I've no duck in this pond, but that sounds outlandish that Hocker has bad pacing. At no point during the race, except when Hocker stopped the clock, had he ever run a 1500m at any of the splits generally being listed. He was a 3:35 guy going in. He ran 3:35 to start his race, improving steadily as the race progressed.
That’s because it IS outlandish. Hocker didn’t run a 52-second last lap or anything that would indicate anything like bad pacing. He was in 3:31 shape and ran 3:31. If/When he progresses to be in 3:29 shape he will run higher up in the field. He already is outperforming finishing 6th in the world whereas in a flat-out time trial you might’ve put him more like 10th considering the 3:29/3:30 guys who didn’t make it to the final or got beat in the final by him.
Once he achieves better fitness, his kick and speed will enable him to punch above his weight.
This is funny because, and Im not holding this against you two personally, what Ive heard from Hocker fans generally contradicts this.
All last year I kept hearing that Hocker is NOT a 3:35 guy and is actually good for 3:30 or 3:29 even though he has never run that.
Back to what you're saying, it doesnt make a difference what a runner has run before. Even if its someones first time running an event you can objectively assess how good the pacing was because we know what ideal pacing looks like generally in every event. It doesnt matter that Hocker's pb was 3:35 going into the olympic final. When you look at the splits from both his 3:35 race and his 3:31 race it is evident that his pacing was not good and therefore he could have run faster. If someone runs a 5k for the first time and splits a final 200m in 26 seconds what's that indicate? Bad pacing, not "wow what a good kick". If someone runs a 400 for the first time and positive splits over 4 seconds, what's that indicate? Bad pacing, not "gee you need to work on your kick".
I wonder why this has become a Hocker thread, about a runner who has yet to show he is in serious contention? Oh, right - this site is an American view of the world.
You just are dense, man. People said he was not a 3:35 guy because he ran great performances in 3:35 races. He also had a 3:33 equivalent mile performance indoors. Fans were correct as he ran 3:31 when put in a fast race even with it being his 3rd race in 4 days. He paced his 3:31 very well and thus around his top-end ability in the race. There is little to quibble with at all from that race. He paced it well and realistically did not have the fitness to run much faster or pace better. In a 3:35 race he had a much better shot of being competitive at the front due to his finish. I don’t get what you’re missing honestly.
Armstronglivs wrote:
I wonder why this has become a Hocker thread, about a runner who has yet to show he is in serious contention? Oh, right - this site is an American view of the world.
Same reason that this site is full of mile supremacists who disregard distance events: the presence of white athletes in the event.
OozmaKappa wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I wonder why this has become a Hocker thread, about a runner who has yet to show he is in serious contention? Oh, right - this site is an American view of the world.
Same reason that this site is full of mile supremacists who disregard distance events: the presence of white athletes in the event.
I think it is less to do with race but that Americans are desperate to find a winner who is American. They'll be looking awhile yet.
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
Des Linden: "The entire sport" has changed since she first started running Boston.
Matt Choi was drinking beer halfway through the Boston Marathon
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts