Obviously... wrote:
What is Centrowitz's PR? You could say he had a big race as well.
Leo was two seconds behind the leaders with 300m to go and walked down four guys in a period of 60-70m. That looked superhuman.
Does the Alergian have a faster PR than the Americans? Is it more than the second he beat them buy?
The logic here is killing me.
Do you know anything about distance running? Leo's strategy for this race was a lot difference from some of the other runners such as, for example, Kiplagat. Kiplagat's strategy was to cover all moves so as to give himself a chance of a medal. Leo's strategy was to time-trial the final 400 and let the chips fall as they may. Kiplagat's strategy might have worked had it not been for Makhloufi's ridiculously fast 200m from 1200-1400 of 25 low. Most of the runners who tried to cover that move had nothing left in the home straight and slowed significantly. Leo is known to have a good finish and that, combined with the other runners dying, enabled him to walk down those guys. Leo's strategy was the correct one and the outcome was not surprising.
The reason why Makhloufi won by a small margin was because he only did what he needed to in the final 100. By 1400m the race was over. The BBC commentary team declared the winner with 100m to go. At that stage Makhloufi took his feet off the gas: it was clear that nobody was going to catch him.
Centro also had very good tactics in that race.
I don't want to take away anything from the performances of Leo and Centro because they both ran fantastic and deserved good results. However, I feel sorry for both of them because they will both feel cheated. It is not so much being cheated of the gold and the broze. It is more the experience of being cheated of a race. Imagine how the race would have played out if Makhloufi had not been there. It would have been completely different: the outcome might have been different. The shame for everyone (including Leo and Centro) is that we will never know. It makes me sick.