Big10 1500????

First 1000 was slow (like 70-71's) and then it was a 400m race after that. I heard that borchers closed in 51-52ish

Wasn't the indoor mile very pathetic as well.

Bigsissypants wrote:

Wasn't the indoor mile very pathetic as well.

I'm not sure what you mean? Is that a question! Do you know how to use punctuation correctly:

So Shannon Rowbury would have crushed the field...nice showing guys.

No, because she wouldn't have been able to kick with them if she followed the slow pace, and if she tried to run solo the field would have sat and kicked around her.

Either way, they are pusses.

Phil K. wrote:

So Shannon Rowbury would have crushed the field...nice showing guys.

Did you just start following track last week?

Why would their coaches allow this shit? Especially the guys in the back of the field who have no chance if it comes down to a pure kick. Especially with the way a guy like Borchers has been running lately. His 1500 performances have been more than weak, yet you allow a slow pace and the kickers prevail. If you take the race out around 3:39-3:40 effort which more than a few people in this heat could've handled, it would've neutralized the field and I think Wisco could've claimed the top 3 spots instead of 3-5.

sounds like a lot of people on here don't know the difference between a race for time and a race for points. The conference championships are all about scoring points and not becoming the rabbit for others.

someone wrote:

sounds like a lot of people on here don't know the difference between a race for time and a race for points. The conference championships are all about scoring points and not becoming the rabbit for others.

Yeah, and in this case, Wisconsin would've scored more points in a fast race. All three of their guys who scored have faster PRs than Borchers, maybe in a fast race he beats one, but no way does he beat all three of them. They wouldn't need to worry about becoming a rabbit either, each of them could've led a lap at 60 second pace, which gets you to 300 to go, and then sprint. That way none of them is doing too much work, and I'd be shocked if they don't end up with a lot more point. Hell, they actually had four guys in the final, each of them could've led for 300 meters and that would get them to 1200 with none of them having wasted themselves in the front. The only thing that could've hurt them from doing this is maybe Miller would've been more tired and not come back to score in the 5k, but he only scored 3 points there, I think in a fast race they get more than that back.

2:05 at 800 is tactical and understandable given the circumstances (conference championship, guys doubling, etc.), 2:23 at 800 is incredibly pathetic for a field of this caliber. It seems like the Big 10 is the only conference that has this problem as well.

The Chatch wrote:

Why would their coaches allow this shit?

Maybe because their coaches want the runners to learn how to win races?

We hear all the time how modern runners never learn how to race, because they only run rabbited time-trial races, so then they're uncomfortable when they get to a real championships race and have to deal with traffic, pace changes, tactics, and a fierce kick.

A race like this is a great chance to learn how to WIN. Obviously a super-slow pace favors the kickers -- but if you can't duke it with the competition in a low-key conference meet and win off a kick, you're never going be outkicking people in a championship semifinal that goes 3:36. This is where you learn to kick (and believe me, it is an acquired skill that you can get better at).

It can be an important confidence booster, too, even if you lose. Maybe you come 3rd or 4th in one of these 3:50 or 4:00 minute races, but you run the last lap in 52, and that's something you never thought you could do. Then later in the season, you're in race that splits 2:30-32 at 1,000, which should still feel pretty easy for a 3:40 guys, and you have the confidence to know that you can close in 53 because you've had a chance to throw down in a tactical race before.

Bottom line: if you've never been in a race like that before, you don't know how much fun you've been missing. And I honestly find a race like that way more entertaining to watch, since you have no idea what's going to happen going into the last lap (unlike many rabbited races, which are pretty over before the halfway mark).

sounds like a lot of people on here don't know the difference between a post for trolling and a post with a legit comment.

Dude, I'm all for the excitement of a great non-rabbited race. 2:23 though is so incredibly awful and inexcusable for a race like this. That is probably 10k pace for some of these guys and they're running a 1500! I can't even understand how the field could stand to run THAT SLOW for over half the race.

If milers who have run 3:41 for the 1500 can't finish in a 52 when they go through the 800 in 2:23, then they should seriously consider moving up in distance. Why is it only the Big Ten that runs like this? Pac-10 had 1-8 between 3:46 and 3:49, Atlantic 10 at 3:53, SEC at 3:45, Big East 3:52, Big 12 at 3:41, Conference USA at 3:52, ACC at 3:45. Then there's the Big 10 at 4:03. As I mentioned after the indoor mile, that's embarrassing.

Okay, so put yourself in the race. Everyone goes out too easy, are you going to be the one to pass everyone? You pretty much know that if you do then you are going to have 8 capable guys sitting on you until the 200m mark.In a championship race no one wants to lead.

haha, YO wrote:

2:05 at 800 is tactical and understandable given the circumstances (conference championship, guys doubling, etc.), 2:23 at 800 is incredibly pathetic for a field of this caliber. It seems like the Big 10 is the only conference that has this problem as well.

midwesta wrote:If milers who have run 3:41 for the 1500 can't finish in a 52 when they go through the 800 in 2:23, then they should seriously consider moving up in distance.

Exactly. If you're a miler, you'd better believe you can finish in 52 (or better) off a slow pace. If you do believe that, then you're more than willing to coast through the first few laps of a slow, tactical race. If you DON'T believe that, then you don't belong in the race -- you should move up.

(Obviously a tactical race, like any other race, has only one winner, so with the benefit of hindsight everyone else looks like they made a tactical error. That's just hindsight speaking.)

To reiterate: if you don't have faith in your ability to throw down off a slow pace (2:05, 2:25, whatever), then you'll never make it as a miler. It's almost like a test of faith: if you're the first to break early in a race like that, everyone knows that what you're saying is, "I don't have faith in my kick." And they'll remember that, and sit on your ass from then on.

Of course, I certainly acknowledge that different race strategies favor different runners, and that a slow race is a lower-percentage move for the guys with the fastest PBs in the field. These kinds of races don't tend to happen at NCAAs or USATFs, because there's more at stake. But I still think this is the right place for some of these guys to experiment with what it feels like to be in a race where the last lap is pretty close to their flat out speed, and there are still other runners around them.

As for why it only happens at Big 10s, I agree it's a bit strange. I guess it's sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy, since everyone is aware that's it's happened before.

why do we have this argument after every single slow race...

oh yeah, its because half the people on letsrun dont understand track...

its perfectly viable to talk about how it was a dumb strategy for some of these guys but the fact that a race went out slow doesnt make it "pathetic" or the runners in it "pussies"...it just makes the ones who placed lower than they should have dumb and the ones who placed well smart...

the guys in the big 10 get it, the guys at NCAAs get it, the guys at the olympic trials get it, the guys in the olympics get it...

why does the average letsrun poster feel that he has the right to question the manhood of real runners after every tactical race

someone wrote:

In a championship race no one wants to lead.

PREFONTAINE