Derrick is Crushing It!!!!

If 1 track event has to be cut I'd vote for the steeple. If it has to be either a track or field event, I'd go with the hammer.

Seriously though, the events they should cut ought to be all that synchronized nonsense. Or all that baton dancing and twirling stuff. C'mon, as low on the totem pole of sports as t&f is, how much of the general population actually participate in those activities?

The problem with this scenario is that Rupp would just sit on Derrick the whole race until the final 400m and blast him like he's done in the last 20 x they've raced. Derrick is the modern-day Salazar. Great runner. No kick. And then you'd all b!tch about Rupp sitting and kicking to win.

[quote]where's the data? wrote:

why does everybody say this? why would you think a 24yo 13:09 guy (who hasn't ran close to his potential for the track 10K) is "made for" the marathon? what are you basing this off of? do you know of some crazy 20+ mile long runs that Derrick has thrown down that the rest of us don't know about?

cripes let the the guy race a half first.

[quote]The Single Voice of Reason wrote:

First of all -- I said I'd like to see him race a half, so not sure what your point is with the last comment. Second: the reason he hasn't run up to his potential in a 10k is because he hasn't really been in a fast one in 2 or 3 years. And he keeps getting hurt toward the end of his outdoor seasons, so even the championship races he's been in haven't been great.

Whether these injuries are a function of mileage or of Schumacher's tendency to have his runners hammer all the time is anyone's guess -- but he's not failing to live up to his 10k potential because he's secretly a 3k/5k guy, surely. He can't change gears at all in the track events; Rupp's 11 seconds better in the 5k by PR but just completely obliterates Derrick in any slow race at 10k, like he's racing against a high schooler.

Derrick's never going to be a contender for a medal on the track -- he's probably my favorite pro runner, but his skill set is not the right one for championship track racing. For an American he'll be very very good in terms of PR, but that's about it. And sure, he may never be a contender in a major marathon either -- who knows, it's hard to predict with all the 2:03-5 guys these days -- but Meb, Kiprotich, and others have shown the championship marathons are still open game. Give him a few years of healthy volume and Derrick will be a monster in the marathon; god knows we need one coming up. Post 2016, I expect big things.

Yea a half usually does come first, thanks for stating the obvious and the worthless post.

Derrick seems to me to be an even hybrid of Salazar and Shorter...the good parts.

rojo wrote:

[quote]jason bold wrote:

If we have to cut one olympic event, i'd say 5000 not 10,000. Think about all of the epic 10,000 races. Mills, Haile - Tergat, Farah . Those were some of the highlights of the Games. When has the been the case in the 5000?

Lol wtf

The Single Voice of Reason wrote:

Derrick's never going to be a contender for a medal on the track -- he's probably my favorite pro runner, but his skill set is not the right one for championship track racing.

The only skill set you need is to be able to run fast. I wish this silly idea that everyone has to be able to blast a 52 second final lap in order to medal would stop. It's not true.

He can't do it on the track. No Kick! The poster is right.

rojo wrote:

jason bold wrote:

Who cares? Get him on the track. If you can't run on the track, you cannot run on the world stage. Derrick know this. He opted out for this xc race because he needs to keep his name in the spotlight.

Who cares? I care.

. I think xc may end up in the Olympics - maybe instead of the 10,000. Xc is how the sport originated. If tandf is trying to go more X games, it should certainly have the 10,000 be xc instead of the track.

That being said, I like the 10,000 way more than the 5,000. If we have to cut one olympic event, i'd say 5000 not 10,000. Think about all of the epic 10,000 races. Mills, Haile - Tergat, Farah . Those were some of the highlights of the Games. When has the been the case in the 5000?

Viren - 72 5000

Viren - 76 5000

as for putting up the money through indiegogo, how about dipping into that trust fund, rojo? Crack open the trust fund.

They say the same thing about 23 year old Jordan Hasay. Run the marathon, run the marathon! It appears her wheels are beginning to crush the milers right now.

Derrick needs to call Alberto. There are openings.

lkjc wrote:

The problem with this scenario is that Rupp would just sit on Derrick the whole race until the final 400m and blast him like he's done in the last 20 x they've raced. Derrick is the modern-day Salazar. Great runner. No kick. And then you'd all b!tch about Rupp sitting and kicking to win.

I wouldn't call him Salazar. He closed in 53.91 (granted, in a 3:47 race) to almost beat Lawi in the Pac-12 1500.

He closed a 7:46 NCAA Indoor 3K at slight altitude in 56.2, the day after the 5000.

jchristophe wrote:

I'd love to see him take it to Rupp on the track.

Stanford > Oregon

Hmmmmmmm.....?

You wanna see what happens if Derrick were to race Rupp on the track?

Rupp would beat him over any distance.

Correction; Rupp would destroy him over any distance.

ooso wrote:

The only skill set you need is to be able to run fast. I wish this silly idea that everyone has to be able to blast a 52 second final lap in order to medal would stop. It's not true.

"silly idea"? I wouldn't it call it that. Sure, if you can start dropping 4:00 or sub 4:00 miles in the middle of a 5k or 10k, then you might not need to be able to run a last lap in 52. But if you can't...and it's tactical...... then you certainly do need to.

Look at Rupp. He had run great times from HS, college, early pro, but until he showed he could REALLY kick with the big kickers (when he miraculously {at the time it seemed miraculous} out kicked Lagat), no one considered him a medal threat, and he probably wasn't (without that "newfound" kick).

Look at Ritz. Fantastic range, amazing strength, 12:56 PR...he NEVER was a medal threat on the track, because he had no kick and the races are often tactical, and guys almost as strong as him were much better kickers.

Solinsky: we never really got to find out about him, but I feel confident, that with his lack of 200 kick (he could go from 2 laps out), even when he was in sub 27 and low 12:50's shape, he wasn't gonna medal in an even semi-tactical race.

Sure, I'll admit that when Ritz was at his brief peak (maybe when he ran 12:56 or between his 12:56 and 60:00 bronze at world 1/2 marathon), or when Sol was at his brief peak (throwing down 12:55-56 three times), in the PERFECT championship race (perfect for them, fast start, hard middle, no let-up) they might have had a shot a bronze if several runners faded. But in a typical championship race, not much of a real shot.

And those guys were better than Derrick. At least for now, maybe Derrick will make a big jump this year on the track. I never thought Ritz and Sol would run 12:55/56.

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

...

Solinsky: we never really got to find out about him, but I feel confident, that with his lack of 200 kick (he could go from 2 laps out), even when he was in sub 27 and low 12:50's shape, he wasn't gonna medal in an even semi-tactical race...

Using your own purely hypothetical evaluation of Solinsky's lack of ability to medal while in peak form is basically zero evidence to back up your conclusion that Derrick does not have the ability to medal on the track.

And this is coming from someone who agrees with your conclusion. Derrick would have a better chance internationally at HM or Marathon distances. But your use of something you are just making up about Solinsky really doesn't help make your case.

the post questioned why people think a guy who has not raced more than a 12K is "made for" the marathon. seems like a legit question. if C. Derrick can go Ryan Hall on his first or second attempt at the HM, then i'd be more convinced he has is a shoe-in for a sub-2:08 marathon with the potential to go faster. but until then there's no reason think that. your post is just hating. that's worthless.

bernardshakey wrote:

Yea a half usually does come first, thanks for stating the obvious and the worthless post.

cross country should be an end in itself.

cross country should be an Olympic sport.

cross country should be the #1 event in running or on a par with marathon, mile 100m etc.

running on the track is the perfect running scenario, a flat fast predictable surface, which is a completely artificial situation. your sill set is very limited.

while cross is running done right is really challenging and could feature a "real" environment. really to emphasize all round skill a course should have barriers (straw or fences not injury inviting steeple chase idiot hurdles) some perfect footing stretches, some soggy turf, some tough hills but not insane declines where injury is a big possibility.

really cross country - with the right course could establish really who is the best runner in the world - in a natural scenario.

a guy like ritz should be focused every year on WCC and in the off season run marathons. rather than just run XC for training.

reality says that XC needs sponsorship or a diamond league and like I said they really need to get the courses right, that reward a variety of running skills.

looks like Nike and Al Sal have the power to help make it happen. Coe too is a big supporter of XC I think. Now add on some other allies and you're "off to the races".