4 person champ final heat: 2 scratches, 1 FS, and solo run for title

This one makes me lol every time. Major kudos to this guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woYG6Uq6OVU

I'm not sure the OP's description is doing the race proper justice. Nor is the tweet description by the Ivy League. The race was a 2 heat final (seeds #3/4 are in the first heat). So he wasn't just racing himself. He was racing the clock.

Once we had the DQ, everyone realized he'd be running alone. People had time to get back into it as the guy DQd protested and tried to get back on the track. Nope.

Not only did he beat the time from heat #1, he crushed the Ivy League meet record.

The crowd was going nuts as were we on the broadcast (I was the color commentator).

It reaffirmed a thought I've had about marketing the sport. I've alway thought it might be fun to have races maybe once a year where people run it by themselves. It would work perfectly for a 400. You come out, run your lap- then the next guy does it. For tv viewers, you could even superimpose the previous runner electronically so you could tell if he or she was ahead or behind - kind of like that world record line they use in swimming.

400 might be best. But a mile would be cool. Would the best miler also be the best time trialer? I don't know. We could have a whole set of WRs - absolute WR and solo WR.

The 200 was one of the funnest races I've ever watched.

would you consider van Niekerk to have the solo WR then (in addition to the absolute WR), since he ran in lane 8 and never saw a single competitor from gun to tape?

The announcers are great. The one cheeses out when the other sarcastically goes "he's got a massive lead Bill".

Pretty clear why you would be the color commentator rather than the subject matter expert on a broadcast. This post is a perfect example.

diet snapple wrote:

The announcers are great. The one cheeses out when the other sarcastically goes "he's got a massive lead Bill".

Thanks. I guess you didn't realize I was the announcer. I was the one with the joke - Bill Spaulding was the one laughing.

Sdfsdfsdfsdfsdf wrote:

Pretty clear why you would be the color commentator rather than the subject matter expert on a broadcast. This post is a perfect example.

Guess you don't understand how announcing works. The color commentator is the subject matter expert.

rojo wrote:

It reaffirmed a thought I've had about marketing the sport. I've alway thought it might be fun to have races maybe once a year where people run it by themselves. It would work perfectly for a 400. You come out, run your lap- then the next guy does it. For tv viewers, you could even superimpose the previous runner electronically so you could tell if he or she was ahead or behind - kind of like that world record line they use in swimming.

400 might be best. But a mile would be cool. Would the best miler also be the best time trialer? I don't know. We could have a whole set of WRs - absolute WR and solo WR.

The 200 was one of the funnest races I've ever watched.

One of the best things about running races which appeals to the general public is the visible head-to-head racing which occurs.

It is not like gymnastics, the field events, diving, etc. where competitors compete alone and on there own.

With head-to-head racing you have tactics and strategy that come into play. There are benefits from pacing in head-to-head races. But the overall winner is immediately obvious.

It could be argued that the 100, 200 and 400 are essentially individual time trials now. They are short enough that the best only focus on themselves and give 100% when running in a lane.

For longer events, the actual racing head-to-head can either slow times or provide extra incentive to run faster.

The clock is a formidable opponent and provides a great incentive to run fast on your own. Every men's world record 400, 800, 5k and 10k was essentially run with the record setter in front with no one really close for most of the race. (1500m record is the exception and was paced for 1200m...) Great things can happen when the distraction of competition is removed and the focus is only on going as fast as possible

this and this wrote:

Great things can happen when the distraction of effective drug testing is removed and the focus is only on going as fast as possible

FIFY

rojo wrote:

Thanks. I guess you didn't realize I was the announcer. I was the one with the joke - Bill Spaulding was the one laughing.

My coworkers laughed too (female louder than the male).

There are only really two problems with a time trial atmosphere: 1. The conditions could change throughout the day. Indoors it's not a big problem, but it'd be annoying if it started gusting. 2. It takes more time. If you did the finals like a time trial it might be ok (if you only had a few people running), but even though I love cycling and I'll watch a few hours of most days of the TDF I still don't watch the time trial stages, way too boring.

Matchup duels where the second-seed runs clockwise in an adjacent lane.

rojo wrote:

The crowd was going nuts as were we on the broadcast (I was the color commentator).

Yes, the crowd was going nuts during the race (I know I was). Unfortunately, the commentary drowns out the crowd.

But FYI - it was only the 3rd time the 200m has been contested at Indoor Heps, so it was a weak meet record to begin with. The kid actually broke the meet record during the preliminary round by 0.02 seconds, and then took off another 0.2 during that final rae. But I think it is quite impressive how it is still one of the fastest 200m times ever run all-time by an Ivy Leaguer.

I found an interview of the Penn sprinter - Calvary Rogers - after he won. Have a listen.

usnspecialist wrote:

would you consider van Niekerk to have the solo WR then (in addition to the absolute WR), since he ran in lane 8 and never saw a single competitor from gun to tape?

Good point. psychologically solo.

Transcontinental wrote:

Matchup duels where the second-seed runs clockwise in an adjacent lane.

Alternatively, you could set up a duel race (indoors) where the two runners start with a half lap distance from each other. Gun goes off, whoever catches the other wins. No timing or preset distance is required.

One could say this format is a counterpoint to time trials. Pure focus on tactics.

Now that would be fun to both race and watch.

It is true that he didn't see a single competitor for the entire race, and didn't have anyone to chase. However, he knew that he had 7 other world-class competitors breathing down his neck, which definitely adds a significant element of competition/incentive for that race. So while he wasn't chasing/seeing anyone, he was being chased in a very big way. So I wouldn't qualify his race as psychologically solo.

Oregon born wrote:

usnspecialist wrote:

would you consider van Niekerk to have the solo WR then (in addition to the absolute WR), since he ran in lane 8 and never saw a single competitor from gun to tape?

Good point. psychologically solo.

It is true that van Niekerk didn't see a single competitor for the entire race, and didn't have anyone to chase. However, he knew that he had 7 other world-class competitors breathing down his neck, which definitely adds a significant element of competition/incentive for that race. So while he wasn't chasing/seeing anyone, he was being chased in a very big way. So I wouldn't qualify his race as psychologically solo.

Read more:

they do something similar in world cup xc skiing. have you seen it? they often have solo time trials, with a staggered start where a person takes off every 30s or so.

after getting done, the fastest skiier sits on a throne-like chair near the finish line, watching the video feed of each skiier out on the course, their checkpoint times, etc. if you finish faster you get to boot the previous person out.

they tend to seed the faster people towards the end. highly entertaining.

CashMeOusside wrote:

Geez, I could a got me a silva metal, in the Ivory Leegg no less, just for showing up.

What is the point of this post?

Nittro wrote:

Transcontinental wrote:

Matchup duels where the second-seed runs clockwise in an adjacent lane.

Alternatively, you could set up a duel race (indoors) where the two runners start with a half lap distance from each other. Gun goes off, whoever catches the other wins. No timing or preset distance is required.

One could say this format is a counterpoint to time trials. Pure focus on tactics.

Now that would be fun to both race and watch.

Like the track cycling pursuit.

Great idea.

Bekele would get 15 seconds up and pass Rupp before 3000m lololol.

Van Niekirk could glance up at the Jumbotron and see the other competitors, so it wasn't quite like he was running alone. And in physical terms, the outermost lane is the fastest because its turns are the widest. It was a Beamonesque performance in some ways: near-perfect alignment of the right person, place, and time--but with no altitude asterisk.