It is? Did you watch Heat 2 of the men's 1500m? Ask them about how going out in 4 min pace worked out for them getting a time qualifier? Geez arguing with LRC is like talking to a 5 year old.
It's THIS simple: If you run an honest time you get in NO MATTER what...on time or place.
If you d*ck around in a jog fest like Heat 2 the other day, you risk not placing and def not making time.
How hard is that to understand dumba$$?????
live coverage in 14 mins wrote:
nigel power wrote:Could you explain to me how it makes more sense to push the pace in a weak field heat 1 than it would in a normal field heat 1?
If you don't push the pace in Heat 1 the only the top finishers move to the final. The stronger and faster guys in heat 2 will take all the time qualifiers. Plus NO ONE in heat one even has the Oly Standard. They may as well shut it down now if they're not going to even try to run a fast heat.
It is always true that if you don't push the pace in heat 1 then you risk getting no time qualifiers. My question is why it allegedly especially makes sense with a weaker field. If there are studs in my heat I'm more worried about needing those extra spots than if I'm racing a bunch of Engels that I think I can outkick.
Heat 1 should push the pace for a few reasons:
-If the best 3 or 4 of them work together and share the lead, maybe they can get the standard without the risk of leading solo and being outkicked.
-If they can ensure all time qualifiers come out of their heat, then there is a greater chance of a main contender not making the final from the second heat.
live coverage in 14 mins wrote:
nigel power wrote:Could you explain to me how it makes more sense to push the pace in a weak field heat 1 than it would in a normal field heat 1?
If you don't push the pace in Heat 1 the only the top finishers move to the final. The stronger and faster guys in heat 2 will take all the time qualifiers. Plus NO ONE in heat one even has the Oly Standard. They may as well shut it down now if they're not going to even try to run a fast heat.
Doesn't Merber have the standard?
Merber does, yes. So he will not be helping push the pace in heat 1.
rent a swag its the real thing wrote:
It is? Did you watch Heat 2 of the men's 1500m? Ask them about how going out in 4 min pace worked out for them getting a time qualifier? Geez arguing with LRC is like talking to a 5 year old.
It's THIS simple: If you run an honest time you get in NO MATTER what...on time or place.
If you d*ck around in a jog fest like Heat 2 the other day, you risk not placing and def not making time.
How hard is that to understand dumba$$?????
Did you watch the other two heats? The early leader fell apart and these were terribly uncompetitive HEATS. The better the competition, the more likely the early leader will get crushed.
An honest time WILL RARELY come from the early leader, thus RARELY are higher level races pushed fast.
I understand your premise, but you either have never raced at a level beyond high school or are just racing low IQ.
The some of guys in heat 1 should get together, workout a strategy to switch leads and get the standard. Probably no chance that will happen though.
CALLED IT, HEAT ONE SUPER SLOW!!!! STUPID
NO TIME QUALIFIERS WILL COME FROM THIS HEAT ..
AS I SAID!!
IDIOTS
HEAT 2 can jog and they will all make the final...EXACTLY as I posted earlier.
It's like some of you guys on LRC have never watched a pro track meet before. Heat 1 screwed themselves. No time qualifiers.
ENTIRE Heat 2 beat the 3:48.3, so they had the time qualifiers. As stated before the race. Centro and Solis took it out
asdfdsfraud corrup wrote:
ENTIRE Heat 2 beat the 3:48.3, so they had the time qualifiers. As stated before the race. Centro and Solis took it out
If you want to call 63 taking it out.
Where did Solis finish by the way? And that was off of a slow pace.
Hoka with four in the final
woah
Starter wrote:
Since someone is posting on the USATF official facebook page asking for someone to come onto this thread and explain about seeding in the 1500, I repeat this: It is rule 166 1.d.ii.b
Starter wrote:USATF is following their rules which have been in place for at least the past four years. The rule states for events up to 400 seeding in heats after the first is based on place. For longer events seeding is based on best performance in the calendar year including times run in the prelims. Remember Wheating didn't even meet the qualifying time but was accepted to fill the field.
Betsy Reed OF the USAT&F Officials group refines Starters post and in doing so clears up the idea that in the semis seeding took into account races from before the trials.
Her post> The short answer is the variance in the first round results; Heat 1 advanced 9 of 10 competitors to the semis, Heat 3 all 10, but only the 6 automatic qualifies advanced from Heat 2.
Assignments to the semis were made by ranking the automatic qualifiers in an order of: fastest first place (Engles, 3:41.92); second best first place (Avila, 3:42.27); slowest first place (Blankenship, 3:49.61); fastest second place (Winn, 3:42.22); second best second place (Manzano, 3:42.28); slowest third place (3:50.01); etc.all the way to the slowest sixth place time; then ranking the six time qualifiers in order. After ranking all qualifiers (by place over time), the assignments came from the serpentine pattern (Semi 1, Semi 2, Semi 2, Semi 1, Semi 1, etc).
(See Rule 166, "Regulations for Forming Heats" for more details on the rules that govern the process.)
https://www.facebook.com/groups/98592597792/permalink/10153602006377793/?comment_id=10153605736087793¬if_t=group_comment¬if_id=1468166200567215
