post american trials performance in europe


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

post american trials performance in europe

Postby 5thstreet99 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:48 am

I have noticed quite a few american athletes have been well below par in Europe after the american trials.
Michael Tinsley
English Gardner
Kimberlyn Duncan
Issiah Young
Bershawn Jackson
Natasha Hastings
To name a few
Any idea what the cause is?
5thstreet99
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 3:52 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby Marlow » Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:29 am

5thstreet99 wrote:I have noticed quite a few american athletes have been well below par in Europe after the american trials.
Michael Tinsley
English Gardner
Kimberlyn Duncan
Issiah Young
Bershawn Jackson
Natasha Hastings
To name a few
Any idea what the cause is?

They had to peak for the trials and now they are back in training.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21133
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby dustoff » Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:10 am

Quite understandable, particularly when you consider how many of those are collegians who had their NCAA championship and then US trials shortly after. Hell, even in the substantially less deep jamaican trials, many people have not performed as well.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby tm71 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:57 am

5thstreet99 wrote:I have noticed quite a few american athletes have been well below par in Europe after the american trials.
Michael Tinsley
English Gardner
Kimberlyn Duncan
Issiah Young
Bershawn Jackson
Natasha Hastings
To name a few
Any idea what the cause is?


most had only one meet since usatf so that does not establish a trend especially with the younger athletes. my concern would be mostly with hastings and tinsley.
tm71
 
Posts: 2302
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby beebee » Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:29 am

5thstreet99 wrote:I have noticed quite a few american athletes have been well below par in Europe after the american trials.
Michael Tinsley
English Gardner
Kimberlyn Duncan
Issiah Young
Bershawn Jackson
Natasha Hastings
To name a few
Any idea what the cause is?


It is unrealistic to expect these athletes to not have a bit of a letdown after the USATF, and if I had a choice I'd want to have my best remaining performances at the WC in August, not some DL meet in June or July. Btw, the USA is not alone...notice for example KAB post her nation's WC trials.
beebee
 
Posts: 535
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:30 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby aaronk » Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:21 am

Look on the bright side!
In particular, the male 1500 runners!!

In one meet, there were, what, EIGHT or NINE guys running under 3:36.....with a few lifetime PR's!!!
And there have been scattered other successes!!
(Some women 1500 runners also getting PR's. Jeter winning in 11.07.)
And Gardner WON her race, albeit in a slow time.

Factors that might lead to "bad" marks......weather, jet lag, temporary illness, and what was said by others, training through with Moscow being the main goal!!
Last edited by aaronk on Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
aaronk
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby KevinM » Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:22 am

Also, not everyone is going to react identically to 6-7 hour time zone change West-->East.
KevinM
 
Posts: 2652
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby sprintdoc » Thu Jul 11, 2013 10:36 am

aaronk what race are you referring to that Gardner won? She was well off pace in Paris but did I miss her race somewhere else? I saw that her camp was in Budapest but didn't see her in the results for any races.
sprintdoc
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby aaronk » Thu Jul 11, 2013 11:30 am

sprintdoc wrote:aaronk what race are you referring to that Gardner won? She was well off pace in Paris but did I miss her race somewhere else? I saw that her camp was in Budapest but didn't see her in the results for any races.


Took me awhile, but I found it!!

July 2, in the meet in Nancy, France!!
The field wasn't very good, but she DID win....in 11.32.
aaronk
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby tm71 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 11:46 am

aaronk wrote:Look on the bright side!
In particular, the male 1500 runners!!

In one meet, there were, what, EIGHT or NINE guys running under 3:36.....with a few lifetime PR's!!!
And there have been scattered other successes!!
(Some women 1500 runners also getting PR's. Jeter winning in 11.07.)
And Gardner WON her race, albeit in a slow time.

Factors that might lead to "bad" marks......weather, jet lag, temporary illness, and what was said by others, training through with Moscow being the main goal!!


add to that AL by LM in the 400
WL by Oliver and SB by Merritt in the 110 h
SB by Harper in the 100h
AL by Taylor and SB by Claye in the TJ
whiting and hoffa 1-2 in the shot in both DL meets
carter second to adams in DL shot
big win by Gay in lausanne
this is just to name a few, but certainly a mixed bag...

i am sure it is very hard on someone inexperienced like Gardner to get off the plane and compete at the same exact level as they did at the USATF.
tm71
 
Posts: 2302
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby J2thaD » Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:44 pm

5thstreet99 wrote:I have noticed quite a few american athletes have been well below par in Europe after the american trials.
Michael Tinsley
English Gardner
Kimberlyn Duncan
Issiah Young
Bershawn Jackson
Natasha Hastings
To name a few
Any idea what the cause is?


That seems to be a recurring theme. Run fast times at the U.S. Trials. Never run that fast again in their career afterwards. Of course I am not talking about Gay, Gatlin etc.
J2thaD
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 9:45 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby ATK » Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:06 pm

J2thaD wrote:
5thstreet99 wrote:I have noticed quite a few american athletes have been well below par in Europe after the american trials.
Michael Tinsley
English Gardner
Kimberlyn Duncan
Issiah Young
Bershawn Jackson
Natasha Hastings
To name a few
Any idea what the cause is?


That seems to be a recurring theme. Run fast times at the U.S. Trials. Never run that fast again in their career afterwards. Of course I am not talking about Gay, Gatlin etc.

I agree. That's why its rare US athletes win medals in the Championships later in the summer....
ATK
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby Smoke » Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:45 pm

You mean a reoccurring myth. Name the athletes that have run fast at trials and never run that fast again? And no excluding the best of the best to cherry pick your results. We will wait for this myth to be proven true. Take your time...
Smoke
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby 5thstreet99 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 2:43 am

aaronk wrote:Look on the bright side!
In particular, the male 1500 runners!!

In one meet, there were, what, EIGHT or NINE guys running under 3:36.....with a few lifetime PR's!!!
And there have been scattered other successes!!
(Some women 1500 runners also getting PR's. Jeter winning in 11.07.)
And Gardner WON her race, albeit in a slow time.

Factors that might lead to "bad" marks......weather, jet lag, temporary illness, and what was said by others, training through with Moscow being the main goal!!


Please note i am in no way trying to criticize american athletes but just find it hard to understand how you can put in a fantastic time, then 1 or two weeks later be a shadow of the athlete.
i totally understand if they fly from america with only a day or so rest its going to have an effect but after the 1st race weather permitting they should improve.
Here are a couple of examples
English Gardner
10.85 + 1.8
10.87 + 1.7
then goes to europe
11.32 -0.3
11.13 -0.2
ok here the wind readings do have a effect
Natasha Hastings
50.67
49.94
then in europe
51.44
51.08
Micheal Tinsley
48.94
47.96
then
48.94
49.63
5thstreet99
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 3:52 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby tandfman » Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:32 am

ATK wrote:
J2thaD wrote:
5thstreet99 wrote:I have noticed quite a few american athletes have been well below par in Europe after the american trials.
Michael Tinsley
English Gardner
Kimberlyn Duncan
Issiah Young
Bershawn Jackson
Natasha Hastings
To name a few
Any idea what the cause is?

That seems to be a recurring theme. Run fast times at the U.S. Trials. Never run that fast again in their career afterwards. Of course I am not talking about Gay, Gatlin etc.

I agree. That's why its rare US athletes win medals in the Championships later in the summer....

Good grief. For one thing, some of those on this list have done quite well in the past later in the season. For another, your comment about US athletes winning medals in later Championships is way off the mark. In the U.S. Trials, US athletes win ALL the medals. Obviously, they're not going to do that in the World Champs or Olympic Games. But their success is not "rare". They do win more medals than any other country. And they don't win more only because they're competing against the very best athletes from all of the other countries on the planet.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:48 am

ATK was being sarcastic, I (and I am pretty sure ATK) think that 5th's expectations (and assumptions) are wrong. He is further being mislead a little bit because of the differential in winds. If they had run 10.95/-0.8 and then 11.03/1.5 he probably would not be led to make his comment, at least as regards Gardner. Too much focus on numbers and not enough understanding of the whole training, preparation, and competing cycles.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby ATK » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:53 am

26mi235 wrote:ATK was being sarcastic, I (and I am pretty sure ATK) think that 5th's expectations (and assumptions) are wrong. He is further being mislead a little bit because of the differential in winds. If they had run 10.95/-0.8 and then 11.03/1.5 he probably would not be led to make his comment, at least as regards Gardner. Too much focus on numbers and not enough understanding of the whole training, preparation, and competing cycles.

Thanks. I guess I should have added one of these :? Or one of these :roll:
ATK
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby 5thstreet99 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 10:17 am

26mi235 wrote:ATK was being sarcastic, I (and I am pretty sure ATK) think that 5th's expectations (and assumptions) are wrong. He is further being mislead a little bit because of the differential in winds. If they had run 10.95/-0.8 and then 11.03/1.5 he probably would not be led to make his comment, at least as regards Gardner. Too much focus on numbers and not enough understanding of the whole training, preparation, and competing cycles.


Please enlighten me
All i am trying to understand is how in two weeks performance can drop so substantially with some athletes.
Gay and Merrits performances have not deteriorated since the trials
5thstreet99
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 3:52 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:47 am

You would have to go look at a lot of indivdual cases and know information that in general you will not know (how much they backed off of training to run at USATF, how hard they are training now, how focused they were on the race. I

In the case of EG, I already gave you an example that would illustrate that the difference was not so large. If the 10.85 was run into a wind and the 11.13 had a tailwind of 1.5 they would be quite similar in the summary number (both just under 11.00). If that was the case you probably would not have her listed as one of your cases and yet that change in your recognition would be based on no real change in her performance.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby Tuariki » Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:13 pm

26mi235 wrote: If the 10.85 was run into a wind and the 11.13 had a tailwind of 1.5 they would be quite similar in the summary number (both just under 11.00). If that was the case you probably would not have her listed as one of your cases and yet that change in your recognition would be based on no real change in her performance.

Is your example back to front?
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby cladthin » Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:31 pm

For a meet as competitive for some events as the U.S. nationals or Oly. trials, some coaches and their athletes have to sell out or aim for something akin to a peak or nearly so for fear of not even making the team. With that often comes a moderate to significant reduction in volume, sometimes density, frequency and the intensity of the training might become more sub-maximal. By sub-maximal probably about 95% of absolute intensity. For very good, usually not great, athletes, if they don't sell out for the meet they simply don't make the team. For the best of the best, they don't have such a concern and will likely "train through" the meet with little to no reduction in their training load. This is because they know that even if not at their best (and barring injury) they probably make the team with little problem. As a result to tapering very little or not at all for the meet, they can likely maintain more consistency throughout the competitive phase.

For those who have to, in their minds, sell out, if they make the team they know they cannot continue to compete successfully on such minimal volume (can't compete well for another 6-7 weeks running on fumes) post championships and then expect to compete well at the WC. The general idea is that eventually the freshness you gain from the the taper (moderate or extreme) will be outweighed by the loss of general and specific fitness that the heavier load provided-volume, intensity, density, types of specific exercises, drills, energy system or cns focus etc. Simply put, if the load had to be significantly reduced in the lead-up to the U.S. championships, there is no longer a load (volume/intensity) which will maintain a peak or near peak condition and they certainly won't be able to achieve any higher than their current levels.

Those coaches and their athletes have to go into a period of increased loading to elicit proper stimuli, to at least maintain the peak condition but, ideally, they can provide quality specific training which will result in even better performances. You can bet that when you go back into a heavier training period-volume and/or intensity, your performances will take a hit, they will drop off.

In training, the best periodization scheme does you no good with respect to achieving at a very high level at the WCs if you can't get to the WC.
Last edited by cladthin on Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
cladthin
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Right there.

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby tm71 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:47 pm

cladthin wrote:For a meet as competitive for some events as the U.S. nationals or Oly. trials, some coaches and their athletes have to sell out or aim for something akin to a peak or nearly so for fear of not even making the team. With that often comes a moderate to significant reduction in volume, sometimes density and the intensity of the training might become more sub-maximal. By sub-maximal probably about 95% of absolute intensity. For very good, usually not great, athletes, if they don't sell out for the meet they simply don't make the team. For the best of the best, they don't have such a concern and will likely "train through" the meet with little to no reduction in their training load. This is because they know that even if not at their best (and barring injury) they probably make the team with little problem. As a result to tapering very little or not at all for the meet, they can likely maintain more consistency throughout the competitive phase.

For those who have to, in their minds, sell out, if they make the team they know they cannot continue to compete successfully on such minimal volume (can't compete well for another 6-7 weeks running on fumes) post championships and then expect to compete well at the WC. The general idea is that eventually the freshness you gain from the the taper (moderate or extreme) will be outweighed by the loss of general and specific fitness that the heavier load-volume, intensity, density, types of specific exercises, drills, energy system or cns focus etc. Simply put, if the load had to be significantly reduced in the lead-up to the U.S. championships, there is no longer a load (volume/intensity) which will maintain a peak or near peak condition and they certainly won't be able to achieve any higher than their current levels.

Those coaches and their athletes have to go into a period of increased loading to elicit proper stimuli, to at least maintain the peak condition but hopefully they can provide quality training which will result in even better performances. You can bet that when you go back into a heavier training period-volume and/or intensity, your performances will take a hit, they will drop off.

In training, the best periodization scheme does you no good with respect to achieving at a very high level at the WCs if you can't get to the WC.



Exactly. some one like gay and Felix didn't have to back off much prior to the USATF meet to make the us team but others like Tinsley and Hastings did with some resulting "poor" results when they resumed their training after the USATF meet.
tm71
 
Posts: 2302
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby 5thstreet99 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 1:21 pm

cladthin wrote:For a meet as competitive for some events as the U.S. nationals or Oly. trials, some coaches and their athletes have to sell out or aim for something akin to a peak or nearly so for fear of not even making the team. With that often comes a moderate to significant reduction in volume, sometimes density, frequency and the intensity of the training might become more sub-maximal. By sub-maximal probably about 95% of absolute intensity. For very good, usually not great, athletes, if they don't sell out for the meet they simply don't make the team. For the best of the best, they don't have such a concern and will likely "train through" the meet with little to no reduction in their training load. This is because they know that even if not at their best (and barring injury) they probably make the team with little problem. As a result to tapering very little or not at all for the meet, they can likely maintain more consistency throughout the competitive phase.

For those who have to, in their minds, sell out, if they make the team they know they cannot continue to compete successfully on such minimal volume (can't compete well for another 6-7 weeks running on fumes) post championships and then expect to compete well at the WC. The general idea is that eventually the freshness you gain from the the taper (moderate or extreme) will be outweighed by the loss of general and specific fitness that the heavier load provided-volume, intensity, density, types of specific exercises, drills, energy system or cns focus etc. Simply put, if the load had to be significantly reduced in the lead-up to the U.S. championships, there is no longer a load (volume/intensity) which will maintain a peak or near peak condition and they certainly won't be able to achieve any higher than their current levels.

Those coaches and their athletes have to go into a period of increased loading to elicit proper stimuli, to at least maintain the peak condition but, ideally, they can provide quality specific training which will result in even better performances. You can bet that when you go back into a heavier training period-volume and/or intensity, your performances will take a hit, they will drop off.

In training, the best periodization scheme does you no good with respect to achieving at a very high level at the WCs if you can't get to the WC.


Thank u very much, very interesting
5thstreet99
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 3:52 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:41 pm

Tuariki wrote:
26mi235 wrote: If the 10.85 was run into a wind and the 11.13 had a tailwind of 1.5 they would be quite similar in the summary number (both just under 11.00). If that was the case you probably would not have her listed as one of your cases and yet that change in your recognition would be based on no real change in her performance.

Is your example back to front?


No: if the 10.85 had a headwind instead of a tailwind, the time would not have been 10.85 but barely sub-11, etc.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby t_monk » Sat Jul 13, 2013 4:54 am

All will be revealed by Moscow, so I guess we can chill until then.

*shrugs*
t_monk
 
Posts: 4338
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:03 pm
Location: New Haven, CT + Kgn, JA

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby gh » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:26 am

don't overlook the mental component. The "3 past the post" system (something that almost no other nation ever makes its athletes do) requires the athletes to concentrate mightily on only the one meet, blocking out everything else. Combine that stiff focus with the physical peaking aspects that clad laid out and what do you think happens to those who make the team,particularly with surprising new levels of performance?

The bubble breaks, and all concentration flies out the window. The approach to immediately subsequent competitions tends to be one of just going through the motions,whether they realize it or not. Learning how to overcome this, of course, is what distinguishes the true pros from the wannabe flashes in the pan.

And thus endeth today's armchair psychology lesson. :mrgreen:
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby DCSIGMA » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:53 am

And if these same athletes dropped some crazy times in Moscow ...folks will still have something negative to say and throw up red flags...so they are damned if they do and damned if they don't
DCSIGMA
 
Posts: 699
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 8:59 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby beebee » Sat Jul 13, 2013 6:36 am

Gardner and Duncan are a bit green, but both are clearly quite talented and more importantly WINNERS.
It will take time and experience for any young pro to learn consistency on the international circuit.The suggestions that these ladies are frauds based on their performances in a couple of pointless European payday meets is simply fucking dumb.
beebee
 
Posts: 535
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:30 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby Speedster » Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:12 pm

Alex Anderson much improved with a 11.07 in Madrid. Barbara Pierre must be kicking herself for missing the finish line in Des Moines winning in 10.92 MR +1.5

http://resultados.rfea.es/2013/resultad ... 001ESP.htm
Speedster
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby booond » Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:17 pm

gh wrote:don't overlook the mental component. The "3 past the post" system (something that almost no other nation ever makes its athletes do) requires the athletes to concentrate mightily on only the one meet, blocking out everything else. Combine that stiff focus with the physical peaking aspects that clad laid out and what do you think happens to those who make the team,particularly with surprising new levels of performance?

The bubble breaks, and all concentration flies out the window. The approach to immediately subsequent competitions tends to be one of just going through the motions,whether they realize it or not. Learning how to overcome this, of course, is what distinguishes the true pros from the wannabe flashes in the pan.

And thus endeth today's armchair psychology lesson. :mrgreen:


Gardner and Duncan had two important meets in June... letdown not shocking. I
booond
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:25 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby norunner » Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:20 pm

Since you guys are collecting american results in europe here: Kylie Hutson won a PV only competition in Germany today with a new outdoor PB of 4.67m. Results here: http://www.leichtathletik.de/index.php? ... wsID=43990
norunner
 
Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:21 pm

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby Smoke » Sat Jul 13, 2013 1:43 pm

5th you have a lot of explaining to do. I am not convinced you are so naive. Your initial argument does not stand up to your faux naivete, given the very specific athletes you cherry picked for this topic. The truth is clearly evident and self explanatory, not to mention the many other athletes that have not had let downs (not fall offs) since trials.
It is a widely known fact that the US trials is the single hardest championship meet in the world. There is not a deeper country, nor another country with the ability to produce medallists from no where. I chuckle when people criticize the three past the post format. There is no other way to chose our team. For example, who knew Barbara Pierre was ready to roll? Who knew Queen and Nia were ready? No system is perfect but when competition is deep and fast , the best solution is between the lines. Yes, that can create some heart breaking results, but until the IAAF starts auto qualifying the best of the best, this is what will happen.
Let me take a look at your list you asked for causes, I will give it a shot:
Michael Tinsley - Been consistent all season. Nothing shocking about a bad race here or there, especially in the 400h. It is safe to assume he is training and traveling in preparation for Moscow.
English Gardner - She won her first race. Ran with the world number 1 for half of her first DL race and faded late. I do not see the problem here. 11.32 off the plane, first trip to Europe, 11.13 against the big dogs in her second race. New coach, training, and prepping for Moscow. Not to mention she had conference, regionals, ncaa, and US nationals all in about 6 weeks. Oh and she won every one of those meets.
Kimberlyn Duncan - Fresh off her collegiate season. A surprise US title with a windy sub 22. I would bet money her body is in shock, and mentally she is recharging.
Issiah Young - He needs to take a mental break. Someone get him a snickers. He ran a full collegiate season. A lot of sprinting in his legs. Refer to my detailing of all EG, it applies to all the collegiates. Lots of sprinting at a high level for them.
Bershawn Jackson - ???? What are we looking at here? The fluctuations of the men's 4h hurdles is pretty much uniform.
Natasha Hastings - Definitely recharging. She put all she had into winning. I expect her to be right and ready for Moscow.

I hope this helps and prevents you from trolling in the future. None is the above is mysterious nor insider information. Just basics of US track and field
Smoke
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby J2thaD » Sat Jul 13, 2013 4:53 pm

Smoke wrote:You mean a reoccurring myth. Name the athletes that have run fast at trials and never run that fast again? And no excluding the best of the best to cherry pick your results. We will wait for this myth to be proven true. Take your time...


What year was that when the wind readings were erratic for damn near every race, then all of a sudden you get the same wind reading for each quarter final of the 100. Plenty of guys ran times they never ran again on that day. What was the little guy from Clemson's name. That guy went from 9.8 to running 10.2 or 10.3 on the Euro circuit. There were other guys from those quarterfinals who never ran that way again also.
J2thaD
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 9:45 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby dustoff » Sat Jul 13, 2013 4:58 pm

J2thaD wrote:
Smoke wrote:You mean a reoccurring myth. Name the athletes that have run fast at trials and never run that fast again? And no excluding the best of the best to cherry pick your results. We will wait for this myth to be proven true. Take your time...


What year was that when the wind readings were erratic for damn near every race, then all of a sudden you get the same wind reading for each quarter final of the 100. Plenty of guys ran times they never ran again on that day. What was the little guy from Clemson's name. That guy went from 9.8 to running 10.2 or 10.3 on the Euro circuit. There were other guys from those quarterfinals who never ran that way again also.


Do you mean Travis Padgett? He ran 9.89 and had other legal sub 10s and 10.0 as a teenager.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby 26mi235 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:00 pm

This is not as 'strange' as it might seem. If you have a strong cross wind you can get very erratic readings along the vector of the track even if the wind speed is absolutely constant. If the wind is then slowing a bit and changing direction, now variations in the direction do not cause variations in the vector along the track, only changes in the speed will do that with a straight following or head wind.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby gh » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:01 pm

J2thaD wrote:
Smoke wrote:You mean a reoccurring myth. Name the athletes that have run fast at trials and never run that fast again? And no excluding the best of the best to cherry pick your results. We will wait for this myth to be proven true. Take your time...


What year was that when the wind readings were erratic for damn near every race, then all of a sudden you get the same wind reading for each quarter final of the 100. Plenty of guys ran times they never ran again on that day. What was the little guy from Clemson's name. That guy went from 9.8 to running 10.2 or 10.3 on the Euro circuit. There were other guys from those quarterfinals who never ran that way again also.


The precise wind readings were NOT the same for every race. Rounded to 10ths (in which they are reported) they were, but the gauge did not give the exact same reading multiple races in a row. A great myth that some love to propogate.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby Smoke » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:59 pm

Are you sure you want to stick with that argument? Let me save you, it has been proven that almost every person from that year ran as fast as they did that day. Like I said, it is a myth. I will see your Travis Padgett with my Tyson Gay, Doc Patton and Jeff Demps. SO you ride that ONE example, I will roll with the others that either ran as fast, or I can go the other direction with those that actually had faster pr's than they ran in that very race. So, are you arguing that only his lane benefited? Just trying to find your logic.
There are far more mysterious results from certain European meets than ANY US championship. I just read a thread about Lalova's 10.77.
Smoke
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: post american trials performance in europe

Postby t_monk » Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:22 pm

SAFP vs Duncan vs Jeter vs Ahoure in Monaco in the 200
t_monk
 
Posts: 4338
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:03 pm
Location: New Haven, CT + Kgn, JA


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 12 guests