Olympic 1500 Splits?

For Matthew Centrowitz, roughly:

Last 100: 12.7

Last 200: 25.4

Last 300: 38.0

Last 400: 50.6

Last 600: 1:17.9

Last 800: 1:49.8

Hjjdbjnfnf wrote:

Anybody have a link to the last lap splits of the men's 1500m final? It would be cool to see each 100m split if the athletes as well. The women's splits were posted on another thread.

Ok, I analysed the race in some detail and have worked out the splits for Centro, Makhloufi and Kiprop.

Before I get posters telling me I'm out by 0.1 sec, I would like to note that the official splits displayed on screen were often 0.1 sec behind where the lead athlete's torso was at the time. Thus, when taking most splits (i.e not the 400, 800, 1200m) I added 0.1 secs to the time shown on the running clock, to keep it in line with what the official clock was displaying. E.g. When Centro's torso was on the 800m mark, the running clock showed 2:16.4, whereas the official split then appeared as 1:16.59. When he crossed the finish, the time was 3:49.9, but then moved on a tenth to 3:50.01 (then adjusted to 3:50.00).

Hope that makes sense!

For many of Makhloufi's and Kiprop's splits, I had to make some estimation based on their distance behind the leader (Centro) and through using clear markers (e.g, other lines on track) as close to the 100m markers as possible.

Thus, If Centro went through a yellow mark on the track just shy of the 1200m line in say 3:10.0, and Mak was 0.2 behind, then it is pretty certain that he went through 1200m the same 0.2 secs behind. Clearly, one can make a visual judgement to see if this gap lessens or widens in the space of 2 secs and then you simply adjust accordingly.

I'm pretty confident that all split times are correct, give or take 0.1.

Distance Centrowitz Makhloufi Kiprop

100m 14.1, c.14.4, c.14.9

200m 31.1, 31.7, 32.5

300m 48.7, 49.2, 49.8

400m 66.83, 67.3, 67.8

500m 1:24.8, 1:25.2, 1:25.7

600m 1:43.2, 1:43.8 (1m wide), 1:44.4

700m 1:59.8, 2:00.4, 1:59.9

800m 2:16.59, 2:17.5 (2.5m w), 2:16.9 (2m wide)

900m 2:32.0, 2:33.0, 2:32.8

1000m 2:45.8, 2:46.6 (4m w), 2:46.6 (2m w)

1100m 2:59.4, 2:59.6, 2:59.5

1200m 3:12.00, 3:12.2 (3m w), 3:12.5 (3.5m w)

1300m 3:24.4, 3:24.6, 3:24.4

1400m 3:37.2, 3:37.3 (3m w), 3:37.3 (2m w)

1500m 3:50.00, 3:50.11, 3:50.87

laps C- 66.8,69.8,55.4,38.0....M-67.3,70.2,54.7,37.9...K-67.8,69.1,55.6,38.3

OR - C-48.7,71.1,59.6,50.6....M-49.2,71.2,59.2,50.5...K-49.8,70.1,59.6,51.3

last: - Centro Makhloufi Kiprop

800 1:50.2, 1:49.7, 1:50.9

700 1:33.4 (1:46.7 800 pace), 1:32.6, 1:33.9

600 1:18.0, 1:17.1, 1:18.0

500 1:04.2, 1:03.5, 1:04.2

400 50.6, 50.5, 51.3

300 38.0, 37.9, 38.3

200 25.6, 25.5, 26.4

100 12.8, 12.8, 13.5

In terms of extra distance run on bends, Centrowitz pretty much ran just 1500m, staying close to rails throughout.

-Makhloufi ran c.13.5m extra, about 2.05 sec in terms of time.

-Kiprop ran c. 9.5m extra, worth about 1.45 secs.

Centrowitz had no drafting, and it is usual to expect 1000m of drafting in a tt circuit race. It's not usually the case to expect any drafting in the first 100m, where everyone is jockeying for position, but from 100m to the bell, 1100m, 2.5 laps of drafting is ideal.

Centrowitz got no drafting at all. Each 400m without drafting costs between 0.7 and 1.0 sec. For arguments sake, let's call it 0.7 sec. So for 1000m without drafting, that cost Centrowitz about 1000/400 x 0.7 = 1.8 sec.

-So the adjusted value for Centro's run is ~ 3:50.00 - 1.8 secs = 3:48.2

Makhloufi had drafting from c 100m - 900m (800m) and then from 1250 - 1300m (50m) for a total of 850m of drafting. That means he is due 150m to bring him up to 1000m, for comparison with Centro's performance.

150/400 x 0.7 = 0.26 sec. But he also needs adjusting for the extra distance run, which was 2.05 secs.

-So the adjusted value for Makhloufi's run is ~ 3:50.11 - 2.05 - 0.26 = 3:47.8

Kiprop had drafting from 100 - 650 (550m). from 700 - 1070 (370m) and from 1130 - 1170 (40m), for a total of 960m of drafting. He is due only 40m extra, which is: - 40/400 x 0.7 = 0.07 sec. But he also needs 1.45sec taken off for extra distance run.

-So the adjusted value for Kiprop's run is ~ 3:50.87 - 1.45 - 0.07 = 3:49.35.

N.B - When adjusting for extra distance run, Makhloufi ran 12.5m extra over the last 2 laps, meaning his 1:49.7 was more like a 1:48.0.

He covered 10m extra in the last 600m (1:17.1), making it equivalent to c. 1:15.8!

He ran 6m extra on the last lap, bringing his 50.5 down to 49.8!! had he run on inside of lane 1.

N.B - Kiprop's penultimate last 200m (from 1100 - 1300m) was 24.9. But considering he ran that penultimate bend wide, covering an extra 3.5m, then that brings that 200m stretch down to something like 24.46!

So, I think there is enough evidence there to dismiss the idea that Makhloufi and/or Kiprop were somehow not trying or letting Centro win. That is nonsense.

Centrowitz won, as many have in the past, not because he was necessarily the quickest to cover 1500m (when extra distance is taken into consideration), but because he ran the smartest race on the biggest stage, and handled the pressure better than anyone else.

Even when the extra distance of Makhloufi and the lack of drafting for Centrowitz are adjusted for, they were still pretty evenly matched. Mak perhaps was over confident that at such a slow pace he could still run wide and outkick everyone else. But he was no faster than Centro down the home straight and couldn't get past him.

Another take away from this race is the fact that Centro was a good second better than Kiprop. Yes, Kip run extra distance, but Centrowitz made the brave decision to run pretty much every step from the front, thus relinquishing any drafting for himself, and acting as a pacer for the rest of the field.

Centrowitz deserved to win and the stats show that the only person on the day that could have threatened with a better tactical performance, was Makhloufi.

N.B - Just before posting I previewed this, but all the split times won't line up under each other like I originally set it out. Apologies.

Hope it can still be made sense of.

Deanouk wrote:

Ok, I analysed the race in some detail . . .

Very nice work!

Deanouk wrote:

Hjjdbjnfnf wrote:

Anybody have a link to the last lap splits of the men's 1500m final? It would be cool to see each 100m split if the athletes as well. The women's splits were posted on another thread.

Ok, I analysed the race in some detail and have worked out the

What about just the official ones?

Flamingosis wrote:

Deanouk wrote:

Ok, I analysed the race in some detail and have worked out the

What about just the official ones?

http://www.runmichigan.com/mynews/data/upimages/subfolders/results/atm015101_raceanalysis_2016_08_20_fa422345_4b53_492c_88e4_83ad0877c893.pdf

Thanks for link, but I have to seriously question how accurate they are!

It has Centro's 300 split as 49.2, whereas on the video of the race (I have a recording of it live, but can't see it on Youtube at moment to leave a link), he actually hits that mark at 48.6! There is a residual error of 0.1 on all the official splits, so I find it hard to think that this split is 0.6 out!

Same thing with 1000m. It has it a 2:46.3 for Centro. He is clearly on the line at 2:45.8.

It also has Ben Blankenship as being in the lead at 800m (2:16.6) and Centro in 2nd (2:16.7), when Centro was clearly in front of Blankenship! The time came up as 2:16.59. So they are completely wrong there.

It's not possible for there to be a time lapse of 0.1 at the 400, 800, 1200 and finish line, and up to 0.5 elsewhere.

Very strange that there doesn't appear to be a single site showing the entire race from a tv channel! Only highlights, edits, dodgy home-made videos on Youtube. There is an official one of 10 mins plus for the women's final, but not for the men's.

The other Pdf showing the results for the race from the same source has Centrowitz as leader at 800m in 2:16.59, whereas the link you gave has him at 2:16.7 with Blenkanship in the lead at 2:16.6!

http://www.runmichigan.com/mynews/data/upimages/subfolders/results/atm015101_results_2016_08_20_4e845cb0_1a91_4105_992f_6247b103ad01.pdf

I know it's nothing to do with you and you were being helpful with your link, but I question the accuracy of the split times it gives.

denouk, your adjustments are hogwash. You don't lose time by leading, nor do you lose time by not running on the rail. The athletes occupy exactly the same place in space regardless of leading, following or running in lane 2.

This is a joke right?Should we get rid of the stagger for lane starts too?

malmo wrote:

denouk, your adjustments are hogwash. You don't lose time by leading, nor do you lose time by not running on the rail. The athletes occupy exactly the same place in space regardless of leading, following or running in lane 2.

malmo wrote:

denouk, your adjustments are hogwash. You don't lose time by leading, nor do you lose time by not running on the rail. The athletes occupy exactly the same place in space regardless of leading, following or running in lane 2.

Then perhaps you'd like to enlighten your chum Calculo next time he posts just such hogwash?

Wow - thanks for this very detailed analysis.

3:50 in an Olympic final. At least it has had one good aspect. Enough time for german TV to still cover the full last lap after an looong break inbetween to see some field eventers going to there place after some failure. From Ayana's WR they showed - nothing. (just last lap after the race). Just for info: they televised every athletics session for several hours. Unbelievable. But out of context here - sorry.

said88 wrote:

Wow - thanks for this very detailed analysis.

3:50 in an Olympic final. At least it has had one good aspect. Enough time for german TV to still cover the full last lap after an looong break inbetween to see some field eventers going to there place after some failure. From Ayana's WR they showed - nothing. (just last lap after the race). Just for info: they televised every athletics session for several hours. Unbelievable. But out of context here - sorry.

Thanks Said88!

I can't believe they left the 1500m race to show field events!?

The BBC showed it all, in it's entirety, and the women's 10k.

I'm surprised that the men's 1500 isn't available in its entirety on the Internet. I can only find highlights, edits, etc.

Hope you have luck finding it, because I'd appreciate you checking the splits above. I know you are analytical and trust your observations.

Cheers.

Deanouk wrote:

malmo wrote:

denouk, your adjustments are hogwash. You don't lose time by leading, nor do you lose time by not running on the rail. The athletes occupy exactly the same place in space regardless of leading, following or running in lane 2.

Then perhaps you'd like to enlighten your chum Calculo next time he posts just such hogwash?

I have no interest in your little circle jerk.

Video of final

malmo wrote:

Deanouk wrote:

Then perhaps you'd like to enlighten your chum Calculo next time he posts just such hogwash?

I have no interest in your little circle jerk.

But enough interest to proclaim your lack of interest. Me thinks your a closet circle jerker.

Linsanity wrote:

http://www.nbcolympics.com/news/matthew-centrowitz-first-us-athlete-win-olympic-1500m-1908

Video of final

Hey, thanks for the link, but unfortunately it won't play in 'my domain', i.e, UK!

But appreciate the effort. :0)

Concupiscurd wrote:

http://olympics.cbc.ca/video/vod/nathan-brannen-finishes-10th-men-500m-final-american-matthew-centrowitz.html

Thanks for your link too. This one allowed me to see the adverts at the beginning, but then screen said, 'we are currently experiencing technical difficulties'! I'll try again tomorrow.

I do actually have my own copy of the race saved on my Tivo box, but just wanted to use a link on Net everyone can access and go check for themselves.

Thanks once again.

Thanks for your support and those of 'Sure, Whatever You Say Man'.