Hockers 6th place is more impressive than Centros gold

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Boogieman wrote:

Hocker didn’t even run to win, he was not competitive by any means. He just wanted to get pulled thru for a time. Performance still impressive, I’m not a Hocker hater but trying to justify a cowardly run with a gold medalist is ludicrous

Do you understand there is an inverse relationship between early pace and having a strong finish? Hocker had no chance of winning a medal so his choices were to go for a top 6 finish or to crater doing the last lap and maybe finish in last place. Only an idiot would choose the latter strategy.

Come on man. You say "go for a top 6 finish" as if that's a thing. A top 6 finish has no significance whatsoever. Nobody makes a race strategy hoping that perfect execution will result in a 6th place finish, nobody.

Top 6 finish the new international measurement of greatness! It's laughable!

False how?

1. There was another 20 year old in the race an he won.

2. Name one other “beautifully tactful” race that resulted in a 6th place finish. Also look up the definition of tactful.

3. The other runners ran very fast international races this year, against much tougher competition. Also the NCAA scheduled was modified due to Covid.

I’m not the one who’s way off.

Are you condemned to defend this position?

bike moit wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Do you understand there is an inverse relationship between early pace and having a strong finish? Hocker had no chance of winning a medal so his choices were to go for a top 6 finish or to crater doing the last lap and maybe finish in last place. Only an idiot would choose the latter strategy.

Come on man. You say "go for a top 6 finish" as if that's a thing. A top 6 finish has no significance whatsoever. Nobody makes a race strategy hoping that perfect execution will result in a 6th place finish, nobody.

Top 6 finish the new international measurement of greatness! It's laughable!

"Nobody makes a race strategy hoping that perfect execution will result in a 6th place finish, nobody."

Of course they do. It's a fact that Hocker could not have won a medal. Assuming you were ever a competitive distance runner, did you always go for the win and were cool with everyone and their brother passing you at the end of the race?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

bike moit wrote:

Come on man. You say "go for a top 6 finish" as if that's a thing. A top 6 finish has no significance whatsoever. Nobody makes a race strategy hoping that perfect execution will result in a 6th place finish, nobody.

Top 6 finish the new international measurement of greatness! It's laughable!

"Nobody makes a race strategy hoping that perfect execution will result in a 6th place finish, nobody."

Of course they do. It's a fact that Hocker could not have won a medal. Assuming you were ever a competitive distance runner, did you always go for the win and were cool with everyone and their brother passing you at the end of the race?

What are you talking about? Not trying to compete because you're worried about getting passed at the end of the race? What kind of nonsense is that. Really??

So here's a question? Which is a better put yourself in the race and fade to 6th or never be in the race and kick to 6th.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

bike moit wrote:

Come on man. You say "go for a top 6 finish" as if that's a thing. A top 6 finish has no significance whatsoever. Nobody makes a race strategy hoping that perfect execution will result in a 6th place finish, nobody.

Top 6 finish the new international measurement of greatness! It's laughable!

"Nobody makes a race strategy hoping that perfect execution will result in a 6th place finish, nobody."

Of course they do. It's a fact that Hocker could not have won a medal. Assuming you were ever a competitive distance runner, did you always go for the win and were cool with everyone and their brother passing you at the end of the race?

In championship races? YES. There is no point in being in a championship race unless you are trying to medal.

Fortunately at the level I’ve competed at, I’ve always been in contention where this was reasonable. This principle applies to ALL levels of championship racing, however.

That is because there is no glory in “going for 6th”. I’m sure that Hocker would tell you himself that (with the benefit of hindsight) he would try to get up front after the first lap if he got a second chance. The whole purpose of the Olympic final is to medal. This is not Monaco, there is no meaningful benefit to getting a PR or prize money for the lesser places. To medal at the Olympics is the pinnacle of sport.

Hocker ran a great race, for his level, but to say it is more impressive than a win is laughable. I can’t believe this troll thread got to 10 pages.

He is young, and has much less training on his legs than Jakob. I think it is VERY reasonable to say he should probably be the betting favorite (either him or Jakob) for 2024, and if I were to place money on anyone at this point, I would in fact place it on Hocker for Paris 2024.

His race still wasn’t as impressive as Centro’s….not by a long shot.

"Hocker ran a great race, for his level, but to say it is more impressive than a win is laughable. I can’t believe this troll thread got to 10 pages"

That's a different topic and of course, what Centro accomplished is far superior to Hocker's 5th place finish.

If Hocker had gone out in 1:52, it's 100% guaranteed it would have ended badly for him. He would have had to be capable or running about 3:27-28 and he's not. Why would he want to do that? It would be like an incomplete for a college course.

Should Jared Ward have taken on the big three in Rio?

Why even speculate about it, he got 6th. Who cares about how someone ended up in 6th!

At least when Jared Ward got 6th and nobody was dumb enough to call it superior performance to Frank Shorter’s Gold in 1972, even though Ward’s time was faster.

Why? Because it’s a dumb take.

I would argue yes and yes. Does anyone care that Jared Ward got 6th? Looks at the rewards for Molly Seidel…she freaking went for it and fortune favors the bold.

I can tell you what I’d be doing if I was fortunate enough to make an Olympic final (for most runners, likely to be their only one): laying it all on the line.

I get it some people don’t agree with that ideal. Those people also don’t win very often and get more excited by PRs than wins. Not my cup of tea.

bike moit wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Do you understand there is an inverse relationship between early pace and having a strong finish? Hocker had no chance of winning a medal so his choices were to go for a top 6 finish or to crater doing the last lap and maybe finish in last place. Only an idiot would choose the latter strategy.

Come on man. You say "go for a top 6 finish" as if that's a thing. A top 6 finish has no significance whatsoever. Nobody makes a race strategy hoping that perfect execution will result in a 6th place finish, nobody.

Top 6 finish the new international measurement of greatness! It's laughable!

I think what SDSU means is that Hocker could either run the race that was best for him to get as high as place as was realistic at the time - which in this case was 6th place - or try and go for the win by running in the front, which he probably knew early on would have ended with a bonk. I think Hocker paced the race perfectly and his best performance was 6th place that day and if he would have went for the win he probably would have absolutely bombed in the last lap and ended up DFL.

Back in December 2020 when they had those 5 and 10 k’s that Grijalva ran 13:16 I stated that in this type of meet it was better to get 10th in 13:13.50 than to get 1st in 13:13.51, because Olympic qualifying time was all that was import. Place did not matter.

An Olympic Final is opposite of a time qualifier. Place is all that matters. When people look at the Olympic history of the men’s 1500 meter Centro’s name will always be the Rio gold medalist, Hockers name will not appear in the medalists column. Centro being the Olympic Champion is far superior to a 6th place finish in an Olympic final no matter the time. Centro was able to defeat the field that lined up against him Hocker did not. What if’s and but but buts don’t matter, facts are facts.

Hocker’s kick was devistated in the final. Hocker’s 1200 and last 300 in semi and final:

Semi: 2:54.7. 1200 final 300: 39.17

Final: 250.3 1200 final 300: 41.10

In my view in the Tokyo Olympic Final Hocker’s performance was like those runners in the December race trying to get a fast time. He was never the medal threat that I thought he would be and challenge those up front for the gold medal. The gold medal Centro has.

Maybe in four years the title of this thread may be correct, but not now.

missBS wrote:

Hear me out……hocker runs 3:31, bests the former OR, PRs by 2 seconds after PRing by 2 seconds in the semifinal, and gets 6th in a loaded field in his FIRST world final event.

This, to me, is more impressive than the cr*p-shoot that was the 2016 final that went out in like 2:18, setting up a free for all, where the best tactician, not the best runner, won.

In 2020, the best runner won, and the best runners in the world placed where they should have, that being at the front of the pack.

This race is more impressive than Centros gold, and certainly better than the 3:49 Centro ran a couple weeks ago.

Insanely unbiased opinion here. This is one of the dumbest things I’ve read on here. Right up there with “should I stay with my gf since she farted in front of me” type thread. Six place out of the world is great. Winning olympic gold is just a tad bit better lol.

I really hope this is just a thread of people saying nope. 6th is not better than Olympic Gold. Period.

To anyone who understands middle distance running, Centro’s gold was a master class in forcing his race plan on the entire field. Cento dominated that race from the very first step until the finish. He made everyone in that race his biitch. His finishing time is irrelevant, first lesson in middle distance running at championships. Centro took command of that race at the gun and ran every step with the plan to win that race. It was not a crap shoot. Furthest thing from a crapshoot. It was a masterpiece of planning, execution and winning.

Deep down, even Centro knows his big win is a f***ing joke. The only true performance metric in track and field IS THE TIME.

actual miler wrote:

To anyone who understands middle distance running, Centro’s gold was a master class in forcing his race plan on the entire field. Cento dominated that race from the very first step until the finish. He made everyone in that race his biitch. His finishing time is irrelevant, first lesson in middle distance running at championships. Centro took command of that race at the gun and ran every step with the plan to win that race. It was not a crap shoot. Furthest thing from a crapshoot. It was a masterpiece of planning, execution and winning.

I don't believe that for a second. Centro's genius in that race was adapting his tactics on the fly. There is no way anyone, even Centro, expected a 3:50 pace in a race with Asbel Kiprop. Centro adapted to the fact that everyone else in the race screwed up and didn't want to force the pace. It was a masterclass of tactical improvisation.

As for Hocker, I maintain he got his tactics wrong in the final. He was badly placed when Kerr made his first move at 450 to go. Hocker either didn't see it, or didn't think he needed to react. Kerr started bridging the gap to the leaders while Hocker waited to 300 to go before moving up. I don't think he could have got a medal anyway, Kerr is just too strong for Hocker right now. But I think Hocker will have learned an important lesson in that race, specifically, how much of his kick is drained by a hot pace. Plenty to build on for him

Centro went to the front and slowed that race down. You can clearly see it. Masterful execution.

There was nothing, nothing at all impressive about Centro's 2016 Gold medal. But he did win.

There was no tactical genius, no "controlling the race", just a ridiculously sleepy, boring first 800m where nobody dared to take command from the start and a lucky outsider was let to lead, slow the f€@& down, and take advantage of the 2-3 meters he had on the field to kick hard. He did win the gold medal on the final 400m, after a shamefully slow first 3 minutes, whereas his opponents had to run 410m. The set up was a total fluke, he controlled nothing, his opponent were observing each other and made the stupidest decisions of their running careers.

This is a win by lack of competition, nothing at all impressive.

The only positive thing is that once in a while, you need a reminder for all milers that awful races like this can happen, where the 5th, 6th best runner on the field can win on a fluke.

This happened also on the 1988 final, where Peter Rono took advantage of a sleepy field (albeit the pace was a bit faster). Just like Centro he was relatively short guy, and someone not considered a medal contender, with a 3:34 PB. The field basically ignored him, but he had a 52 kick on the last lap and that was good enough. Just like Centro, he also did not win anything after his gold medal.

Not gonna say I 100% agree, but you hit some interesting and true points here, hard to argue.

It is more impressive for Cole because we all know who Centro was coached by and what was going on...