I am not a distance runner.
I was an 800m runner in college.
If 49 doesn't work and 52 doesn't work then there is not a sweet spot in between to beat him.
51 flat is still going to feel fine for Amos after they went out in 49 in Monaco.
Rudisha would have less separation. Amos should have more reserves. And there may not be a Kenyan teammate on the final curve for Amos to deek around.
Talk about tactics.
In Monaco, Amos had moved into second behind Rudisha with 200m to go and pass him coming out of the turn, running one of the fastest times in history.
At Commonwealth, Amos was in a box with 100m to go and Rudisha still had a good lead on him with less than 50m to go.
That's a huge tactical advantage and he still lost.
You're insinuating that there is a perfect middle pace where Rudisha would have more left in the last 100m than Amos.
"I assume you're a distance runner. Say you race a sprinter at 800, go out insanely fast and the guy catches you. Is your move next time to jog with him and see how that works? No, you need an intermediate strategy BETWEEN the two failing ones, not an extreme application."
Everything about this analogy is wrong.
Speed based 800m runners tend to go out hard and hang on where distance based ones run more even.
And Rudisha and Amos is not a sprinter vs. a distance runner. It's an 800m runner vs an 800m runner.
And they both have great 400m speed.
Here's how your idea could have worked:
Rudisha goes out in 51 flat.
The second Kenyan goes out in 52.7 and Amos decides to follow the second place guy, giving Rudisha enough of a gap to hold on for the win.
But come on, Amos would just pass that guy and keep up with Rudisha.