World Championships are done. Does anyone care that Symmonds wasn't there?

As a fan, I did miss Nick being at worlds. Whether or not he would have medaled didn't really matter to me. I follow track & field for entertainment value and he has a more entertaining persona than most U.S. athletes. Having said that, it didn't prevent me from watching. Talent comes and goes, the sport endures.

new shoes wrote:

dsafsdf wrote:

I bought two pairs of Brooks shoes during the worlds.

You're probably not the only one.

Nobody's thinking about Nick anymore. Oops, here's another positive story about Nick...

http://www.king5.com/story/news/local/seattle/2015/08/31/symmonds-seattle-based-brooks-running/71494386/

Yes, alas, a local TV station website, of a station based in Brooks' Seattle actually covered it as though it had a huge impact. It did not. Nick I admired until the other poster pointed out his gloating and I went to his twitter site. Ah, self-promotion at it's least appealing. Dropped several notches of respect for Nick. His running speaks droves, as did his London 12 race. Not running was a missed opportunity.

Since you are the 800 man, I have to ask if you really believe this?

"Nick has one decent play in the 800m. Follow off the pace in a fast race, going through in 51 and slowing down the least in the second lap. 52 on his best day, 53 on a good day. As the best miler of the 800m guys, his strength is his endurance. A slow first lap suits the 400m types. Solomon would have done well in that race. He's crazy for running a fast pace at nationals against Symmonds."

Nick has run 1:42.XX. To do that 51 and 52.XX don't cut it. Further is he really any kind of a miler(3:34.55 in a paced race wins what)? Or is he more like Centro (you know 13:20, no 3000 to speak of), knowing himself and being in the right position.

Even more puzzling, Solomon would have done well in that race????

Solomon would have done exactly what he did at nationals if his run at nationals got him on the team. When Solomon went out fast in this hypothetical WC final, Rudisha and the rest would have run MUCH different races.

'World Championships are done.'

Have the words finished, completed or over become extinct in America.

Every other sentence an American utters appears to have the word 'done' in it. I think you wrote the post just to include the phrase 'done'.

Doclove wrote:

'World Championships are done.'

Have the words finished, completed or over become extinct in America.

Every other sentence an American utters appears to have the word 'done' in it. I think you wrote the post just to include the phrase 'done'.

If you are going to criticize someone's grammar, try to minimize your own grammatical errors.

Nick only hurt himself. His No#1 priority should be RUNNING FAST!!! and maximizing his potential. That means going to World Champs and Olympics and competing. Who gives a flying crap about standing on your soap box and crying foul. As I said in an earlier post "You can do that when your retired". His window for running fast is closing quickly if not already. He's wasted an entire year by not shutting up.

Idiot much wrote:

Les wrote:

Considering we only won 1 distance medal we could have used him. The way the 800 played out though, wasn't to Symmonds strength. But he would have made the final, I believe.

Hahah are u freaking serious!? How didn't it play to his strength. This man loves to start slow and come from behind. He would have sat in the top 3 off the slow pace and kicked hard into the finish and would have medaled. This was his chance at gold. It probably will never happen again like this when Aman and the Botswana guy get back to the finals.

You are an absolute moron.

Nick's "start slow and come from behind" strategy is COMPLETELY dependent on everyone else starting out a bit too fast and then coming back to him on the last 200. He DOES NOT have great top-end speed and is ENTIRELY dependent on others being completely gassed while he is only partially gassed at the end.

This first lap jog of a final would have been an absolute disaster for Nick.

My god, do you even watch this sport?

He did it to stand up for what hr thinks, and perhaps a lot of non-nike athletes also think, a point for clarification. When do you need to wear your USA-Nike stuff, and when not. What are the official functions not specified?

He's run 1.52.95. His best run was 51, then 52. He's also good for 51 and 53 on a good day. He catches the guys who went out too fast. That's his entire strategy for international 800m running and at USAs. However, those days are fading quickly. He's already ended his 2015 season. He tried to cover up his less than stellar form with grandstanding, many people outside track and field bought it. But, those close to the sport know it was selfish grandstanding.

Dude, seriously get help.

chunky wrote:

Old man ranty wrote:

berian was more of a medal threat. Solomon was more of a medal threat.

Symmonds was only a threat to the buffet table.

Yeah & I've been a fan longer than you've been alive sonny

No, Symmonds was much more of a medal threat because Symmonds made the team.

Buffet table? You mean he was out of shape? That's already been covered, geezer. He trained to peak at worlds. He was in excellent shape.

I've got chunks of fans like you in my stool.

One thing I learned from your post: You Care.

My Chunky friend, I appreciate your support but hate to say that I was at the buffet table and couldn't be happier with my decision. All the stress of training for that Ninja Warrior show took a lot out of me and taking a flier on Worlds was the best decision that I could have made. Its all about the long term, when you think about Brooks I want you to think of me just like when you think of Cytomel you think of Galen. If I had gone to Worlds I am afraid that my performance might have been about as foul as your filthy stool. Now I don't need to worry about that and can focus on the next chapter of my life's story. One more thing, I think that I might have mentioned this in Life Outside the Oval Office, you really should try to respect your elders son, I can take care of Nick, you take care of you.

Dear Mr. Symmonds,

You had me at "I appreciate your support" !!! I will keep munching these geezers and taking my fiber supplement.

Yours truly against USATF,

chunky, a.k.a. on this thread, THE WINNER!!!

If USATF was broke and unable to pay athletes to attend national championships and fund a full team to international competitions, which is the case in every other nation, Nick would be complaining about that. USATF, and US athletes, are fortunate their federation is rich.

Nick stood up for what he thought was right. He got zero support from the other athletes.

You may recall that after the two DQ's at the indoor meet two years ago, there was a lot of noise about boycotting the outdoor meet and standing up for what the athletes thought was right. The bigger issue here is USATF is a mess and the athletes really don't give a $hit. They worry only about themselves. AAC is a joke, Hightower is a joke, the Board is a joke, Seigel is a joke. Not one of these groups or individuals gives a damn about the future of Track and field in this country.

Nick was right about the the "lost money" in USATF. I have been witness to money wasted on useless "projects", trips, meetings and junkets all in the name of athlete support. Total BS. But this is a group of selfish athletes, who may be having their only shot at an international trip, or are trying to kiss enough backside to get themselves into a nice admininstrative position. They are not going to sacrifice any of that for the good of the order.

Why isn't Symmonds running Zurich?

I think the slower 800 may have been to Nick's advantage.

His lack of 400m speed hurts him more in the first lap than the second.

He is just unable to keep up with a very fast pace.

But he'd be right up there in a slower pace.

And speedier guys will still be a bit gassed on a slow pace that would affect Nick less.

He wouldn't be coming from as far back and everyone is hurting that last 100, even off a slow pace (53 still puts junk in your legs)

His medal chances this year would have been more about positioning than about pace.

Star wrote:

I think the slower 800 may have been to Nick's advantage.

His lack of 400m speed hurts him more in the first lap than the second.

He is just unable to keep up with a very fast pace.

But he'd be right up there in a slower pace.

And speedier guys will still be a bit gassed on a slow pace that would affect Nick less.

He wouldn't be coming from as far back and everyone is hurting that last 100, even off a slow pace (53 still puts junk in your legs)

His medal chances this year would have been more about positioning than about pace.

OK, so you don't understand the sport. No shame in that.

If Symmonds struggles to run a 50 second first lap, how on earth do you expect him run a 50 on the second lap? He's the slowest 400m runner of the current top group, even at his peak in 2012. He was in 48.5 400m shape heading in to Beijing, not nearly fast enough. Plus, his endurance was way down. Heading in to London 2012, he had run a 3.35 1500m. He's not shown that type of over distance conditioning since 2012.

This is 2015, on current form, lack of speed, lack of endurance, and lack of desire to take on the world's best, Symmonds would have been destroyed in that race. He knew it, that's the main reason he wasn't there.

He's run one decent race in two years. By the time he races again, it will be three years.

If Symmonds really was in shape, he'd be racing in Europe this month.

C'mon. At least add something new to the conversation. Your dribble was covered earlier in this thread in this post summarizing the arguments of Nick-haters:

Why hide it? Just come out and finish your post with "and the reason I think this is because I Hate Nick Symmonds."

BTW this Zurich race was won by Kszczot in 1:45.55. Symmonds might not have won this race.... and the reason I think this is because Kszczot Isn't Overburdened By Vowels. I have no foundation for this reasoning, but just like you, 800m man, it makes me feel good.