D1 3k

no way! thats crazy none of the big guns pushed the pace

No offense to those guys, but that was a pussy race. Not even under 8 minutes! I really wanted Curtis to win but I think he just expended too much energy getting out of traffic a few times in the race...that was a disappointment though, it was only exciting the last two laps. Wish Solinsky were there, cause no one racing now is confident enough to try and disperse the field early.

not bad for bumbalough. thanks for the updates you guys

1 Kyle Alcorn SR Arizona State 8:00.82 10

2 Andrew Bumbalough SO Georgetown 8:02.22 8

3 Kyle Perry JR Brigham Young 8:02.63 6

4 Robert Curtis SR Villanova 8:02.79 5

5 Kurt Benninger SR Notre Dame 8:03.61 4

6 Josh McDougal SR Liberty 8:03.77 3

7 Sean Quigley SR La Salle 8:05.20 2

8 David McNeill FR Northern Arizona 8:06.18 1

9 Brandon Bethke SO Wisconsin 8:06.63

10 Matt Debole SR Georgetown 8:07.35

11 Luke Gunn SR Florida State 8:07.98

12 Mark Buckingham SR Florida State 8:09.98

13 Patrick Smyth JR Notre Dame 8:10.33

14 John Kosgei SO LSU 8:10.67

15 Austin Ramos SR UCLA 8:14.20

16 Lex Williams JR Michigan 8:27.23

Yeah "not cool" that was a "pu$$y race."

It also has to be the FIRST time in the history of the sport that a CHAMPIONSHIP race was tactical and had a fast, exciting finish.

pussy race!!! yo dude you know nothing at all about championship racing...

i bet if one of the BIG guns won in the same tactical fashion, you would not be saying "pussy race"...

you have NO clue who kyle alcorn is, do you... he is a 5th year senior (i think) and he was an 8:56 2-miler out of HS known for having a killer kick off of a long hard surge for home... he kid had big wheels in HS (california), but was injured alot. went to oregon and ran some good times, but nothing great... hurt off and on... i think sub 14 5k, sub 8:55 steeple, but nothing spectacular... then transferred to ASU and is on another level - he is healthy getting consistent training and is a whole different runner. he posted a nice 3k this season, well under 8 minutes and i also think he broke 4 minutes for the mile...

so, i am not surprised that he stuck around for a fast last 1000 meters and then kicked hard... much like he used to do in HS... when he was fit and on, he was hard to drop, no matter what the pace was, fast, slow, average pace with a long haul from way out (like tonight)... and boom, kicked down everyone...

give the respect... he may be a bit underrated like quigley, but he is really good and deserving of this title...

See, this is the problem with both championship racing and Letsrun in general. First of all, I never said anything about Kyle Alcorn--I have plenty of respect for the guy, but the bottom line is he is a sub 8 guy and that's not what we saw today. Sure, the point of running a race is to win, but its just plain crap when guys who have the potential to run extremely fast times don't have the confidence to string the race out. If I wanted to see a race that only consisted of two laps, I'd have just watched the 400.

Racing is about two things: winning and running fast, and in championship races it seems like we only get the former. Can I run that fast? No, but then again I don't run for a living. To be honest, races like today don't really establish a "champion." A "champion" is the guy who's the best on any given day, but if you win a slow, tactical, kicker's race, what does that really prove? They're running a DISTANCE event, not a sprint. All those guys in the field were superbly talented, but 8:00 as a winning time certainly isn't indicative of their upper limits. It's one thing for guys to run over 8 minutes at a conference meet or something where they can just coast to victory, but when you aggregate all the best runners into the same field, you expect to see something fast. Maybe guys like McD and Webb seem to only be good time trialers because they can only let lose in races where they don't feel threatened. Think about if other jobs worked like professional running--in the business world where you're under pressure, are you gonna bide your time and try to sneak in at the end or be aggressive and go after what you want? Championship races should show us who the best is, and there's serious doubt in my mind in most of them that I watch.

8:00 really isn't that slow, it's only 10 seconds slower than the fastest guys' entry time. Plus a lot of these guys were doubling back. You're acting like they were jogging the whole thing. And what does a race like this really prove??? C'mon, it proves exactly what it's supposed to - who is the best 3k guy on that day. And these guys don't run for a living either, they are student-athletes.

Yeah, that running for a living bit wasn't really directed at D1 athletes, more just venting frustration at championship racing in general. Thinking back on it I understand that most guys were completing their third or fourth races of the weekend, but my complaint is that there were so many people in contention until the end. 8:00 isn't a bad time, but many of those guys were capable of something more, even having run a race or two before. I was just hoping someone would have made a move earlier--Alcorn dropping a 2:45 first thousand but then closing in a 2:26 is indicative that the race could have been faster and more even. Looking at how it played out, the race was Alcorn's to lose as he easily powered away from Curtis's challenge, but it's just a shame that we only saw 1/3 of a race.

Alcorn, I believe, made the final at USATF's last year in the steeplechase. I remember two ASU guys making it, him and Aguayo (who ended up getting third I think)

not cool wrote:

Yeah, that running for a living bit wasn't really directed at D1 athletes, more just venting frustration at championship racing in general. Thinking back on it I understand that most guys were completing their third or fourth races of the weekend, but my complaint is that there were so many people in contention until the end. 8:00 isn't a bad time, but many of those guys were capable of something more, even having run a race or two before. I was just hoping someone would have made a move earlier--Alcorn dropping a 2:45 first thousand but then closing in a 2:26 is indicative that the race could have been faster and more even. Looking at how it played out, the race was Alcorn's to lose as he easily powered away from Curtis's challenge, but it's just a shame that we only saw 1/3 of a race.

No, "we" saw a whole race. Maybe you only saw 1/3 of a race. But then again, your standards are absurd. You clearly know jack about what it's like to run in a championship race. If you didn't think this race was exciting, that's you're problem, not theirs.

To clarify...Kyle ran 8:52-53 in HS. He won the 3200 at the CA state meet by running a 26.x last 200. I can't even remember who he beat, but he ran 9:00. The next year he did almost the exact same thing, but Tim Nelson was too far in front of him and that's where he ran 8:52 or 53. Kyle has always been the guy that ran just as fast as he needed to to get it done. That's why I'm not surprised by the 8:00 win. To be honest I wouldn't have been THAT surpirsed if he won and ran 7:51 (I mean it was surprising, but I always knew that he had that kind of talent and race in him). Also, Kyle hasn't been hurt on and off. To my knowledge he's really only been hurt once and it was the year he had to sit out at ASU. I could go through his entire career, but just take my word on it.

Look "not cool" just because your life mate Bobby Curtis didn't win doesn't mean the race sucked. If he had won would you be posting about how you were cheated and how Alcorn isn't the "real champion?" Probably not. But that's the nature of letsrun and the internet...it's a wonderful place where people can anonymous talk shit and bitch about stuff. Bekele runs a slower than WR time to win the world championships or olympics...he not the REAL champion? Jorge Torres won the US 8k title yesterday...Dathan wasn't there does that make him not the REAL champion? Come on dude. Being the champion is about having what it takes on THAT day. About putting yourself in position and executing. If not then we should just drop championships all together and just set up some sort of rabit system and see who can run the fastest. We'd see fast times, but it really wouldn't tell us who is the BEST competitor.

Well "sweet tempe 88" I think there have been many tactical races one of the best I ever saw in the 3000m was the Cragg, Willis dual. The pace for the first 800m was so slow the feild was crashing into each other, then Cragg took off with willis, Dobson in persuit. They ran the remainder of the race lapping in 61sec (400m) and ending in 59secs. Willis was so close to Cragg in the race it appeared they were stuck together. Willis just waiting to kick. Cragg relentlessly picked up the pace, taking the sting out of Willis. Now that is tacktics both had a plan and one of them succeeded. A race I will never forget. The pace started at 9min pace and they finished in 7.55.

not cool wrote:

Sure, the point of running a race is to win, but its just plain crap when guys who have the potential to run extremely fast times don't have the confidence to string the race out.

You have one small grain of truth in your rambling: the point of running a race is to win. You're like a football fan who loves to see long bombs and gets pissed off when a team relies on a rushing game. A series of four-yard gains may not be as thrilling to you as the occasional 30-yard pass, but it's all part of the strategy of winning a football game.

Or to make a different analogy, it's like you want a basketball team to play a high-scoring run-and-gun game and neglect defence. You love seeing fast breaks and dunks, but you get bored seeing tight defence, good boxing out, and zone traps.

Winning a race takes a lot more than just running a fast time. Look at how tightly clustered the top seed times in the 3K were. None of those runners were capable of just running away from the others (as McDougal realized the night before in the 5K). If any of them had taken it from the gun, they would have reached the last lap with three or four guys sitting on their shoulder waiting to pounce -- and by leading the whole way, they would have hurt their chances of kicking successfully.

(For instance, did you watch the women's 3K? I suppose you admire Lambie for her "guts." I also think she ran a very admirable race, but the fact remains she had the worst outcome of the three legit contenders. If her goal was to please idiots like yourself, she succeeded; if her goal was to win, not so much.)

So it becomes a poker match, with all the contenders watching each other, each trying to maximize their chances by making their move at the most advantageous time. Like a poker match, you play the odds -- and just because you lose, doesn't mean you made the wrong decision! Sometimes you make the moves that maximize your odds, but you get outdrawn by someone else. That's sports, and that's why it's so exciting to watch a race like that 3K, where there were tons of lead changes, lots of moves and countermoves, and a huge amount of tension with everyone still in it in the last km.

So to sum up, sorry you didn't like the race. To me and the people I was watching with, we all agreed the men's 3K was BY FAR the most exciting race of the meet to watch. I hope that someday you learn to appreciate the tactics and tension of championship racing -- and who knows, maybe understanding the difference between racing and time-trialling will help you improve your own running.

A couple of things cleared up, Kyle ran quite well at Oregon, 8:44 for the steeple as a true sophomore (not many 19 or 20 year olds run that fast) and was one of the first guys out of the NCAA final that year. He transfered to ASU after martin smith was "resigned" from Oregon. ASU capitalized and picked up an incredible talent.

And yes, a tactical race is much much more impressive to anyone who has raced, or understands racing at a high level. Any idiot can go out there and hammer from the gun, but it takes a seasoned vet to be calm, composed, and relaxed and confident around the best runners in the country and play the cards that suit them best at the time that suits them best. Kyle ran a terrific race tactically and deserves the win.

Finally, most of those faster qualifying times were run on faster 300 meter tracks. I've run at fayetteville and it is easily 5 seconds or so slower over 3k then a track like Washington's is.

Bobby Curtis ran his nation leading 7:50 on a banked 200m oval. does that mean that his time would be 5 seconds faster on a 300m track? I don't buy it.

On a second note I think Alcorn deserves a ton of credit. He could be the MVP of the meet for the way he came up big individually and for the team. I believe he had the second fastest mile split in the dmr and seperated himslef from a huge pack that he started with to finish second. Then he put the ASU team on his back and won the 3k, securing 10 valuable points and tie the team score going into the 4x4. When ASU was able to beat florida state they won the title, but they wouldn't have even had the chance if it weren't for his two huge races.

"NCAA Watcher" you actually made my point. Sorry for confusion, but I was trying to say that although it is exciting seeing guys run fast I enjoy the tactics and fast, close finishes that championship races often provide.

At any rate, a fantastic race by Kyle and really a fantastic meet. Without Alcorn running the way he did in the DMR or the 3k the ASU men do not win the meet. Other than Manzano, Kyle's performances had to be some of the best in the meet this year.

not cool wrote:

Yeah, that running for a living bit wasn't really directed at D1 athletes, more just venting frustration at championship racing in general. Thinking back on it I understand that most guys were completing their third or fourth races of the weekend, but my complaint is that there were so many people in contention until the end. 8:00 isn't a bad time, but many of those guys were capable of something more, even having run a race or two before. I was just hoping someone would have made a move earlier--Alcorn dropping a 2:45 first thousand but then closing in a 2:26 is indicative that the race could have been faster and more even. Looking at how it played out, the race was Alcorn's to lose as he easily powered away from Curtis's challenge, but it's just a shame that we only saw 1/3 of a race.

I have to agree with you. It wasn't a race, more like a farce, but U.S. runners are not as conditioned as the rest of the world. Alcorn ran a good race, and no one challenged to try and take the pace away from him so he won, not that he wouldn't have won anyway. But everyone else just gave it to him. What's the point of being in a race, if you're not going to give it your best.

Any idea why we have no Ryan Shay autopsy result?

Weren't we told back in December that we'd have results soon?

Something isn't adding up