Colby Alexander 3:33!!!!

koyPond wrote:

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

And people on this board will tell you that the US is weak at the 1500m lol and Hocker is a 3:35 guy

The US is weak compared to the other top countries. Results don’t lie. Has Hocker run under 3:35? No? So then he’s a 3:35 guy.

Just like Rupp was a 2:11 marathon guy going into the Rio Olymics. Then he wins the bronze medal. There are situations when you know a runner is better than their PR, Rupp was better than his 2:11 PR going into Rio, just like Hocker is clearly better than his 3:35 PR going into Tokyo.

High hopes wrote:

I just get tired of people saying "he's in 3:30 shape" or his mile time converts to XX. Suppositions, conversions, "the transitive property", it's all junk until he puts down the time. That's not to say he can't get a medal in Tokyo, or he isn't capable of a good time, but he hasn't proven it yet

He has absolutely proven it - you just won’t open your eyes.

We have two runners….

Runner A runs 72, 70, 70, 72 for a 4:44 mile.

Runner B runs 75, 75, 75, 60 for a 4:45 mile.

If these runners were to face off tomorrow, who are you betting on?

Obviously runner B is capable of much more than runner A at this time.

Similar to Hocker… anyone who closes in 52/25 to finish in 3:35 (after rounds) is in significantly better shape than someone running an even paced 3:33.

hooty wrote:

Why would his sponsors regret dropping him? He’s certainly a fast runner but craps down his leg and never runs well at the right time. The sponsors are not getting their worth so they drop him. Makes sense. No one cares that he ran fast at some random meet. That’s not what they pay for.

CA lead the 1500m at the trials for a few laps, in a plain black singlet instead of a sponsored uniform. I think he was the only unsponsored dude in the finals. I think sponsors pay for visibility at big meets. Leading the pack for a few laps at arguably the biggest track meet in the US is pretty visible.

Transitive properties do not always apply to track and field. Hocker is a kicker. He can't use Cheruiyot tactics and gun it from the front. Don't kid yourself. That's like saying he beat Centro, and Centro's 5,000 PR is 13:01, so Hocker can run sub 13 now. Doesn't work like that.

DwideSchrude wrote:

Transitive properties do not always apply to track and field. Hocker is a kicker. He can't use Cheruiyot tactics and gun it from the front. Don't kid yourself. That's like saying he beat Centro, and Centro's 5,000 PR is 13:01, so Hocker can run sub 13 now. Doesn't work like that.

No, it's not. It's like saying Hocker is a guy who has run a time worth 3:33 for the mile, and then has regularly beaten guys who have run 3:33 by wide margin in races that are in the 3:35 range.

If you can find a guy in the history of track and field who ran his PBs in championship races with big kicks do share...

Hocker is actually a 3:50 miler.

Thanks for playing.

There are many sub 4 milers who have also run 13:30 for 5k but are sitting on a 62 second open 400 PR from sophomore year of HS and a 2:09 800 from junior year. Your logic dictates that we can't assume they are in sub 60 shape now or sub 2 shape.

Do you think Hocker would have lost this race? Jakob came off of a 3:31 PB at Monaco going into this. He won this race in 3:38 running his last 800 in 1:51 with a 53.6 close. Hocker would have crushed him based off what he did at NCAA and USA’s. I feel confident he can at least run 3:30.

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

DwideSchrude wrote:

Transitive properties do not always apply to track and field. Hocker is a kicker. He can't use Cheruiyot tactics and gun it from the front. Don't kid yourself. That's like saying he beat Centro, and Centro's 5,000 PR is 13:01, so Hocker can run sub 13 now. Doesn't work like that.

No, it's not. It's like saying Hocker is a guy who has run a time worth 3:33 for the mile, and then has regularly beaten guys who have run 3:33 by wide margin in races that are in the 3:35 range.

If you can find a guy in the history of track and field who ran his PBs in championship races with big kicks do share...

So someone starts a thread about CA running 3:33 and then all of the Hocker fans have to jump in and claim the Hocker is really faster, even though he has never officially ran that fast. Why is that?

Because when the 8th placer at USAs runs 3:33 it illustrates the potential for the top 3 if they were in chasing times mode.

And there are dozens of 3:33-35 guys in the world who believe they are also sub 3:30 guys....they just haven't run it yet. I just don't believe Hocker is any different nor any more special.

Centro makes final and finishes outside the top 5.

Hocker might make final and finishes 6-10 or he might get snipped out of it.

Alan

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

It counts but just shows you if also-rans in the US can run 3:33s on high school tracks, then you shouldn't overreact to paced time trials on the Monaco track.

Again, you get a stat and try to tailor it.

You keep inventing scenarios that don't exist. This race had nothing to do with the trials. There's nothing to be garnered from this. Just like you tried to make it sound like Hocker had actually beaten Kerr and Hoare WHEN HE NEVER RACED THEM by claiming Hock was better in college. You tried to pass that off so much that you honestly believe he beat them.

When I see US runners in a world class, international field and not home based, no pressure time trials I'll grant them their due...but only if they compete well and they ask nicely for my approval.

Runningart2004 wrote:

And there are dozens of 3:33-35 guys in the world who believe they are also sub 3:30 guys....they just haven't run it yet. I just don't believe Hocker is any different nor any more special.

Centro makes final and finishes outside the top 5.

Hocker might make final and finishes 6-10 or he might get snipped out of it.

Alan

I don't really think there are dozens of 3:33-3:35 guys who have closed those championship races in 1:49 or faster or 12.2/52 for the last 100 of said races. That is the difference. If you can identify these sort of guys overseas let me know...You might be able to find them occasionally in Kenya, but not really unearthing them anywhere else.

The Original Rastus wrote:

You keep inventing scenarios that don't exist. This race had nothing to do with the trials. There's nothing to be garnered from this. Just like you tried to make it sound like Hocker had actually beaten Kerr and Hoare WHEN HE NEVER RACED THEM by claiming Hock was better in college. You tried to pass that off so much that you honestly believe he beat them.

You just want to ignore context completely. When we have three guys who haven't really raced much outside of the NCAA OR the Olympic Trials, the next logical step is to look who they've beaten and how, the context of their races, and how they stack up historically. So, when guys who they beat decisively run 3:33 and their splits hold up to top closes in similar races in the past these are promising developments. Of course you can seek validation from something that's not going to happen (them time-trialing in Europe), or wait until the Olympics to make your judgment.

the macdaddy og wrote:

High hopes wrote:

I just get tired of people saying "he's in 3:30 shape" or his mile time converts to XX. Suppositions, conversions, "the transitive property", it's all junk until he puts down the time. That's not to say he can't get a medal in Tokyo, or he isn't capable of a good time, but he hasn't proven it yet

He has absolutely proven it - you just won’t open your eyes.

We have two runners….

Runner A runs 72, 70, 70, 72 for a 4:44 mile.

Runner B runs 75, 75, 75, 60 for a 4:45 mile.

If these runners were to face off tomorrow, who are you betting on?

Obviously runner B is capable of much more than runner A at this time.

Similar to Hocker… anyone who closes in 52/25 to finish in 3:35 (after rounds) is in significantly better shape than someone running an even paced 3:33.

I don't see how that proves anything. How do you know he can close fast after having to run the first 3 laps 13 seconds faster than before?

Also, guys in Doha closed in 53-54 off a pace that was 8 seconds faster going into the final lap than what Hocker had with a lap to go in the trials. And he didn't just blow by Centro either, he had to fight his way past him over the last 70 meters and he was straining to do it.

You have no context and I'll use your thinking against you. Centro was beaten in 2019 by Kerr and Wightman, two younger guys that you claim are inferior to Hocker based on your belief that you use a third party athlete as a barometer. And Centro was beaten in a real race, no pacer, championship race and that was with Centro not only running an SB, he ran a time that Hocker is 3 seconds off. You're trying to pass that same thinking off as definitive truth. You can't have it both ways when it suits your boy.

It goes by the archaic thinking that if two teams beat the same opponent by a different score that the two results show which team is better. And that's been proven wrong countless times.

This originally basic acknowledgement thread has officially morphed into the Aspergeric Troll Thread Of The Day. Congrats to r ass tus and anyone else who threadjacked it masterfully.

Just like Rupp was a 2:11 guy wrote:

koyPond wrote:

The US is weak compared to the other top countries. Results don’t lie. Has Hocker run under 3:35? No? So then he’s a 3:35 guy.

Just like Rupp was a 2:11 marathon guy going into the Rio Olymics. Then he wins the bronze medal. There are situations when you know a runner is better than their PR, Rupp was better than his 2:11 PR going into Rio, just like Hocker is clearly better than his 3:35 PR going into Tokyo.

He was, but not significantly, he still only ran 2:10. I'm not diminishing his achievement, the bronze was great, but he needed others to under-perform while he brought his A game. He didn't significantly improve until two years later. Hocker has potential, can get a medal if other screw up, but he's probably a few years away from reaching his peak - or not, some athletes peak in college or the first year out

The Original Rastus wrote:

Also, guys in Doha closed in 53-54 off a pace that was 8 seconds faster going into the final lap than what Hocker had with a lap to go in the trials. And he didn't just blow by Centro either, he had to fight his way past him over the last 70 meters and he was straining to do it.

Incorrect. They closed in 53 high-54 low off of 2:37-2:38. Hocker went through in a smidge under 2:43. So they went through about 5 seconds faster tops. He ran 12.2 for the last 100 that speaks for itself ~ the strain is how Hocker runs. Centro was closing at a high level as well, which is why he didn't blow by Centro.