Will this be the slowest 1500m final in trials history? YES it will

usual jog fest guaranteed wrote:

So we live in 2016. Everybody running today grew up with participation trophies and support socialist/commie ideals. That means that they don't work hard or take risks to be great. They run safe (read: scared and weak).

They have no balls, much like our current president...You heard it here first.

Trials record, thanks to millenial Yorks. We did hear it here first, and it was bullshit.

Thank you. Seeing someone else who understands higher level racing has restored a lot of my faith. Well said.

sc42 wrote:

usual jog fest guaranteed wrote:

So we live in 2016. Everybody running today grew up with participation trophies and support socialist/commie ideals. That means that they don't work hard or take risks to be great. They run safe (read: scared and weak).

They have no balls, much like our current president...You heard it here first.

Trials record, thanks to millenial Yorks. We did hear it here first, and it was bullshit.

Boomers were swindled by Wheating's bluff...Like they were swindled by their mortgage lenders, by the people who fabricated Christianity, by people who told them college doesn't matter, by George W Bush, and as we speak, by Donald MF Dwumpf. Let's make sure to avoid the mistakes of these tremendous disasters.

What this guy said.... wrote:

wait what wrote:

Participation trophies have nothing to do with the pace of tonight's 1500. The goals are to win, place top 3, beat as many as possible. Going balls to the wall from lap 1 would ruin your chance at any of those goals. In fact, it's almost an assured way to DFL and get an A for effort. You can then claim you led the first or second lap of the 1500m USA finals, which ironically would be its own participation trophy.

^This.

OP is probably a member of the entitlement generation (aka Baby Boomers, aka those who have destroyed America, aka the WORST generation) who is bitter about his lack of accomplishments in life and that fact that he has to use b0ner pills to get it up these days.

Don't be confused. OP is a feeble troll. Age has nothing to do with his inane assertion.

opinionated guy wrote:

Thank you. Seeing someone else who understands higher level racing has restored a lot of my faith. Well said.

You are welcome, but I think you did a much better job of explaining what we had all just seen. Sadly, it seems to have had little impact. The depth of the delusion here is impressive.

Is there a youtube video of the race yet that isn't NBC? I can't watch the nbc one cause I'm in the UK (which is dumb).

Star wrote:

So now that the race is over ...

We see the guys that took it out to make fast, finished way back and didn't hit the standard or even a seasonal best.

Leading can work for good runners, not mid packers.

I don't give them credit for trying.

Looking back we will just look at the results.

The truth is the top 4 guys would have finished in the top 4 spots if the race was won in 3:44 or 3:34. Those guys all had the standard for a reason.

molespookes wrote:

...If you make the trials and just run to place, and not make the team, then why go? Its not the nationals. .

Are you sure it is not the nationals?

Everybody else says it is.

Qqqqqqqqwwwwww wrote:

-andrews

-wheating

-MERBER/leo

You heard it here first

you mean how dead fvking wrong you were??

I agree the top 4 was pretty much set in this race no matter what, but while he may have been tired from a long season, he may not have the kick of the others, and 3:37 may be all he has in his career at this point, anyone who thought this race was going to be a jog-fest with Yorks in it hasn't been paying attention.

sc42 wrote:

usual jog fest guaranteed wrote:

So we live in 2016. Everybody running today grew up with participation trophies and support socialist/commie ideals. That means that they don't work hard or take risks to be great. They run safe (read: scared and weak).

They have no balls, much like our current president...You heard it here first.

Trials record, thanks to millenial Yorks. We did hear it here first, and it was bullshit.

opinionated guy wrote:

Thank you. Seeing someone else who understands higher level racing has restored a lot of my faith. Well said.

So you're saying that if they go out slow with the pack they're schlubs and they suck. But if they go out fast, they are showboater 3:37 hobby joggers, and they still suck?

Serious question. Are you EVER happy about anything? Do tell!

What are you talking about?? wrote:Like the hobby-jogger, these guys had no chance of winning, or even of running the standard. Everyone knew that. Everyone. By going out fast, they weren't "going for it all." They were simply faking it, pretending to be who they weren't. And in they end, all they did was serve as rabbits for the guys who did have a chance.

I think the point is that for everyone who made the finals, any choice other than maximizing his chances of going to Rio was almost pointless. The difference between 4th place and 13th place was almost meaningless, while going to Rio would be career-changing. Even winning, but without the standard, would have been barely better than just making the final.

McNamara and the others who tried to hit the standard chose between zero chance of going to the Olympics without the standard and a very small chance of going to the Olympics if they hit the standard and were in the top 3. When those are your choices, trying to hit the standard is the rational choice.

Also, from a fan's standpoint, they made the race worth watching and I'm always grateful to runners who prevent a predictable jogfest.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

The field is almost identical to last year's race, which was won in 3:37. Centro closed in 1:48, Andrews in 1:49, Manzano and Blankenship in 1:50.

That race went out slow (about 2:03 at 800m). If this one starts out honest, say 1:58-2:00 at 800m, then it will probably be won in 3:35 or faster, because any move Centro makes, Andrews will match, and those guys will battle it out for the win.

This 2:10/3:48 talk is ridiculous.

^^ Lenny gets it. Great post!!

rational choice wrote:

McNamara and the others who tried to hit the standard chose between zero chance of going to the Olympics without the standard and a very small chance of going to the Olympics if they hit the standard and were in the top 3. When those are your choices, trying to hit the standard is the rational choice.

This is Economics 101. Any action that didn't get the race to the Olympic standard pace had an expected payout of 0 for those without the standard. So trying to maximize their return required pushing the pace, even if it carried a very high risk of flameout. McNamara and Yorks weren't dumb enough to think it was likely to work, but not doing something to push the pace early was guaranteed not to work, so why not try?

Fjords and sandstorms wrote:

So you're saying that if they go out slow with the pack they're schlubs and they suck. But if they go out fast, they are showboater 3:37 hobby joggers, and they still suck?

Serious question. Are you EVER happy about anything? Do tell!

I will take you at your word that it is a serious question and address your questions honestly.

I am not sure where you thought I said they suck. What I did say is for someone in the Olympic trials finals who set a fast pace for 400-600 meters, appear to give up and drop to the back, are not brave or heroes as some called them. I believe they KNEW they couldn't hold it from the start. So why did they do it? I see brave as trying something to make the team - shock the world. I even gave examples such as surging strong in the middle, going with a slow pace then starting a near sprint kick from 600 out, etc.

My happiness has nothing to do with this. I am not trying to troll or put anyone down. I just cannot understand why the coaches of the three guys who did this didn't convince their athletes to try something "that gave them a chance of top 3, no matter how remote." Anyone who has watched higher level 1500s, and most coaches have witnessed a practical lifetime of them, knows that if a mid-pack guy/gal going in sets a fast early pace, they will be buried in the end.

opinonated guy wrote:I just cannot understand why the coaches of the three guys who did this didn't convince their athletes to try something "that gave them a chance of top 3, no matter how remote."

Of course the problem is, for them top 3 wasn't good enough. They needed to win a race, but they also had a time trial. They had to simultaneously achieve both despite being slower than the top guys. Kicking with 600 to go might have gotten them top 3, but it already would have been too late for the Olympic Standard.

Economics wrote:

Of course the problem is, for them top 3 wasn't good enough. They needed to win a race, but they also had a time trial. They had to simultaneously achieve both despite being slower than the top guys. Kicking with 600 to go might have gotten them top 3, but it already would have been too late for the Olympic Standard.

I understand their dilemma, but getting to the trials final without the standard puts them between a rock and a hard spot. I am 48 years old and have NEVER seen a mid-pack guy/gal lead in a fast pace and finish in the first half of finishers. They HAVE to try something else and as I said, I put that on their coach.

You say they needed to time trial. Do you realize that they did it for what, 400 meters? That is not even admirable. Then they just went right to the back far behind the pack with no visible effort to hang on. That tells me that they were not confident or ready for a time trial type approach. Someone (coach and/or athlete) should have known this before toeing the line and tried a plan of substance.

About 1200m in the race I was watching. Sure Jmac wasn't there but Yorks was right there were a 55/56 (i.e. reasonable kick for a 3:36 runner) last 400 would make the team and get the qualifer.

Lets make it simple, who would you rather be

a) Gregorek who hit 1100m at 2:42.6 and needing a 53.5 or so to make the team (i. not happening)

b) Yorks hitting 1100 at 2:40.3 needing a 55.9 (i.e. somewhat realistic)

B is going for it. A is there for the experience... You can debate exact exection but they did a heck of a lot better than the 5k guys who jogged for 1k, sprinted for a lap, and then got sucked up. But yeah JMac comes across poorly after leading for like 300ms and then dropping like a rock

This.

OP is a moron.

Blankenship should get McNamara and Avila beers for making the race fast and giving him a chance against Manzano.