USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Cooter Brown » Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:40 pm

Suhr sets a WR with some good performances behind her and only the men's winner exceeds the HS outdoor national record. Has any other event ever been on the rise and falling deeper in the shitter at the same time like this?
Cooter Brown
 
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Austin

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:44 pm

odelltrclan wrote:This was a low key meet in an season where there is no world team, and many high level athletes chose not to attend or compete. To see the results belies statistically what we should have seen collectively for the group.


Name some high level American pole vaulters who were not competing?
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:46 pm

Cooter Brown wrote:Suhr sets a WR with some good performances behind her and only the men's winner exceeds the HS outdoor national record. Has any other event ever been on the rise and falling deeper in the shitter at the same time like this?


Maybe we'll get an A standard out of the men at NCAAs :(
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Dutra5 » Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:46 pm

odelltrclan wrote:
This was a low key meet


I don't think a national meet is ever low key to the athletes in attendance and in this particular event weren't there 7 of the 10 US ranked PVers from last year plus Keppler, who was in the top 10 performers last year and the list leader coming in?
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby aaronk » Sun Mar 03, 2013 5:36 pm

Cooter Brown wrote:Suhr sets a WR with some good performances behind her and only the men's winner exceeds the HS outdoor national record. Has any other event ever been on the rise and falling deeper in the shitter at the same time like this?


I keep all time top 24 performers lists for HS and Collegiate athletes.

On the Collegiate Top 24 indoor list are....so far!!....5 women with 2013 bests....another 5 with bests from 2012!!
And there's still the NCAA's to go.

On the all time HS list indoors....so far.....are 5 girls with 2013 bests!!
And they still have the NB meet to go!!

So American women's PV is alive and well....with several up-and-comers to fill the ranks the next few years!!
aaronk
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby gh » Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:09 pm

Marlow wrote:My 2 (cents) observations.

1. Yes, altitude DOES help pole vaulters, but not as significantly as a good steady tailwind, which no one mewls about when it happens. ...


in essence, altitude IS a good steady tailwind.
gh
 
Posts: 46322
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Dave » Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:03 pm

polevaultpower wrote:
odelltrclan wrote:This was a low key meet in an season where there is no world team, and many high level athletes chose not to attend or compete. To see the results belies statistically what we should have seen collectively for the group.


Name some high level American pole vaulters who were not competing?


Now, that is depressing.
Dave
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby 26mi235 » Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:29 pm

odelltrclan wrote:
This is flawed logic from the get go. How many competitions are there at lower level versus at altitude? You probably have 100 competitions at lower levels for every 1 or 2 at altitude that matter. And, to also ignore that all of America's current top vaulters either have personal bests at altitude or near their very best when there is such a dearth of competition at altitude is telling.


If you cannot quantify it then it probably does not come into play much. There is a well-respected physicist (JRM, see his post and his response to those who do not like his answers when they have really nothing of their own, and certainly nothing that is in the scientific literature) who has done a lot of analysis and his analysis is very consistent with the wind adjustments used by T&FN, such as in the Big Gold Book. The altitude for ALQ combined with no wind, gives the same adjustment as a 100m time of 11.00 in Atlanta (temp 30 C, pressure 1000mb, RH 70%) with a wind 0.49mps -- 0.051.

Going to a related comparison, what elevation gives the same correction as a legal 2.0mps wind -- Mount Whitney at close to 4500m.

Again, since they are not using wind meters for the PV it makes no sense at all to put an A by the mark made at a third the elevation as the effect of a legal 2.0mps wind.

http://myweb.lmu.edu/jmureika/track/DensityAltitude.html

Since this is a rather minor wind speed
26mi235
 
Posts: 16320
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby 26mi235 » Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:59 pm

Cooter Brown wrote:Suhr sets a WR with some good performances behind her and only the men's winner exceeds the HS outdoor national record. Has any other event ever been on the rise and falling deeper in the shitter at the same time like this?


The Triple Jump, where American men did pretty well in London while the women had a marginal B standard effort.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16320
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Sun Mar 03, 2013 8:15 pm

Dave wrote:
polevaultpower wrote:
odelltrclan wrote:This was a low key meet in an season where there is no world team, and many high level athletes chose not to attend or compete. To see the results belies statistically what we should have seen collectively for the group.


Name some high level American pole vaulters who were not competing?


Now, that is depressing.


On the plus side, the NCAA MPV is the best it's been in years, with a lot of young guys in the 5.50-5.60 range. Hopefully a few of them can make the jump to the next level in the next few years.

Otherwise, yes, the USA MPV is rather depressing at the moment. Maybe Brad will put it together outdoors and give us hope again.
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Dave » Sun Mar 03, 2013 8:26 pm

For all of this discussion, we have a new world record holder. She has overcome a number of injuries over the years and now she has the WR to go with her gold medal.
Dave
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby sprintdoc » Sun Mar 03, 2013 9:19 pm

On all the vault talk I am surprised no one has brought up that in addition to altitude is the impact of the actual runway. This particular runway has received much praise from many vaulters and it provides a little bounce on the plant much like a gymnastic's floor does. I liken the benefit of altitude and runway here to the same as a vaulter in practice going off a springboard that I have witnessed many do in practice over the years. By getting this extra boost vaulters are able to get on that slightly bigger pole they otherwise can't quite manage under "normal" circumstances.

But this whole talk of trying to minimize the performance of Jen and others drives me crazy. Do they say of a record-breaking performance in football that its diminished because the game is on turf indoors vs outdoor rutted field like Redskins played on end of season? No! She and others still had to go out and do it and at the end of the day she did it!
sprintdoc
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby aaronk » Sun Mar 03, 2013 9:34 pm

sprintdoc wrote:On all the vault talk I am surprised no one has brought up that in addition to altitude is the impact of the actual runway. This particular runway has received much praise from many vaulters and it provides a little bounce on the plant much like a gymnastic's floor does. I liken the benefit of altitude and runway here to the same as a vaulter in practice going off a springboard that I have witnessed many do in practice over the years. By getting this extra boost vaulters are able to get on that slightly bigger pole they otherwise can't quite manage under "normal" circumstances.

But this whole talk of trying to minimize the performance of Jen and others drives me crazy. Do they say of a record-breaking performance in football that its diminished because the game is on turf indoors vs outdoor rutted field like Redskins played on end of season? No! She and others still had to go out and do it and at the end of the day she did it!


I agree......especially with your last sentence.
My main...and maybe ONLY...complaint about WR-setting PV'ers...and this goes for females AND males...is that they tend to try to break as many WR's as they can.

To do so, they'll try to raise each new record by just one centimeter...or, in English terms, by a quarter or a half-inch!!

Sergey Bubka was famous for that.
He turned what SHOULD have been maybe 10 or 15 records into about 35!!

Yelena Isinbayeva has also been "guilty" of that!!
As was Stacy Dragila!!

I was happy when, after getting her 16-5 and one half....she upped the bar by a full TWO inches, attempting 16-7 and one half!!

Bubka, Isi, and Dragila might have attempted only 16-6...at the MOST!!

Kudos to our new WR holder!!
aaronk
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby olorin » Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:08 am

Re - wind effect on PV.
There is an academic paper from 1984 (by Frohlich) that examines wind effect on sprints PV and LJ. From the paper I copy the following table:
Air density
(relative to see level)...............effect
0.70...................................+0.257
0.75...................................+0.211
0.80...................................+0.166
0.85...................................+0.123
0.90....................................+0.081
0.95....................................+0.040
1.00......................................0

Altitude of ~1500m is roughly 0.85. So according to this paper 5.02 is roughly 4.90. In other words, one should decrease all the marks by one height (10 cm) is order to receive a better representation of the athlete ability.
For the full paper see:
http://home.comcast.net/~saintjohnboscooffice/images/martikean/articles/11.pdf
olorin
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:23 am

sprintdoc wrote:On all the vault talk I am surprised no one has brought up that in addition to altitude is the impact of the actual runway. This particular runway has received much praise from many vaulters and it provides a little bounce on the plant much like a gymnastic's floor does. I liken the benefit of altitude and runway here to the same as a vaulter in practice going off a springboard that I have witnessed many do in practice over the years. By getting this extra boost vaulters are able to get on that slightly bigger pole they otherwise can't quite manage under "normal" circumstances.


There are specs for how "bouncy" the runway can be and this runway meets them. The runway in Donestk is the same. We see good marks on raised runways and good marks on "normal" runways, like Lavillenie yesterday. Vaulters tend to prefer the raised runways, but there are plenty of records on both, it's not clear that a raised runway is as much of an advantage as the vaulter perceives it to be.

Having been a gymnast and used a springboard, and done pole vaulting drills off a springboard, and pole vaulted many times on raised runways, including many times on raised runways at the elevation of Reno, I can assure you that the "bounciness" of a raised runway is only a tiny fraction of that of a springboard.
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:26 am

olorin wrote:Re - wind effect on PV.
There is an academic paper from 1984 (by Frohlich) that examines wind effect on sprints PV and LJ. From the paper I copy the following table:
Air density
(relative to see level)...............effect
0.70...................................+0.257
0.75...................................+0.211
0.80...................................+0.166
0.85...................................+0.123
0.90....................................+0.081
0.95....................................+0.040
1.00......................................0

Altitude of ~1500m is roughly 0.85. So according to this paper 5.02 is roughly 4.90. In other words, one should decrease all the marks by one height (10 cm) is order to receive a better representation of the athlete ability.
For the full paper see:
http://home.comcast.net/~saintjohnboscooffice/images/martikean/articles/11.pdf


Donestk is at ~500' of elevation, so I guess we'd better downgrade some of Bubka and Isi's records as well :lol:

That's all very hypothetical (as far as the pole vault), it's not based on actual performance differences between altitude and sea level. All I can say is that reality does not match the theories of this 29-year-old paper.
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Marlow » Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:51 am

polevaultpower wrote:That's all very hypothetical (as far as the pole vault), it's not based on actual performance differences between altitude and sea level. All I can say is that reality does not match the theories of this 29-year-old paper.

The PV is FAR too complex to lend itself to physics calculations. What should or should not be very rarely manifests itself into what is and what is not.

Bubka's speed and strength were great attributes to have, but without his impeccable technique it would have been all for naught.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21085
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:02 am

The paper yields what seem to be unrealistically large conversions. For instance, for the 200 the listed effect of a 2mps wind is -0.571 seconds. Of course, the same wind would not apply for the 200, so we will take a figure of -0.285 for 100m. The generally accepted figure is about -0.11 to -0.12 seconds; the value he provides is 137% higher than the -0.12 value. He gives a conversion for altitude for Mexico City of -0.401 (or -802 for a 44-second 400m). While we saw some pretty fast times, I have not seen anyone indicate that they thought that the 4x400 marks were 3.25 seconds faster than usual nor that the 200m record was aided by ~0.20. He also has that the combined correction for the long jump in Mexico City was (more than, since the wind speed was likely more than 2.0 mps) 0.586m, so that Beamon's 8.90 was really just a relatively modest 8.32 and all of the other jumpers were having terrible days, but second was 8.19 (less than Jesse Owen's in the 1930s) that would imply a value of about 7.90m with no additional wind adjustment, but since it was windy, the no-wind/sea level equivalent would be about 7.70 which would not have placed real high an a number of conference meets last weekend. (Yes, I know that it poured rain soon after his jump). But the TJ marks should be affected by at least twice the figure so Saneyev and company were mediocre jumpers capable of marks only in the mid-16meters.

In general, the corrections that he provides seem off by a little more than a factor of 2. The vault results from Mexico City, the paper implies that the gain is 21 cms. This would be an across-the-board effect with great vaulting. There was not a WR at the Games because Seagren had already increased the WR at the trials to 5.41 but the winning height was 5.40 so these guys would be down at 5.20 and compared to indoor vaulting with no wind, if they had a 1mps wind, they would have a height of about 5.05m in terms of what they could do indoors.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16320
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:03 am

Working the other direction, the only WRs in the vault for men at altitude of any kind was the 5.41 at Lake Tahoe (~2500m) and Bubka's last cm increment at Sestriere, Italy and clearly, that was one of only 30 or so WRs and so essentially has no implication except he was off his game a bit given the projections here. Furthermore, vaulters sometimes get aiding winds that are pretty brisk and a 4mps wind is supposed to help by almost 60cms, which would turn a lot of college vaulters into bettering Bubka. We would see a lot of women vaulters over 5 meters.

The implications are that these adjustments are widely over-optimistic. The fact that this paper is obscure in the world of track and field geeks is an indication that no one thinks that they paper was at all accurate. There are way too many occasions on which vaulters have had steady, strong tailwinds and the results tend to be 'good' but only at the margin, not the large corrections cited in this paper.

Thus, if there were much of a systematic effect in the vault, there would be wind rules for the event and I have never heard any discussion of that as reasonable, needed etc. The college vaulters would be flocking to high-altitude sites in order to qualify for the indoor and outdoor NCAA fields -- I have not heard of any school that has done this, despite the fact that they look for every advantage to get them into that elite qualification.

[Link to WRs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Record_progression_Pole_Vault_men
26mi235
 
Posts: 16320
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Marlow » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:08 am

26mi235 wrote:if there were much of a systematic effect in the vault, there would be wind rules for the event

Ask any vaulter of note how important a tailwind is. The 'little' effect of a tailwind can completely change the pole you're on and your grip height. Likewise, a headwind can knock you down a pole. That has a huge impact on the height you clear.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21085
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:28 am

Marlow wrote:
26mi235 wrote:if there were much of a systematic effect in the vault, there would be wind rules for the event

Ask any vaulter of note how important a tailwind is. The 'little' effect of a tailwind can completely change the pole you're on and your grip height. Likewise, a headwind can knock you down a pole. That has a huge impact on the height you clear.


Knocking you down a pole does occur, but we are not seeing 20-30cm PRs all the time with some wind and we are not seeing huge clearances in the Texas and Oklahoma meets that routinely see sprint times with 4-5 mps aiding winds. Of course, any variation/swirling of the wind creates problems; look at the effects in some of the Trials etc. But, aside from Bubka's last record (of a zillion and inferior to his indoor mark) and Seagren's brief 5.41 which was soon swallowed by sea-level marks, we see a paucity of WRs at anything remotely close to high altitude. Given how valuable records and qualifying marks are, it is far to inconsistent with the facts too assert that there is much effect, and denigrating Jenn's WRi with such large claims is inappropriate.
Last edited by 26mi235 on Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16320
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:37 am

26mi235 wrote: Given how valuable records and qualifying marks are, it is far to inconsistent with the facts to asset that there is much effect, and denigrating Jenn's WRi with such large claims is inappropriate.


This.
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby odelltrclan » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:51 am

sprintdoc wrote:But this whole talk of trying to minimize the performance of Jen and others drives me crazy.


polevaultpower wrote:
26mi235 wrote: Given how valuable records and qualifying marks are, it is far to inconsistent with the facts to asset that there is much effect, and denigrating Jenn's WRi with such large claims is inappropriate.


This.


Somehow now discussing the effects of altitude on performance has sunk to denigration and attempts at minimizing performance.

Jenn herself said in the interview after the event specifically that she felt the altitude was one of the reasons for her performance. I watched the interview right after the event. It is unfortunate how that portion of the interview has been removed from the current video available of this at runnerspace and in other articles referring to her comments after the event.

I find it incredulous that those discussing this are being told it is inappropriate and unfortunate. If an athlete can mention the altitude as one reason for the performance in an interview related to the event, and at least half of the ladies in the event being discussed have Personal records at altitude we cannot freely discuss the matter on a message board? :roll: When would be a good time to discuss a topic such as this? I am as big a fan of Jenn Suhr as anyone on these boards. I can't see any reason why the issue cannot be discussed?
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Dutra5 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:37 am

aaronk wrote:
I agree......especially with your last sentence.
My main...and maybe ONLY...complaint about WR-setting PV'ers...and this goes for females AND males...is that they tend to try to break as many WR's as they can.

To do so, they'll try to raise each new record by just one centimeter...or, in English terms, by a quarter or a half-inch!!

Sergey Bubka was famous for that.
He turned what SHOULD have been maybe 10 or 15 records into about 35!!

Yelena Isinbayeva has also been "guilty" of that!!
As was Stacy Dragila!!

I was happy when, after getting her 16-5 and one half....she upped the bar by a full TWO inches, attempting 16-7 and one half!!

Bubka, Isi, and Dragila might have attempted only 16-6...at the MOST!!

Kudos to our new WR holder!!


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Dutra5 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:46 am

odelltrclan wrote:
Somehow now discussing the effects of altitude on performance has sunk to denigration and attempts at minimizing performance.


There was at least one post which was absolutely dismissive of the performance....not by yourself mind you...but it was put out there.

In addition, you yourself I thought quite dismissive of one of Becca's posts by referring to it as rationalizing a position.

In general, I sometimes find a problem with how the sport is perceived in terms of fans who, when a mark is put out there, immediately attempt to figure out a way of describing what we saw as not actually happening.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Fortius19 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:59 am

Really happy for Suhr! Good for her for going after 5.07!

The one vault NBCSports showed of Mary Saxer (her best?), she seemed to running so slow? She looked great on the pole.

Anyone know if that's her normal technique? Any chance of her getting faster on the runway and maintaining technique on teh pole to get higher? I seem to remember her being around awhile.
Fortius19
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:18 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:01 am

We have a difference of opinion on the effects of altitude. There have been two papers cited on the topic. One (1984) with some theory and no empirical evidence that does not align with a huge amount of data on the effects of wind and altitude and has been not featured in this and other forums discussing the topic. The other (JRM) is in very close agreement with the sport's authoritative publications on such effects and, I think, in accord with most people's expectations and experience.

The cited effects that seem large to me seem to fail the 'common sense' test. That is, if it were accurate we would see a large range of behavior and results that are essentially totally absent in the vault; they are seen in other areas - sprinting and LJ - but with empirical magnitudes in accord with the work of JRM and not with the 1984 paper.

Since the NCAA adjusts for altitude in the sprints and for tracks configuration, races and such have taken place at various venues to take advantage of the most advantageous conditions. In all of this process, I know of not a single instance of vaulters going to altitude to obtain better marks. This despite that fact that a 10cm difference in clearance would make a big difference. My conclusion is that the altitude effect is there but is just a bit larger than minimal -- likely on the 1-4cm range. Citing one location, ABQ fits other possibilities. The runway mentioned above; we do not see results for Boulder, Utah, Wyoming, etc. And, why does the PV summit in Reno (similar elevation) with great emphasis and a large number of vaulters, not result in a large number of stellar results?

If the empirical
26mi235
 
Posts: 16320
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby RichC » Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:18 am

Becca, I really enjoyed your detailed post.

Many of the PV'ers (and athletes in general) come to our track facility during the regular season to compete so there is a comfort level with the facility. Anyone who know anything about athletics will understand that have a familiarity with surroundings is important to performance. At our Don Kirby Elite on February 8th many of the vaulters who competed at USATF had a great competition with us.

On Sunday I spoke with Jen and her husband for a good length of time and her altitude comment that some are taking liberty with may have not meant what you think. She said to me that she loved coming to altitude from Rochester, NY where she trains given the great sunshine that makes her mood improve. As someone who used to live in Rochester winters can be long, dreary, and cold. So she discussed the altitude issue more in the context of walking around enjoying the sunshine and climate and feeling good, as opposed to beneficial to performance. And Rick indicated that most of the runways Jen competes on are actually not very conducive to high level performance, so our runway provides that good solid foundation.

Our runways are very fast and they do meet all specs that IAAF sets up. We have done "bounce" tests on the entire track to ensure that everything is within normal parameters.

It is quite sad to me that a great performance that only a few hundred witnessed is reduced to a discussion that it "must" have been assisted by the altitude. All I know is that I feel lucky to have watched this special event in person.
RichC
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 2:18 pm

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:05 am

I wish I could have been there in person Rich!
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby eldanielfire » Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:26 am

polevaultpower wrote:I wish I could have been there in person Rich!



You may get more chances. The fact Jen attempted to jump the outright world record of 5.07m is significant. That says to me she feels or even knows Isi's outdoor record is within her sights and she could/will probably jump it this year.

Yelena is going to have to be at her best in Moscow!
eldanielfire
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 7:07 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Marlow » Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:13 am

eldanielfire wrote:Yelena is going to have to be at her best in Moscow!

Didn't she already intimate she wasn't going?
Marlow
 
Posts: 21085
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:15 pm

eldanielfire wrote:
polevaultpower wrote:I wish I could have been there in person Rich!

You may get more chances. The fact Jen attempted to jump the outright world record of 5.07m is significant. That says to me she feels or even knows Isi's outdoor record is within her sights and she could/will probably jump it this year.

Yelena is going to have to be at her best in Moscow!



I hope so! I don't think I'll make it to any big meets this year, I'm having a baby in a few weeks or less. Maybe next year.
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Marlow » Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:26 pm

polevaultpower wrote:I don't think I'll make it to any big meets this year, I'm having a baby in a few weeks or less. Maybe next year.

Attention all Pole Vaulters!
Cease and desist IMMEDIATELY all important competitions until further notice!
When Ms. Becca feels ready to re-engage in the sport, we will notify you that you may proceed.
Thank you for your compliance.

:wink: :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21085
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby eldanielfire » Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:33 pm

Marlow wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:Yelena is going to have to be at her best in Moscow!

Didn't she already intimate she wasn't going?


I have only heard that she will. Home crowd, big occasion, it will possibly be the biggest moment of her Athletics career.

I thought it would be Moscow, baby, Rio 2016. She has stated that several times.
eldanielfire
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 7:07 am

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Cooter Brown » Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:04 pm

From a few weeks ago...

http://en.rsport.ru/other_sports/201302 ... 18412.html
Pole vault world record holder Yelena Isinbayeva said Tuesday she doubts she will be fit enough to compete at the world championships in Moscow in August.
Cooter Brown
 
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Austin

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Marlow » Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:54 pm

Cooter Brown wrote: Pole vault world record holder Yelena Isinbayeva said Tuesday she doubts she will be fit enough to compete at the world championships in Moscow in August.

Oh, so I'm not completely crazy! :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21085
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby Dave » Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:58 pm

Marlow wrote:
Cooter Brown wrote: Pole vault world record holder Yelena Isinbayeva said Tuesday she doubts she will be fit enough to compete at the world championships in Moscow in August.

Oh, so I'm not completely crazy! :D


I wonder if Ms. Suhr's world record affected Isinbaeva's perceived fitness
Dave
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:24 pm

Dave wrote:
Marlow wrote:
Cooter Brown wrote: Pole vault world record holder Yelena Isinbayeva said Tuesday she doubts she will be fit enough to compete at the world championships in Moscow in August.

Oh, so I'm not completely crazy! :D


I wonder if Ms. Suhr's world record affected Isinbaeva's perceived fitness


Nope, the article was from about 3 weeks ago. I missed it at the time, but I found it after Marlow mentioned it. Thanks for the tip!

I am somewhat surprised, because Isi's plan for many years until London was to retire after Moscow. She very much wants to compete well in front of the home crowd. London didn't go well so now she is considering 4 more years.

She's always been pretty clear that she wants to get married and have babies at some point. I think she hoped to have that married part taken care of, or at least in the works by now so she could get started on the babies after Moscow. She's 30 now and the biological clock is probably starting to tick.

My guess is that Mr Right hasn't come along so she is ostensibly sticking with pole vaulting, but it doesn't seem like her heart is really in that anymore either. I'm surprised she would express doubt so early in the year about her fitness in August, that is a long way off.
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby polevaultpower » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:25 pm

It'll be interesting to see if Jenn's record lights a fire in Isi's belly, or if she just gives up.
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: USATF Results: Day 2 [AR for Suhr, then WR]

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:37 pm

Her plan was to win in London and then retire after Moscow -- plan A did not work; plan B is to talk about 2016 like it is going to happen when she can't get off the coach now... [too severe, but we have seen this many times and not too many work like Phillips who has come back and surprised. ]
26mi235
 
Posts: 16320
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aaronk, andyjgt, Bing [Bot], DCSIGMA, Dutra5, lonewolf, norunner and 17 guests