X-C is the most competitive- you get middle and long distance track specialists, road guys,cyclocross enthusiasts, pentathletes, and those people who run around in forests with maps.
X-C is the most competitive- you get middle and long distance track specialists, road guys,cyclocross enthusiasts, pentathletes, and those people who run around in forests with maps.
The walks are the most competitive event because everyone has at one stage of their life walked.
Say what brah wrote:
Uhh the track is 400 meters. Not 100 meters. Any race should start with 1 lap of the track. Not a 1/4 of the track.
The best athletes are 400 meter sprinters.
You can't take an event seriously where 25% of the race relies on the starting block/start.
Not only is the 400 the basic event, it is the most hotly contested by far, at least on the men's side.
The 100m was Bolt for nearly 10 years, trailed closely at various points by Gatlin, Gay and Blake. Nobody else had a chance.
During Bolt's reign, nobody has dominated the 400, with Wariner, Merritt, Kirani, WVN, Makwala, and quite a few others in the mix at various points. No matter how good the meet, or who lines up, 44.1 could win it. The world lead in 2011 was 44.35!
And there is absolutely no question that the 4x400 relay is more entertaining than the 4x100. The 4x100 should definitely be axed. Pacing strategy is interesting, baton-exchange contests are not.
Say what brah wrote:
Uhh the track is 400 meters. Not 100 meters. Any race should start with 1 lap of the track. Not a 1/4 of the track.
The best athletes are 400 meter sprinters.
You can't take an event seriously where 25% of the race relies on the starting block/start.
Your quote makes sense. 25 percent. Good number.
The most competitive event is sitting on your arse eating a bag of chips. I bow to no man...
belial wrote:
The most competitive event is sitting on your arse eating a bag of chips. I bow to no man...
That's not an Olympic sport.
Not yet.
https://variety.com/2018/gaming/news/esports-olympics-2024correct me if im wrong but wrote:
I always thought the 800 was the most competitive since you would have 400 guys with crazy fast twitch fibers moving up and you would have 1500 guys with a lot of strength (likely from a 5K-10K XC background) also coming down.
The 800m is among the hardest and most competitive events. It is also the most open-ended with frequent surprises (e.g. Bosse in 2017). In no other event there is such a high chance of favorites getting kicked out in the semis or disappointing in the final. Contrary to what you seem to indicate, though, at the top the 800m (men) has become a specialized event.
None of the last few great 800m-runners (Kipketer, Rudisha etc. ) came even close in 400m or 1500m to what they did in the 800. Unlike with Juantorena in the 70s or Coe in the 1980s, nowadays one has to become an 800m-only-specialist to prevail.
SisterBanger wrote:
LoneStarXC wrote: Also, I’m a girl, BTW.
Very funny... not.
0/10. Too treadworn.
You're new here and a moran.
Jim Walmsley Superfan wrote:
marijuologist wrote:
The 100m is the most competitive event because it is the prize and the event that attracts the top TALENT. Every athlete on the starting like of the Olympic 400m would be competing in the 100m if he had the ability.
Except everyone who runs the 100 can also run the 200, so it has the same talent as the 100 plus the additional talent from the 400.
Not everyone can run a 100 and 200 at the same level.
The 200 needs more speed endurance than a 100, and a 200 at the same level. Mel Pender for example. Houston McTear. And a list of specialized shorter 100 guys can't get out to 200. And then you have guys who are almost there in the 200 who should move up.
2 x longer than a 100 and around a curve and a huge need for speed endurance. Flat out from the go. Technical and physically demanding.
In the 400 the 'effort' may be hard, but the speed isn't. 21 - 22 secs ~ through 200m means you are cruising at at a comfortable speed. Until it becomes uncomfortable.
I ran A standard Olympic qualifying at 100 and 400. Always struggled at 200 due to injuries that prevented me from reaching absolute peak fitness. That's what you need for the 200. 400 didn't suffer, cos I had speed that I never had to use, and a pain cave that felt like a walk in the park
200 talent is different. MJ wasn't the fastest 100 guy, with a big endurance engine that he could take out to 400. That was because he had a hard head. Bolt could run a fast single 400 but I doubt he had the mental interest to make himself a Olympian at 400. Needing to run rounds.
Obviously there is a huge overlap, but the skillsets are not exactly the same. And mostly its mental. Look at the WVN. He's great from 100 through 400.
And I do agree - if you can win the Olympic 100, why would you ever do anything else. A minute or so then back in the stands to sign autographs and drink beer. Watching the distance joggers out there. Heck you might not even raise a sweat