There has been a lot of talk on here about Jordan Hasay and I do my bit to hype Emily Pidgeon, but there are several other younguns out there who are just as talented. They have all ran fast times at an early age, but who do you feel has that extra something to take them all the way to senior success? Here are the candidates (in age order):
Hasay has also run 4:25.08 for 1500m and 9:26.32 for 3000m in 2006.
I had the opportunity to witness the 4:43.09 1600 this weekend. One thing that struck me as Hasay was lining up (and is also evident in the stride-for-stride photo in the other thread) is that her legs are very long in relation to her torso. That's a plus. Special things happen when a top-flight aerobic system is placed in a gazelle frame.
Other salient point from the linked article is that Hasay's mother was an Olympic-level swimmer for England. I think the Brits would be well advised to adopt Hasay as one of their own, so as to hedge their bets in the event of future showdowns with the Pidge.
richxx87 wrote:Someone else can do the conversions. These are just the bizarre distances kids run in California (and some other US) high school competitions.
It isn't just CA. The natl HS federation went metric, and invented 2 events not contested elsewhere. On the face, not illogical, 4 laps, 8 laps of 400m track. Would have worked well at the turn of the century. The 20th century. T&FN has a conversion value to add to 16 & 32, but I am too lazy to go upstairs and dig it out. :(
richxx87 wrote:Here are some recent times by Jordan Hasay -- but it seems she PRs every weekend so these will be out of date in a couple of weeks.
1600 -- 4:43.09
Mile --- 4:45.00
3200 -- 10:07.56
Someone else can do the conversions. These are just the bizarre distances kids run in California (and some other US) high school competitions.
We have only seen her once at any sort of major peak in HS and she ran away in the Footlocker National XC (HS) Championship. the 4:43 and 9:26 are unlikely to be her seasonal bests, especially since the 4:43 was part of a double that finished in 5:01(1600) after a 5:19.9 (first 1600).
If you're not a true track person (and very few at the HS level are), what seems illogical is to have a race that starts 10m (or 20m) before the finish line, then does an even number of laps. It would also make little sense to those people to run all but two races in meters. Either you switch or you don't.
gh wrote:If you're not a true track person (and very few at the HS level are), what seems illogical is to have a race that starts 10m (or 20m) before the finish line, then does an even number of laps. It would also make little sense to those people to run all but two races in meters. Either you switch or you don't.
I have no problem with the 1600; physically is makes more sense than running a mile on a 400m track and it is so close in distance to a mile that the 1.4-2.0 seconds is very easy to take into account as the incremental slowing does not have time to accumulate. I wonder if the standard was 1600 and not the mile, would we have a conversion factor of 7.5% (rather than the implicit 7.37% that the 8% for the mile yields)?
Well they did and the didn't, metric but not 1500. Worst of both worlds in my opinion.
The 1500 is an odd bird, it is the only race with laps that does not begin on the lap or the half lap. With an (usually indoor) 200m track, it is the only one that does not begin at the finish line. It is run in a country where people understand miles and quarters and distances that are almost those; For someone thinking miles, I think that it is easier to compare the 1600 than the 1500. I think that it is irrefutable that it is easier logistically for lap times etc. Besides, most of the distances are a double as you move up, but the 1500 is less than a double and the 5000 becomes much more than a double, so moving to 1600 is not bad on that score either.
This is very true, I'm sure there is an interesting history as to why they chose that distance (we're moving into new thread territory here).
Considering the mile was so well established when metrification kicked in, i agree that the 1600 would have been preferable to the 1500m. Given the 1500m race was chosen by the international community, however, it made no sense for the HS's to go their own way despite it being more user friendly.
EPelle wrote:26:er -- same with some steeplechase races, depending on the track:s straight-away.
And HS steeples are almost as rare as hen's teeth.. I am not really arguing that is a great choice, but I do think that it was not an unnatural choice (and Daisy, HS does not pay too much attention to the world stage because it is not closely connected by any institutions).
Jon, great post...sorry it's devolved into the same old whine about hs 1600's. As an American, I'm clearly rooting for Hasay... I hope to be watching her go for Gold in 2012...maybe against the others you've hilighted. And when I say I hope to be watching...I mean, I hope I'm still alive!
Thanks, Jon. This is interesting to think about, especially for wondering about development programs in different countries. Japan for instance -- I was interested in Kobayashi. I don't know anything about the Japanese development program for junior runners, but I would guess that it's focused not on the events she is running, but is focused long term, and long distance -- ie, they are very good at developing marathoners, and have little presence internationally at other distance events that are part of the OG/WC program. They have produced, from the 1990s til now, a great record of consistently getting women on the medal stand in the marathon at WC & OG, and have depth, too -- often have 2-3 in the top 10. I also looked up the depth of their performances on pela2's all-time lists. In the top 200 women marathon performances (down to low 2:25), Japan has 39 -- almost 20%. At 10,000m, they have 16 of the top 200 all-time performances. However, at 5,000m, 1500m, and 800m, they have no performances in the top 200 all-time. So, I wonder if Kobayashi is being developed in the way that many Japanese women distance runners have developed -- toward being a marathoner, or if she's something different in their system.
I would not be surprised to see her on the marathon starting line for Japan in a few years, whereas the Romanian girl seems to be a Steepler in the making. I'm less sure about Pidgeon's or Hasay's, or Fetcere's "destiny" (I mean the events they are most likely to end up excelling in). We might see all these in senior competition, in different events.
It makes sense for us to compare their times, and look at their ages -- that's about all the data we have anyway -- but the athletics culture each is in will shape each in other ways, even if everything goes well. That's what I'm suggesting with the speculations about Kobayashi. Even though she seems to have middle distance tendencies at this point, her athletics culture has such a great record of creating marathoners, and almost no record of creating great middle distance runners, that I would expect to see her in the marathon, even if she is running 2:05 800m now.
^Thanks for the video.
Her splits were, approximately, as follows:
Approximate km splits: 3:05.5, 3:05, 3:01. I think that her pace maker was realizing after 600m he was going too slow, so he put in a quicker lap. She probably lost 2 seconds there. But it's very well possible she'd have followed a pace-maker (or run alone) to a faster time- her time was pretty much predetermined.
Greatly appreciate the Pidgeon video but surprised to see male pacemakers in a women's track race. I wasn't aware that the practice was allowed in any sanctioned track competition. The vice of that practice is that the superior runner never has to take the pace for herself. In men's competition, the rule against pacemakers jumping into the middle of the race means that the superior runner will have to make his own pace at some point.
Official Result Women - 1500 Metres
Pos Athlete Nat Mark Pts
1 Jamieson Sarah AUS 4:03.51 10
2 Kobayashi Yuriko JPN 4:07.87 8 3 Yoshikawa Mika JPN 4:14.05 7
4 Sigmont Erica AUS 4:16.11 6
5 Kuwashiro Nanae JPN 4:17.75 5
6 Shadle Anne USA 4:22.65 4
7 Miyazaki Chise JPN 4:25.00 3
8 Nishimura Miki JPN 4:27.50 2
It appears that the Japanese gal in the original post has run a big 5-second PB at today's Osaka meet. If, in fact, it is the same gal, as Yuriko and Kobayashi are both quite common names in Japan. Yuriko means "Snow Child" and most girls born when it's snowing get that tag.
She looks to be the early favorite for Beijing World Juniors in August. Another Japanese Junior that could make some noise could be the 400 kid who got a PB at 45.41 at the same meet.
As an aside, Daniela Fetcere came up against Pidgeon's training partner Sarah Hopkinson in the 1500m at the ISF World Gymnasiade last week in Thessalonica, Greece. It was a field of 21 athletes in 37 deg cels temperature. The first lap was slow, but things started to pick up after then. Going into the last lap, Britain's Emma Pallant was leading and Hopkinson was in fifth position. With 300m to go, Hopkinson had moved up behind Fetcere, who was in second. At 200m, Hopkinson drew level with Pallant and then kicked for home, opening up a two-second lead by the time she crossed the finish line in first place.
Her coach said that he expected the time to be around 4:35, given the way the race played out, so was very surprised when he saw the clock at 4:23 - just one second away from her PB.
Oh, and Hopkinson (at age 14) was the youngest in the field.
My training routine includes about 60 miles per week including a tempo run, a long run, hill repeats, and easy running. We're introducing some new runs and methods this year such as a 10 mile run once a week, and wearing a heart rate monitor for my tempo runs. I'm still swimming also. I like to swim one to three miles a day five days a week. Then twice a week I take easy bicycle rides of 7 miles. Finally I weight train with my dad twice a week. Coach Mando has some good plans for me this season. Right now I'm just focusing on adapting to the mileage and staying heathly.