Man, there may be a lot of good runners on LRC, but there sure as hell aren't a lot of great thinkers.
When an objective observer (like me, for example, and many others) looks at Montano's racing strategy, and suggests it seems incredibly stupid, there *might* be some reasonable ways to rebut.
'What have YOU ever done at a Championship level?'
...is not one. That's the recourse of morons who don't have an actual argument.
'Well, she's run 1:57 this way!'
...is also not one. It's completely irrelevant to the question.
For the mentally challenged, I'll lay out the question:
It's not, Can she run fast this way?
It's, Would she run faster with a different approach?
And, therefore, does it make sense for her to run this way?
'Well, she beats almost everybody else!'
...is also not a legitimate response (at least not for anyone with an IQ above 80).
Again, it doesn't matter who she beats (or, in this case, doesn't beat), it only matters if she's running the best she can run with her current approach, or could run much faster, and win more races, and place higher in others, with a different approach.
'She's really a 400 runner.'
...is, again, the response of an idiot.
If she's REALLY a 400 runner, she should be running the freaking 400.
AFAICT, she's running the 800. She needs to concern herself with one thing: how to run the fastest 800 she can.
The fact that she may be faster than some of the other girls for one lap doesn't really make a goddamn bit of difference, as long as her race requires her to continue on for a SECOND one.
From everything I've read on the topic, there seems to be lots of evidence that the most efficient way to run an optimum 800 is with positive splits of 2 to 3 seconds.
Is it possible that the optimum number varies a little from person to person, with physiological (and maybe psychological) differences among competitors? Sure it is.
Is it possible that there are some folks who can run their best with a +1 split, instead of 2 or 3? I would certainly think so.
Is it conversely possible that some folks might max out their achievement with a +4-second split? Why not?
As far as I know, there's no evidence anywhere to suggest that ANYONE runs their best 800 with 6 or 7 seconds of positive splits --but that's what Alysia does every time she runs. (Yes, on some occasions it's been over 7, though in this race it was slightly under 6 --actually a slight improvement for her.)
Look at the splits in this race (a really great, high-quality race with superb depth of performances): Let's just consider the top six finishers, since they're the ones who ran really fast. (Sixth place was Ajee, with a brilliant 1:58.21.)
Here are their split differentials, in order of finish, excluding Alysia:
1. +3.06.
2. +2.10.
3. +1.79.
4. +2.05.
5. +1.71.
Oh, and then there's Alysia: +5.71.
If you want to defend her strategy, there's only one argument to make: explain why you actually believe she's running faster with a plus-six than she would run with a +2 or +3, like everyone else.
If you want to suggest that she helps herself a little by running clear of the field, and not having to worry about contact or position, okay fine, maybe she gains a couple tenths that way, but who cares? She could go out a second slower, and still be clear of the field anyway.
I'll just say this: if she, and her coach, Tony Sandoval, haven't at least experimented thoroughly with slower first laps, and more human splits --if she's never at least *tried* going out in 57.5, let's say, and then seeing how fast she can close off that-- then they are idiots.
If they *have* --and they carefully examined the results, and concluded that she actually is somehow better off at 56/62-- then they ought to tell us that, and explain it.
At least that way, the rest of the world wouldn't go on thinking they're idiots (and quietly thanking their lucky stars that this awesome athlete, who *should* be kicking my ass, hands me the race by going out so stupidly fast).
And I've left out the fact (in the interest of simplifying a little) that she makes it even worse than what I've described by building most of that ridiculous first-lap lead in just the first 200.
If you want to make a real case that she's helping herself this way, do it.
Hell, I'd love to hear it.
Leave out all the stupid platitudes and usual BS.