I just watched the video. I think you're wrong here. Yes, Symmonds' more aggressive racing tactic had consequences at the end (i.e., a lesser kick). No, he would not likely have won had he used his typical strategy (trailing the pack the first 500m). The reason is Aman is a superior runner. He came out of the box and blew everyone away the last 100m. Had Symmonds not boxed him, Aman would have gone earlier. There was no stopping him with Rudisha not in the race. You were right to "vote" for Aman in the first place.It is possible that Symmonds ran his best race ever, although not his fastest. He should be proud of his silver.
A Duck wrote:
I voted for Aman, would rather have gotten it wrong.
I didn't have many worries about Symmonds confidence.
Solomon taking the lead, as he always does, was predictable and made him a likely sacrificial lamb ala Johnny Gray and KD Robinson styles of racing.
I didn't think Symmonds would go out and stay in back as he used to do. I figured the only way he would under perform was if he got too agressive...
That first 200 in under 24 doomed him.
He thought the title was his to go out and take and go out and get it and the way was to let Solomon lead.
Nope.
He'll be kicking himself for a long time after this.
His splits should tell the story.