Josh McDougal is the man - Sick 5k/10k double 22:57 apart

Think about it wrote:

The 1500 is stacked in the east region and if you're not top 5 you better have a fast time for an atlarge bid.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! OF COURSE it's to your advantage to have as fast as time as possible going into the regional meet since there are runners who get into NCAAs on time.

That's the only reason why he would run as fast as he did in the QUALIFYING round.

Not the only reason. The pace in the final is never sure to be fast and there might be traffic problems even if it is fast. You probably won't have the inside lane the whole way. On top of that, the weather was forecasted to be up to 16 mph winds for the final. Maybe it'll be nice weather and the final will be fast after all, but doing a fast time FRESH and without having to run in lane two because of a pack of guys trying to stay with you seems a little easier to do. Plus - what you might not have known - Wyner HAD A RABBIT in this prelim. Kimple, who has been sick lately and ran a couple of bad 1,500s, made the IC4A meet by virtue of his indoor mile time and wound up in Wyner's heat. He wasn't confident in running a good 1,500 anyway and wouldn't have run in the meet at all if he hadn't been in Wyner's heat, and the whole plan would have been scrapped. But with Kimple in the heat, it made perfect sense for Wyner to try to get a fast time FRESH in the first round with a RABBIT he knows when the WEATHER was supposed to be better and when there wouldn't be as much TRAFFIC. Starting to get it now, "Reality sets in"? Can you change "dummy" to "smart plan"?

Now if he runs crappy in the final or if the final turns out to be faster than 3:42, people will second guess the whole thing again. But the 3:42 might get him to the show. It actually looks like he'll be lucky to make it with that and he was shooting for 3:41 but just couldn't go any faster after Kimple dropped out. Going fast in the prelims was a gamble, but he had to try. And if he makes it, I think he'll be happy he did it this way, regardless of what happens in the IC4A final.

Besides, the guy just ran a 3:42. Even if it didn't score a point, it's not too shabby.

Josh has taken some top notch scalps during the regular season in the past. But Josh has always been more of a cc guy than track until this year. In cc it probably seems like he should win the NCAAs since Liberty faces such shitty schools so often for competition. So Josh blows everyone away and expectations get huge, but really it's just his crappy school doesn't often go to the top meets.

Oh, man, you crack me up. Completely impervious.

The funny thing is I actually agree with you to a point. The paces he was running were workout paces. However, I think it's too hard of a "workout" this close to the big dance. Especially if part of it was in spikes. I know that stuff beats my achilles/forefoot up, but of course I'm not as fast/tough as you. Were. ;)

Just curious, many of us know your running resume, but who have you ever coached?

harry nile wrote:

malmo wrote:

Until this spring, McDougal was a 13:52/29:21 runner, hardly someone who should have won an NCAA title.

Billy McChesney never won an NCAA title and he was a 3:57/13:14 runner.

Rudy Chapa was a 3:57/13:15 would have never won an NCAA title if Henry Rono showed up to the starting line in 1978.

Geoff Smith ran 13:22 and never won an NCAA title.

Wrong! McDougal ran a 28:49 10,000 in 2006. He also ran a very speedy 7:53 3000 in 2006.

How quickly you forget Malmo. You claimed McDougal only ran 29:21 in 2006, when in fact he ran 28:49 on 2006. That makes you wrong.

Malmo was half a minute off. That's pretty bad actually

Beaver 3 wrote:

What are you stupid? You were totally wrong about Josh's 06 10,000 pr. You were damn near 50 seconds off.

Oh MY, Draw and quarter me for something that was irrelevant to the topic. I'd better get a refund back from my subscription to tilastopaja.

fresh cider wrote:

McDougal is extremely talented. He really should have NCAA titles already, but his coaches alway peak him at the wrong time. Why don't they learn? How hard is it to figure out that maybe doing a triple right now isn't too bright? That said, Josh has enough talent that he could still very well win a title, but if he doesn't, his coaches will look like mondo jackasses yet again.

You guys just don't understand what has been going on here with Josh in his college career. His coaches are not forcing him to run these races, triple at conference, etc. He willingly chooses to do this stuff for the team. I don't see how putting the team ahead of himself is such a bad quality. You act as if Josh is held hostage and his coaches are punishing him or something.

A good coach knows when to hold their athletes back.

Yes.

why would anybody say it's dumb for wyner to try for a fast time when he was fresh? obviously he wants a fast time before regionals to cover as many bases as he can. cornell had that chick uceny run a 2:04 in the prelims at the indoor ic4as last year, which was a 2 second pr, even more of a pr than wyner's 15 today, and nobody thought that was dumb. it ensured making the indoor national meet. uceny ran 4:18 in the 15 today and was nearly 4 seconds up on 2nd in the heat. was that stupid too? wyner needed a faster time than 3:44 or he'll have to make top 5 in the region, which is loaded. why not run it fresh with his teammate in there to rabbit him instead of on the second day? of course he did the smart thing.

oasis wrote:

Malmo,

If you were McDougal's coach would you have him race in the 1500m, 5000m and the 10000m at this conference meet? I can see the need to aquire team points but to run these three races even at a "tempo" pace should be avoided.

Why would McDougal's coach frown upon a good tempo workout. For the rest of the field this was a race. For McDougal it wasn't. That's the disconnect.

This thread is mind-boggling. Why does everyone want to prove Malmo wrong? It's not like he's making crazy, outlandish statements. Good gravy... this has to be the pettiest argument of all time, and I once argued with someone for two hours about whether Charles Barkley was taller or shorter than 6'5"!

terps wrote:

Fresh Cider- if you've read this entire thread, i think you may find a conservative estimate of at least 4 people who have started out with a simple, rational statement, that Malmo has somehow managed to turn into a pissing contest with his arrogant replies, and then just plain stubbornly ignoring the attempt to come to some common ground on ideas. So class may be a lot to ask at this stage of the game. I have read he held a few American records in the past, so I respect his performances, but feel he has risen into a self-appointed holier-than-thou role as compared to us mere mortals. Good luck arguing with him.

No...he's right. You guys are too thick to understand what he's been saying over and over again.

[quote]wowser wrote:

28:49 would have won most 10,000 meter championships in the last 10 years. You're a joke. [quote] That's a non sequitur little boy. How many athletes with a 28:49 PR have won a National title?

dean moriarty wrote:

This thread is mind-boggling. Why does everyone want to prove Malmo wrong? It's not like he's making crazy, outlandish statements. Good gravy... this has to be the pettiest argument of all time, and I once argued with someone for two hours about whether Charles Barkley was taller or shorter than 6'5"!

It's the same little boy posting over and over. Do you recognize any of the handles?

georgia rain wrote:

A good coach knows when to hold their athletes back.

Absolutely right. He didn't have to in this case since McDougal ran a series of relatively comfortable efforts. Glad to see some come around.

too thick? hey sportsfan, he originally asked to name a person in the world who has commented on someone else's mention of collegiate burn out issue. i named 3. gave him quotes from book, pages. that turned into a cluster-f***. end of story.

terps wrote:

too thick? hey sportsfan, he originally asked to name a person in the world who has commented on someone else's mention of collegiate burn out issue. i named 3. gave him quotes from book, pages. that turned into a cluster-f***. end of story.

The Geb and Lear comments? You've got to be kidding?

What you idiots can't seem to grasp is this is not racing overload in any fashion. This was a fairly decent workout for McDougal and little more.

Somehow, the board trites have decided that his "racing overload" is what's held McDougal back from winning past NCAA titles in races which they cannot identify as winable for him.

Which I showed didn't address the issue of burnout, nor did the racing schedules of El Guerrouj or Gebrselassie support the quotes. As follows:

Obviously, neither Coach Kada nor El Guerrouj subscribes to the words attributed to them by Lear.

Hichan El Guerrouj race history (indoor, outdoor)

2004 11 races (1, 10) sick

2003 16 (3, 13)

2002 15 (0, 15)

2001 21 (5, 16)

2000 12 (0, 12)

1999 13 (0, 13)

1998 17 (2, 15)

1997 18 (3, 15)

1996 12 (1, 11)

1995 10 (0, 10)

It should be noted that these figures only reflect the racing activity that was reported by Tilastopaja. Tilastopaja under-reports domestic races, XC and road races. I would suspect that there are more El Guerrouj races than listed above.

With Gebrselassie, I was able to find a 2nd resource that reported additional information.

Gebrselassie didn’t comment on the US collegiate system, nor does his racing schedule support Lear’s inferences nor your conclusions.

Gebrselassie race history (Indoor, outdoor, Xc-roads, marathon)

2006 6 (0, 0, 3, 3)

2005 7 (0, 0, 6, 1)

2004 9 (6, 3, 0, 0) injured

2003 12 (5, 7, 0, 0))

2002 5 (0, 1, 3, 1)

2001 7 (0, 1, 6, 0)

2000 6 (0, 6, 0, 0)

1999 19 (5, 14, 0, 0)

1998 26 (8, 16, 2, 0)

1997 19 (5, 13, 1, 0)

1996 10 (1, 6, 3, 0)

1995 16 (0, 12, 4, 0)

1994 20 (0, 8, 12, 0)

1993 20 (0, 10, 10, 0)[/quote]