About That London US Women's 4x100


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

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby gh » Tue Apr 10, 2012 9:23 am

Not a bad analogy, a terrible one. So let me remind you that it was yours, which is why I trashed the concept of comparing double plays with passing the baton. Classic apples & oranges.
gh
 
Posts: 46298
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Apr 10, 2012 10:13 am

gh wrote:Not a bad analogy, a terrible one. So let me remind you that it was yours, which is why I trashed the concept of comparing double plays with passing the baton. Classic apples & oranges.

There's no perfect analogy, but you were comparing the apple stem to orange seed. In order for the analogy to make any sense, we need to at least compare the apple seed to orange seed which is what I'm doing. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby norunner » Tue Apr 10, 2012 10:25 am

Gabriella wrote:Can the Great Britain team medal in this event? More often than not, either Jamaica or the USA mess up, leaving the other to win comfortably and robbing us of a great battle.

I wonder with the home advantage, can Britain go for a medal ahead of Russia, Bahamas, Trinidad et al?

The Germans have been having relay camp training since the end of last year; 6 men and women are selected and go on a few of these camps throughout the year. I'd like to think Britian do the same, but we don't. If we could make our girls practice together we're in with a shout for a medal.
Didn't do all that much for Germany though, the last two world championships the men DNF in the heats and the women did the same in Barcelona 2010. They are having another mandatory relay camp before London, almost two weeks of relay training in july for all four relays.
I think even if Jamaica and the USA don't screw up the bronze medal is very much open to several countries: UK, Ukraine, Germany, Russia, France, Bahamas.
norunner
 
Posts: 1269
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:21 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Speedster » Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:15 pm

Everyone wants a return on their investment (time, money, emotion) but in the end humans are involved and anything can happen eg: injury or being impedid by another athlete, both of which have struck down the US 4x100 at the last two worlds.

GB women are in with a shot but the order needs to be Kwakye, Phillips, Oyepitan, Williams - though Abi did run first at the Florida Relays, I just feel Jeanette's start is wasted elsewhere, much like Fraser-Pryce for the JAM team.
Speedster
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby 26mi235 » Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:11 pm

The failure mode in the men's 4x100 at the WCs is not really something that smooth handoffs and good timing would address.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby mump boy » Tue Apr 10, 2012 3:13 pm

Speedster wrote:Everyone wants a return on their investment (time, money, emotion) but in the end humans are involved and anything can happen eg: injury or being impedid by another athlete, both of which have struck down the US 4x100 at the last two worlds.

GB women are in with a shot but the order needs to be Kwakye, Phillips, Oyepitan, Williams - though Abi did run first at the Florida Relays, I just feel Jeanette's start is wasted elsewhere, much like Fraser-Pryce for the JAM team.


I can definitely go with that order, although Abi has always runs last, I would still be tempted to have Jodie on 2nd and Asha on last though
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Smoke » Tue Apr 10, 2012 4:21 pm

Our teams have had plenty of practice over the years. No less than the Jamaicans currently have.
The telling fact is that this practice issue is only applied to the men yet the women have had the same prep over the years, and far more personality conflicts. Point is, we are only having these mental acrobatics because of the drops. My point is being faster equates to winning, and makes the world a happy place.
Smoke
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Speedster » Tue Apr 10, 2012 11:26 pm

mump boy wrote:
Speedster wrote:Everyone wants a return on their investment (time, money, emotion) but in the end humans are involved and anything can happen eg: injury or being impedid by another athlete, both of which have struck down the US 4x100 at the last two worlds.

GB women are in with a shot but the order needs to be Kwakye, Phillips, Oyepitan, Williams - though Abi did run first at the Florida Relays, I just feel Jeanette's start is wasted elsewhere, much like Fraser-Pryce for the JAM team.


I can definitely go with that order, although Abi has always runs last, I would still be tempted to have Jodie on 2nd and Asha on last though


Video of Abi at the Florida Relays, great anchor leg from Tianna Madison too, though I think she's walking down a hurdler on the last leg.
http://www.flotrack.org/coverage/248544 ... -4x100-H01

The Asha Jodie switch makes sense, giving Jodie a chance to stretch out on the traditionally longer second leg, they're going to be behind on the last exchange so you want someone good at chasing and aggressive.
Speedster
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby mump boy » Wed Apr 11, 2012 4:28 am

Speedster wrote:
mump boy wrote:
Speedster wrote:Everyone wants a return on their investment (time, money, emotion) but in the end humans are involved and anything can happen eg: injury or being impedid by another athlete, both of which have struck down the US 4x100 at the last two worlds.

GB women are in with a shot but the order needs to be Kwakye, Phillips, Oyepitan, Williams - though Abi did run first at the Florida Relays, I just feel Jeanette's start is wasted elsewhere, much like Fraser-Pryce for the JAM team.


I can definitely go with that order, although Abi has always runs last, I would still be tempted to have Jodie on 2nd and Asha on last though


Video of Abi at the Florida Relays, great anchor leg from Tianna Madison too, though I think she's walking down a hurdler on the last leg.
http://www.flotrack.org/coverage/248544 ... -4x100-H01

The Asha Jodie switch makes sense, giving Jodie a chance to stretch out on the traditionally longer second leg, they're going to be behind on the last exchange so you want someone good at chasing and aggressive.


I know i saw Abi in that race she's looking good. She's also run 22.75w so we are all very hopeful she can get back to those kind of times with legal wind this year

This will definitely be Abi's last year of running i hope she can go out on a high with an Olympic medal :D
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:34 am

Speedster wrote:Everyone wants a return on their investment (time, money, emotion) but in the end humans are involved and anything can happen eg: injury or being impedid by another athlete, both of which have struck down the US 4x100 at the last two worlds.


Speedster, "impeded by another athlete" ?? I know many blame the Brit, but are you sure
that Patton wasn't leaning into the next lane on the curve and ran into the "massive, hulk"?

The NCAA rules for relays do not allow a runner to break the plane of his lane while running.
I haven't found anything like that in the IAAF rules, but there should be.
Running athletes you know are injured and not knowing the rules of relays, which the US claimed after the early-touch DQ, are not excused by the "anything can happen" cover, IMO.
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:45 pm

DJG wrote:Speedster, "impeded by another athlete" ?? I know many blame the Brit, but are you sure
that Patton wasn't leaning into the next lane on the curve and ran into the "massive, hulk"?

The NCAA rules for relays do not allow a runner to break the plane of his lane while running.
I haven't found anything like that in the IAAF rules, but there should be.

I can't blame Patton for that since it was a very fluky incident that was caused by two things.
    1) The U.S. was so far ahead of the U.K. that Patton caught up to the British anchor before he could take off. Usually teams are more evenly matched than that which prevents this from happening.
    2) The British anchor took off at precisely the time that Patton was about to pass him, leaving Patton unable to adjust quickly enough for the sudden obstruction. Regardless of whether or not Patton was leaning into the adjacent lane, he would have missed the Brit if he had not left until after Patton passed him. It's very likely that the upper bodies of both Patton and the Brit were over the line at the instant of impact, but this isn't a problem when the teams are evenly matched.
DJG wrote:Running athletes you know are injured and not knowing the rules of relays, which the US claimed after the early-touch DQ, are not excused by the "anything can happen" cover, IMO.

I also agree that there's no excuse for there to ever be an early pass DQ at this level, but some folks think it's too much to ask to expect these athletes to understand such fundamental concepts; after all, they only practice together a few times a year.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby ATK » Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:13 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:I also agree that there's no excuse for there to ever be an early pass DQ at this level, but some folks think it's too much to ask to expect these athletes to understand such fundamental concepts; after all, they only practice together a few times a year.

I agree here. Compared to college teams who get baton practice multiple times each weeks and are continuously go over the fundamentals, pro athletes don't. Not only do they have an entire year of no real relay practice, in the off year, but if they don't come in a certain spot at trials durring championship year, that's a whole nother year of practice gone. So yes these are fundamental and "simple" actions, if they are not continuously reinforced and gone over, when the time comes there will be problems.
ATK
 
Posts: 3804
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:08 pm

ATK wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:I also agree that there's no excuse for there to ever be an early pass DQ at this level, but some folks think it's too much to ask to expect these athletes to understand such fundamental concepts; after all, they only practice together a few times a year.

I agree here. Compared to college teams who get baton practice multiple times each weeks and are continuously go over the fundamentals, pro athletes don't. Not only do they have an entire year of no real relay practice, in the off year, but if they don't come in a certain spot at trials durring championship year, that's a whole nother year of practice gone. So yes these are fundamental and "simple" actions, if they are not continuously reinforced and gone over, when the time comes there will be problems.

Most of these pro athletes ran relays constantly in high school and college. If they can't remember not to attempt the pass before the zone, something is wrong with them. This is like a major league baseball pitcher having to be reminded to cover first base on a ground ball to the first baseman or a football player having to be reminded to run out of bounds when his team is running a two-minute drill. 99% of the time, baseball and football players get these thing right, and on the 1% of the times that they get them wrong, they are ridiculed unmercifully on ESPN and sports talk radio for weeks.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby ATK » Thu Apr 12, 2012 3:42 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
ATK wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:I also agree that there's no excuse for there to ever be an early pass DQ at this level, but some folks think it's too much to ask to expect these athletes to understand such fundamental concepts; after all, they only practice together a few times a year.

I agree here. Compared to college teams who get baton practice multiple times each weeks and are continuously go over the fundamentals, pro athletes don't. Not only do they have an entire year of no real relay practice, in the off year, but if they don't come in a certain spot at trials durring championship year, that's a whole nother year of practice gone. So yes these are fundamental and "simple" actions, if they are not continuously reinforced and gone over, when the time comes there will be problems.

Most of these pro athletes ran relays constantly in high school and college. If they can't remember not to attempt the pass before the zone, something is wrong with them. This is like a major league baseball pitcher having to be reminded to cover first base on a ground ball to the first baseman or a football player having to be reminded to run out of bounds when his team is running a two-minute drill. 99% of the time, baseball and football players get these thing right, and on the 1% of the times that they get them wrong, they are ridiculed unmercifully on ESPN and sports talk radio for weeks.

I think your comparisons are off. Your talking about relays, which for pro track athletes, don't happen nearly as often as the events in those other sports do.
In no way am I saying that they should be given a pass for a DQ, especially for something thats pretty much common sense like passing before the zone, like you said. I'm simply saying that if these athletes are hardly practicing for something, you can only expect so much from them.
ATK
 
Posts: 3804
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Speedster » Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:23 pm

DJG wrote:
Speedster wrote:Everyone wants a return on their investment (time, money, emotion) but in the end humans are involved and anything can happen eg: injury or being impedid by another athlete, both of which have struck down the US 4x100 at the last two worlds.


Speedster, "impeded by another athlete" ?? I know many blame the Brit, but are you sure
that Patton wasn't leaning into the next lane on the curve and ran into the "massive, hulk"?

The NCAA rules for relays do not allow a runner to break the plane of his lane while running.
I haven't found anything like that in the IAAF rules, but there should be.
Running athletes you know are injured and not knowing the rules of relays, which the US claimed after the early-touch DQ, are not excused by the "anything can happen" cover, IMO.


Where the blame lies is open to opinion but I refer to it more for the fact it was a freak accident rather than a dropped baton, I'm not sure any amount of US team training would have prepared for that.
Speedster
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Sat Apr 14, 2012 6:35 am

Speedster wrote:
DJG wrote:
Speedster wrote:Everyone wants a return on their investment (time, money, emotion) but in the end humans are involved and anything can happen eg: injury or being impedid by another athlete, both of which have struck down the US 4x100 at the last two worlds.


Speedster, "impeded by another athlete" ?? I know many blame the Brit, but are you sure
that Patton wasn't leaning into the next lane on the curve and ran into the "massive, hulk"?

The NCAA rules for relays do not allow a runner to break the plane of his lane while running.
I haven't found anything like that in the IAAF rules, but there should be.
Running athletes you know are injured and not knowing the rules of relays, which the US claimed after the early-touch DQ, are not excused by the "anything can happen" cover, IMO.


Where the blame lies is open to opinion but I refer to it more for the fact it was a freak accident rather than a dropped baton, I'm not sure any amount of US team training would have prepared for that.


Having seen relay teams intentionally stick their butts out into the next lane to throw off an
incoming runner, I don't consider this a freak accident. On many HS tracks with narrower lanes, this happens even without intent. No more freakish than a hurdler impeding the guy next to you with a wide arm swing or grab. As for prevention, maybe if Patton had run the early round he may have been reminded that another outgoing runner is in the inside lane positioned on the outside of that lane, as he should be and is allowed to be.
[Running both practice meets would have helped Patton's preparation also.]
My opinion, Patton was running so hard trying to atone for past mistakes that he leaned into the curve so hard, he would have hit the Brit even if the Brit was further along into his acceleration. The resulting collision would have been less damaging to both teams, but would still have throw both final exchanges off.
Many things can and will go wrong on 4x1 exchanges, preparation should address those things.
Bottomline: the US has exhausted all their excuses for 4x1 mishaps.
[See Track Coach issue #199, "Is This Any Way To Run a Relay?],
Subscriptions are available through T&FN
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Blues » Sat Apr 14, 2012 8:22 am

Speedster wrote:
Video of Abi at the Florida Relays, great anchor leg from Tianna Madison too, though I think she's walking down a hurdler on the last leg.
http://www.flotrack.org/coverage/248544 ... -4x100-H01



That was definitely British hurdler Tiffany Ofili Porter who Tianna Madison (and others) made up ground on during the anchor leg. Another hurdler, Damu Cherry Mitchell (blonde hair) seems to have lost significant ground for her Star Athletics team on the second leg too. Kristi Castlin (1st leg) and Kellie Wells (3rd leg) seemed to fare better on their legs as far as the well known hurdlers in the race go, but to be fair Cherry-Mitchell and Ofili-Porter may have had slightly faster competition on their 2nd and anchor legs...
Blues
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Speedster » Sat Apr 14, 2012 10:11 am

It wasnt meant as a dig to Porter or any other hurdlers racing, it's not a fair contest when they are use to jumping over obstacles 10 times in a race.
Speedster
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Sat Apr 14, 2012 11:43 am

DJG wrote:Having seen relay teams intentionally stick their butts out into the next lane to throw off an
incoming runner, I don't consider this a freak accident. On many HS tracks with narrower lanes, this happens even without intent. No more freakish than a hurdler impeding the guy next to you with a wide arm swing or grab. As for prevention, maybe if Patton had run the early round he may have been reminded that another outgoing runner is in the inside lane positioned on the outside of that lane, as he should be and is allowed to be.
[Running both practice meets would have helped Patton's preparation also.]
My opinion, Patton was running so hard trying to atone for past mistakes that he leaned into the curve so hard, he would have hit the Brit even if the Brit was further along into his acceleration. The resulting collision would have been less damaging to both teams, but would still have throw both final exchanges off.
Many things can and will go wrong on 4x1 exchanges, preparation should address those things.
Bottomline: the US has exhausted all their excuses for 4x1 mishaps.
[See Track Coach issue #199, "Is This Any Way To Run a Relay?],
Subscriptions are available through T&FN

With all due respect, I think you're dead wrong. I agree with Speedster 100%, it was a freak accident. For one thing, if the Brit had left earlier, Patton wouid not have caught up to him in the first place. And if he had left later, Patton would have had missed him. And what good would running the earlier round have done? In the very unlikely chance that the same exact timing was duplicated in the heat, the U.S. would have just DNF'ed in the heat instead of the final. Otherwise, he would have been still caught off guard by the sudden obstruction into his path. As it turns out, the Brit left so ealry, that the incoming Brit never got to within one meter of his teammate before he got to the end of the zone, depsite him being slowed down by the collision with Patton. So ironically, if he had left when he supposed to, the incident would have never happened.

Last year you said the U.S. coaches should teach their runners to run in the middle of the lane to avoid such incidents. I have to tell you that I was absolutely shocked that someone who supposedly knows so much about relays would say such a thing.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Sun Apr 15, 2012 10:13 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
DJG wrote:Having seen relay teams intentionally stick their butts out into the next lane to throw off an
incoming runner, I don't consider this a freak accident. On many HS tracks with narrower lanes, this happens even without intent. No more freakish than a hurdler impeding the guy next to you with a wide arm swing or grab. As for prevention, maybe if Patton had run the early round he may have been reminded that another outgoing runner is in the inside lane positioned on the outside of that lane, as he should be and is allowed to be.
[Running both practice meets would have helped Patton's preparation also.]
My opinion, Patton was running so hard trying to atone for past mistakes that he leaned into the curve so hard, he would have hit the Brit even if the Brit was further along into his acceleration. The resulting collision would have been less damaging to both teams, but would still have throw both final exchanges off.
Many things can and will go wrong on 4x1 exchanges, preparation should address those things.
Bottomline: the US has exhausted all their excuses for 4x1 mishaps.
[See Track Coach issue #199, "Is This Any Way To Run a Relay?],
Subscriptions are available through T&FN


With all due respect, I think you're dead wrong. I agree with Speedster 100%, it was a freak accident. For one thing, if the Brit had left earlier, Patton wouid not have caught up to him in the first place. And if he had left later, Patton would have had missed him. And what good would running the earlier round have done? In the very unlikely chance that the same exact timing was duplicated in the heat, the U.S. would have just DNF'ed in the heat instead of the final. Otherwise, he would have been still caught off guard by the sudden obstruction into his path. As it turns out, the Brit left so ealry, that the incoming Brit never got to within one meter of his teammate before he got to the end of the zone, depsite him being slowed down by the collision with Patton. So ironically, if he had left when he supposed to, the incident would have never happened.

Last year you said the U.S. coaches should teach their runners to run in the middle of the lane to avoid such incidents. I have to tell you that I was absolutely shocked that someone who supposedly knows so much about relays would say such a thing.


Edit postReport this postReply with quote Re: 2011 WC: m4x100—Jamaica 37.04 (NEW WR!)
by DJG » Tue Sep 06, 2011 3:50 am

Any time a car crashes into the back of another vehicle, the driver of the car doing the crashing is at fault.

Of course, sprinters are taught to hug the curve and lean in. But not on relays where you know an athlete will be standing on the outside of the lane to your inside. Relay runners know this.
The # 2 runner runs on the outside of the lane to set up the left hand-to right hand pass at the 2nd exchange zone. The anchor leg sets up on the outside of the lane. Everyone knows this.

To call this a fluke is to disregard the last ten years or more of US relay running.

Guru, I believe, said the 4x1 would be a "bloodbath". Marlow cited the poor preparation going into Daegu. The signs were there to see.

The US coaches made several very questionable decisions on substitutes on 3 of the 4 sprint relays, they got by on two, but not the third and final one.


JC, Is this my post you are referring to? I believe you inferred that this means "run in the middle of the lane." It does not. It means stay inside your lane. Whether the Brit left, early, late, or no at all, has no bearing, IMO, he was inside his lane and Patton ran into him. That's how I saw it then and I have found no footage of video that shows otherwise.
What was the official ruling by the IAAF after thar race? Were the Brits DQ'd for obstruction?
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby ATK » Sun Apr 15, 2012 10:21 am

Relating to the womens 4x100 topic, Alex Anderson ran 10.88 +5.9 at Texas this weekend.
Converts to about 11.14.
ATK
 
Posts: 3804
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:37 am

DJG wrote:Of course, sprinters are taught to hug the curve and lean in. But not on relays where you know an athlete will be standing on the outside of the lane to your inside. Relay runners know this.

So you're saying that runners should run in the middle of the lane on relays, right?
DJG wrote:To call this a fluke is to disregard the last ten years or more of US relay running.

Can you point to another incident like this in a major national or international competition?
DJG wrote:JC, Is this my post you are referring to? I believe you inferred that this means "run in the middle of the lane." It does not. It means stay inside your lane. Whether the Brit left, early, late, or no at all, has no bearing, IMO, he was inside his lane and Patton ran into him. That's how I saw it then and I have found no footage of video that shows otherwise.
What was the official ruling by the IAAF after thar race? Were the Brits DQ'd for obstruction?

The Brits upperarm, which was over the line at the point of impact, hit Patton's thigh, which was not over the line. Send me your email address in a pm and I'll send you the HD video from the critical video angle.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby 26mi235 » Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:29 pm

At speed, the runners in the middle of their lane might still be leaning in to the inside lane. You cannot run 11+mps on a curve standing straight up.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:57 pm

I'm sure Patton's upper body was over the line at the instant of impact, but his upper body was not what came into contact with the Brit. If you think about it, a sprinter's hands and arms will cross the line even in a straightaway if he/she is trying to hug the line, since the hands and arms will extend 12 to 18 inches beyond than the footprint depending on the runner. Here are the links to a few photos to demostrate what I'm talking about:

http://www.lsusports.net/pics32/800/XO/ ... 024607.jpg

http://www.lsusports.net/pics32/800/AR/ ... 024607.jpg

http://www.lsusports.net/pics32/800/CI/ ... 024607.jpg
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Apr 15, 2012 3:22 pm

If you want to know what happens when a sprinter runs in the middle of the lane, a great example is the second exchange between Justin Gatlin and Coby Miller at the 2004 Olympics in Athens. Miller, who was running the third leg, ran in the middle of the lane, which didn't leave Gatlin with enough room to work with. This meant that Gatlin had to try to avoid clipping Miller's feet, while at the same time passing the baton across his body without straying into the adjacent lane.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:32 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
DJG wrote:Of course, sprinters are taught to hug the curve and lean in. But not on relays where you know an athlete will be standing on the outside of the lane to your inside. Relay runners know this.

So you're saying that runners should run in the middle of the lane on relays, right?
No
DJG wrote:To call this a fluke is to disregard the last ten years or more of US relay running.

Can you point to another incident like this in a major national or international competition?
DJG wrote:JC, Is this my post you are referring to? I believe you inferred that this means "run in the middle of the lane." It does not. It means stay inside your lane. Whether the Brit left, early, late, or no at all, has no bearing, IMO, he was inside his lane and Patton ran into him. That's how I saw it then and I have found no footage of video that shows otherwise.
What was the official ruling by the IAAF after thar race? Were the Brits DQ'd for obstruction?

The Brits upperarm, which was over the line at the point of impact, hit Patton's thigh, which was not over the line. Send me your email address in a pm and I'll send you the HD video from the critical video angle.


I'm saying that the the incoming runner knows that there is an out-going runner in the adjacent inside lane positioned on the outside of that lane. No incoming runner should be surprised, or caught "off-guard" by this. The US's lead over GB was no different from that of Jamaica's over T&T. Was Blake surprised to see the T&T anchor still sitting there in his three-pt stance as he went by? Watch the video and tell me Blake wasn't in the middle of his lane as he passed T&T. He adjusted his position to the middle of the lane as he went by, it appears to me, to avoid contact. If the T&T anchor had turned to run then, Blake would not have run into him.

Watching the youtube videos again, I got the impression that Patton was distracted by the fact that he saw Dix leaving early. Maybe that contributed to his not seeing the Brit sitting in his 3-pt stance in lane 3.
The IAAF officials did not DQ anyone, the US and GB were listed as DNF. T&T, also affected in lane 5, almost certainly lost medalling.

The US relays will get better when apologists stop making excuses for all the foul-ups.
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Apr 16, 2012 8:22 am

DJG, what you seem to be missing is the fact that the Brit's sudden arm movement is what caused the problems, not his positioning on the outside of the lane, since Patton had already accounted for that. Does this type of thing happen frequently or is this a rare incident, that is the question? You implied that this sort of collison happens regurlarly. If that is the case, surely you can provide us with some others examples. Otherwise, I will continue to write it off as a fluke accident.

Also, I'm at least willing to entertain the idea that incoming runners in unevenly matched races might want give themselves a little more room to account for any sudden movement by outgoing runners from other teams as they approach the acceleration zone. But the idea that runners should be taught to run in the middle of the lane is definitely not the answer since that creates a whole new set of problems. Perhaps Patton could have swung slightly wide and reestablished position on the inside of the lane after he passed the Brit, but it was imperative the he hugged the line as he approached Dix.

By the way, why did you say Dix left early? Based on the go mark, which you can see pretty good on HD TV, it appears that he left right on time. Evidently, the U.S. was just trying to stretch the zone more than Jamaica.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Dutra5 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 8:52 am

DJG wrote:
JC, Is this my post you are referring to? I believe you inferred that this means "run in the middle of the lane." It does not. It means stay inside your lane. Whether the Brit left, early, late, or no at all, has no bearing, IMO, he was inside his lane and Patton ran into him. That's how I saw it then and I have found no footage of video that shows otherwise.
What was the official ruling by the IAAF after thar race? Were the Brits DQ'd for obstruction?


Whether the British left early, late or exactly on time matters little. What matters is they left when they did and the timing was such that Patton was in the exact spot he was when the British runner began to accelerate and in doing so moved his arm into Patton's lane. It was circumstantial and a fluke whether you wish to call it that or not.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby notorious » Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:36 am

If the Jamaican ladies get back to the form they were in in 2008 and 2009, there is no way in hell that Jamaica will lose barring a dropped baton or poor exchanges.


If Fraser gets back to her 2009 form (10.73 and 10.79)
If Kerron gets back to her 2009 form(10.75 twice)
If Sherone gets back to her 2008 form(10.8+)

and Veronica being Veronica (10.76), the relays will be over.

A WR is a strong possibility for the Jamaican team.

The Jamaican team was subpar in 2011. Fraser wasn't on form, Kerron just coming off an injury and Sherone just having an okay year. VC ran great on the anchor to give us a national record.
notorious
 
Posts: 2011
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:34 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:26 am

They have actually outrun the US how many times? One advantage the Jamaicans have in those 100 times, good as they are, is better starts. That does not help nearly so much in the 4x100. Jeter can and does outrun all other anchors almost all the time. US with three very good exchanges beat Jamaican even with good exchanges.

It should be close, with the advantage to Jamaica, but we have to see how the season pans out. So far we have sen mainly collegians, SRR in a surprise 10.89w, and Jeter's 22.31. It is only April and some of the key players will not show us where they are until the May meets, especially in Jamaica. Even later in the season, however, we will not be sure SAFP is not in 10.75 form and if the US collegians are in the mix, which ones are at the top of their game and who is coasting down (none of them are good enough to be good at this level is they are not at the top of their game).
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:53 am

jazzcyclist wrote:DJG, what you seem to be missing is the fact that the Brit's sudden arm movement is what caused the problems, not his positioning on the outside of the lane, since Patton had already accounted for that. Does this type of thing happen frequently or is this a rare incident, that is the question? You implied that this sort of collison happens regurlarly. If that is the case, surely you can provide us with some others examples. Otherwise, I will continue to write it off as a fluke accident.

Also, I'm at least willing to entertain the idea that incoming runners in unevenly matched races might want give themselves a little more room to account for any sudden movement by outgoing runners from other teams as they approach the acceleration zone. But the idea that runners should be taught to run in the middle of the lane is definitely not the answer since that creates a whole new set of problems. Perhaps Patton could have swung slightly wide and reestablished position on the inside of the lane after he passed the Brit, but it was imperative the he hugged the line as he approached Dix.

By the way, why did you say Dix left early? Based on the go mark, which you can see pretty good on HD TV, it appears that he left right on time. Evidently, the U.S. was just trying to stretch the zone more than Jamaica.


JC, Freak as in "markedly strange or abnormal", is not a word that comes to my mind when describing contact between runners which happens frequently in all races, eg. btwn the hurdlers which resulted in a DQ for Robles, contact between Felix and Montsho in the 400 in lanes, in distance races, etc. Do I have a 4x1 example just like the one we're discussing (WCorOG)? Not on hand. But because something doesn't happen often, doesn't make that event freakish.
Contact of runners in track is the norm, not the exception. And certainly not freak accidents.

Hugging the line is not imperative, getting the baton to the next runner is.
These lanes are wide enough to accommodate both runners for good exchanges, without having to run the curve on top of the line. (By IAAF rules, the Brit did nothing wrong, although I get the impression that some consider this was willful intended "obstruction", how dare the Brit start to run and swing his arms when he did.]

The US didn't stretch the other two exchanges, so I doubt they were trying to stretch the 3rd.
But tell me where your HD TV shows Patton looking just before the collision.
[Thanks for the offer to send me video, but I never give my email out to someone I don't know.]
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:23 am

DJG wrote:JC, Freak as in "markedly strange or abnormal", is not a word that comes to my mind when describing contact between runners which happens frequently in all races, eg. btwn the hurdlers which resulted in a DQ for Robles, contact between Felix and Montsho in the 400 in lanes, in distance races, etc. Do I have a 4x1 example just like the one we're discussing (WCorOG)? Not on hand. But because something doesn't happen often, doesn't make that event freakish.
Contact of runners in track is the norm, not the exception. And certainly not freak accidents.

So you're comparing the 4x100 relay, where contact almost never happens unless a runner falls, to the 110 hurdles where contact happens frequently, perhaps in 50% of the races at the elite level? Come on man, come on. That's like comparing the frequency of physical contact in the 1500 to the 100. You know better than that. And IMO, the Felix/Montsho contact, which had no effect on the outcome, was also unusual, lest you can name another outdoor 400 race where two runners made contact.
DJG wrote:The US didn't stretch the other two exchanges, so I doubt they were trying to stretch the 3rd.

Patton had clearly reached the go mark when Dix left. Who am I supposed to believe, you or my lying eyes? Perhaps he misplaced the go mark, but how are we supposed to find out if he did?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Mon Apr 16, 2012 5:04 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
DJG wrote:JC, Freak as in "markedly strange or abnormal", is not a word that comes to my mind when describing contact between runners which happens frequently in all races, eg. btwn the hurdlers which resulted in a DQ for Robles, contact between Felix and Montsho in the 400 in lanes, in distance races, etc. Do I have a 4x1 example just like the one we're discussing (WCorOG)? Not on hand. But because something doesn't happen often, doesn't make that event freakish.
Contact of runners in track is the norm, not the exception. And certainly not freak accidents.

So you're comparing the 4x100 relay, where contact almost never happens unless a runner falls, to the 110 hurdles where contact happens frequently, perhaps in 50% of the races at the elite level? Come on man, come on. That's like comparing the frequency of physical contact in the 1500 to the 100. You know better than that. And IMO, the Felix/Montsho contact, which had no effect on the outcome, was also unusual, lest you can name another outdoor 400 race where two runners made contact.
DJG wrote:The US didn't stretch the other two exchanges, so I doubt they were trying to stretch the 3rd.

Patton had clearly reached the go mark when Dix left. Who am I supposed to believe, you or my lying eyes? Perhaps he misplaced the go mark, but how are we supposed to find out if he did?


You win, JC. The bloody Brits did us in again and now we have to run on their home track.
Who knows what the Brits will do this time to crush our hopes for gold!!

And supposedly, it is not a good coaching strategy to stretch exchanges when you have three
new exchanges on tap due to using two subs on the relay. But hey, some like to gamble and roll the dice. We'll have to wait til Aug 9, 10,11 to see what snafu awaits US in London.
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Apr 17, 2012 5:46 am

DJG wrote:You win, JC. The bloody Brits did us in again and now we have to run on their home track.
Who knows what the Brits will do this time to crush our hopes for gold!!.

I never blamed the Brits for that incident.

DJG wrote:And supposedly, it is not a good coaching strategy to stretch exchanges when you have three
new exchanges on tap due to using two subs on the relay. But hey, some like to gamble and roll the dice. We'll have to wait til Aug 9, 10,11 to see what snafu awaits US in London.

But weren't you one of the folks last year who advocated the abandoning of the conservative approach and stretching the zone to run faster?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:00 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
DJG wrote:You win, JC. The bloody Brits did us in again and now we have to run on their home track.
Who knows what the Brits will do this time to crush our hopes for gold!!.

I never blamed the Brits for that incident.

DJG wrote:And supposedly, it is not a good coaching strategy to stretch exchanges when you have three
new exchanges on tap due to using two subs on the relay. But hey, some like to gamble and roll the dice. We'll have to wait til Aug 9, 10,11 to see what snafu awaits US in London.

But weren't you one of the folks last year who advocated the abandoning of the conservative approach and stretching the zone to run faster?


JC, The US has demonstrtated to me that you will not be consisitently successful in 4x1 relays at this level if you repeatedly use two substitutes from the prelims to the finals. Stretching the exchanges must be done with the same people who have the confidence that comes from practicing and performing well together before the OG or WC final; the US has taken a "more the merrier" (Subs) approach to relay running with results that leave much to be desired.
{RE: Track Coach #199, available through T&FN}

When you say the Brit "obstructed" Patton, it seems you are placing blame. IMO
My apology for misinterpreting your post.
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:58 am

DJG wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:But weren't you one of the folks last year who advocated the abandoning of the conservative approach and stretching the zone to run faster?


JC, The US has demonstrtated to me that you will not be consisitently successful in 4x1 relays at this level if you repeatedly use two substitutes from the prelims to the finals. Stretching the exchanges must be done with the same people who have the confidence that comes from practicing and performing well together before the OG or WC final; the US has taken a "more the merrier" (Subs) approach to relay running with results that leave much to be desired.
{RE: Track Coach #199, available through T&FN}

I agree with you 100% on this point. The more-the-merrier approach might be good for the 4x400, but I think it's bad for the 4x100. Over the years, I've noticed that the best college teams never make 4x100 substitutions between rounds no matter how deep they are with sprint talent. Of course those coaches aren't juggling politics with winning like U.S. coaches seem to do.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby mump boy » Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:23 am

The US could have a guaranteed silver and possible gold with any combination of about 20 of their sprinters, if they bothered to actually practice. If the big guns would rather drop the baton than put in some relay practice just select people who will put in the work.

I wish we had that luxury, we just have slow people who don't bother practicing enough :(
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby 72 » Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:27 am

It's not rocket science passing a little stick, even for the half wits who occasionally represent the USA in short relays.

Mind you , if it were rocket science, the USA team could always employ some Germans to run for you guys. :D

If you foul up again in London in the 4x100m relays I hope the Brits complain about it again; I am not putting any bets on our lot getting the sticks round for men and women in both heats and possibly finals.
72
 
Posts: 742
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:53 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jjk4ever » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:12 am

[/quote]

Guru, Last time I saw BK she was false starting at a indoor meet while wearing a track
outfit that appeared to belong to a much smaller athlete. [/quote] :D :D :D

Hey some of us liked that small tight uni on her thick body!! I miss the days of Jose Marie Perec 96 OLY outfits...

Would love to see the Barber Twins get a relay spot(s) along with BK. Agree Anderson and Jeter are the locks with maybe Muna in the 3rd slot and wildcards for 4th.

And as someone said there are Sanya and Felix.........
jjk4ever
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:04 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby 26mi235 » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:26 am

jjk4ever wrote:And as someone said there are Sanya and Felix.........


Each could do a second relay if they do not double with individual events. They become less compelling cases if they double (although M. Hooker's absence make them more likely...).
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Sasuke and 13 guests