasharima wrote:

It seems I have finally gotten to the bottom of your disagreement with OP then, as well as our own disagreement. I'll do another breakdown now that I've been able to sleep on it. Thank you for an exciting and illuminating discussion!

You seem to care most about what I call the racing performance, which involves tactics and the better disposition of the athlete's fitness to get first to the finish line. At the same time you care about their time, as you consider a faster race more inpressive. You do not however, care about the athlete's aerobic performance (what I previously called the "pure physical performance" in lack of a better term).

OP argues that he cares most about the aerobic performance as a big Jakob fan, and he weighs this higher than the other athlete's running performances.

Now that I've been thinking about this I have changed my opinion, as I previously was inclined to agree with OP. I appreciate that Hocker put down a very impressive aerobic performance to be able to follow Jakob, and he obviously delivered the best and most impressive racing performance as the winner.

At the same time I am able to appreciate that Jakob's aerobic performance was likely more impressive than Hocker's, though his race was way less impressive as he lost his head getting too excited and failed to pace himself ideally. I sincerely doubt Hocker could front run a 28:24 even if he wanted to.

If we try to determine a "total" performance we have to consider which of these components that matters most. Seeing as the event is a race, the racing performance is definitely more important than the aerobic performance. And in this discussion we haven't even considered how stacked the rest of the field is and so on. The world doesn't care who did the highest VO2 max, but who won the race. Therefore I disagree with OP that Jakob's performance was more impressive. However I won't take from him that Jakob's aerobic performance was dope. Jakob's aerobic performance is in this sense independent from his racing result.

My disagreement with you is your argument that a time is "more impressive" than another time just because the time is faster. If you want to compare people's times as a measure of how impressive their aerobic performance was, it's not sensible to ignore headwind and the other factors. It is a faster time yes, and can be a more impressive race.

I think Jakob's 3:27:95 is a more impressive total performance seeing as he won, but likely a less impressive aerobic performance than a 3:28.24 from the front based on what we know about drafting advantage.

Further, I'll now argue that Jakob's 2021 total performance was more impressive than this year's because he got a gold. Do you think this year's race was a more impressive performance than 2021 gold only because his time was faster? It got higher on the all time list after all?

Let's pretend that Jakob ran the 2021 olympic final in 3:28:24 instead of 3:28:32, so equal to this year's. Then his total erformance would have still been more impressive, but obviously it required less aerobic fitness to draft to that time. Hence, this year's final demonstrated a superior aerobic performance to 2021, not only because it was faster, but also because it was achieved without drafting. To me, this context is important because it gives more insight into the details of the athlete's performance.

If you want to compare times, and only times, you ignore all aspects that go into the performances except the velocity of the athlete. In an of itself I think it's too imprecise to talk only about velocity.

Based on your above arguments, would you also say that a 9:57 100m dash with a 10 m/s tailwind is more impressive than Bolt's 9:58 (which obviously was within the wind assistance rules)? It's a faster time for the 100m dash after all.

What I have bolded in your text is where you understand sort of how I think.

To me, there are 2 types of races: championship races (regional, state, national, world champs, olympics, and also in lots of cross country race), trying to win, or place as highly as possible, possibly for a team competition is the aim in these races, and times are not the goal. In these races, whatever tactics are legal should be used to try and win, or place as highly as possible, whether that's trying to make it a fast pace in a 1500 like Jakob did, or running a 5000 like Jakob does and like how Mo ran the 5000 and 10000, or sitting around like in the 2016 1500 and making it a sprint in the last lap. Tactics are a means to an end, and you would want to run every race that is not your last in a way that tires you out as little as possible, so you can run as fast as you can in the final. A fast time in a championship race is nice to get, but it is just a bonus.

The other types of races are races for time. This is your diamond league races with pacers and wavelights, or your all comers meet for amateurs. At these races I personally don't care about place (though obviously if you run a PB you will typically place higher up) and if I feel good, I will take the pace, for example I went to the lead with 2 laps to go in a 1500 earlier in the year and got passed by I think 3 in the last lap, though that didn't bother me because it was a PB at the time.

And I'm not particularly interested in people's splits in training sessions, or VO2 max, they are also just means to an end to run fast and win races, but no one wants to be the workout hero who can't back it up in the races.