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 TxHottrack » Thu May 10, 2012 2:47 pm

gh wrote:
ATK wrote:
gh wrote:Tarmoh 11.13 PR in the Caymans last night.

Given her extensive stick experience with the hyper-successful A&M teams, she may well be worth some OG consideration.

Consideration yes, but I wouldn't put her over any of the ladies who ran on that Penn 4x1, and a few other ladies behind them.


I'd def. give her a look over Knight, whose lack of collegiate experience makes her far less familiar with a baton. Knight's best 100 the last two years? 11.40 in '10, 11.22 in ’09. It's not as if she's got big 100 credentials of current standing.



I think Knight will surprise many of you this Olympic year. Knight work on her start, she is going to run a monster leg on the 4x100. I even predict Knight to be an Olympic finalist in the
200 mtrs. Knight can run with the best, again, she just need to work on her start.
TxHottrack
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby gh » Thu May 10, 2012 3:22 pm

Lifetime, Tarmoh and Knight are 1-1 in 200 meetings. Tarmoh has two times faster than Knight's PR.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby trackonthebrain » Thu May 10, 2012 5:43 pm

gh wrote:Lifetime, Tarmoh and Knight are 1-1 in 200 meetings. Tarmoh has two times faster than Knight's PR.



Lifetime? GH, are you serious?

Remember they ran together in the youth and junior ranks. They were even on relays together coming up.

And what's the "fuss" about Tarmoh on the relay all of a sudden? You're using Tarmoh's 200 PR to make your case (where Tarmoh's PR beats Knight by only hundreths of a second)?

Really? Since when?

Why not use their 100 PR like you usually do? Better yet, why not wait until Knight runs a 100 this year before making the comparison - or they meet face to face? Tarmoh's running well this year - but so is Knight. The 11.13? Let's see what Knight runs this year as soon as she runs a 100. Tarmoh has run her 100 - let Knight run hers.

What's the rush?

Why pick on Knight, only? Aren't there other ladies she might replace rather than Knight?

Knight has had major champs experience in the relay. Tarmoh hasn't - and she "bombed" at Worlds. And she was in the pool last year, wasn't she? Why were Knight and Anderson selected instead of her? What does that tell you?

Who runs a 22.2 at Nationals and then a 23.4 at Worlds 6 weeks later (admitted low blow, lol - but I'm a Knight fan)? Other low blows - don't forget Tarmoh's history. She didn't exactly shine at Tenn before moving on to A&M either. And I think she's training with Jeter now so...of course she'll do well...

I'm not against Tarmoh. I pick her to go crazy this year - but ditto for Knight.
trackonthebrain
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:46 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby ATK » Thu May 10, 2012 7:00 pm

trackonthebrain wrote:And what's the "fuss" about Tarmoh on the relay all of a sudden? You're using Tarmoh's 200 PR to make your case (where Tarmoh's PR beats Knight by only hundreths of a second)?

Im pretty sure he began his case speaking on Tarmoh and Knights 100m credentials.

I would give Knight the nod considering her world class experience, racing with the pros for about 4 years now. Also her consistency at being competitive at this stage in the past year plus is nothing to push to the side.
Also its pretty obvious that she is doing something special that only the relay gods can see. She was 4th at US's behind Solomon and Tarmoh, but still made it on the final relay team over them, and the other 100m runners.

And like everyone knows, open times don't necessarily translate to a fast relay.
ATK
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby TxHottrack » Fri May 11, 2012 4:52 am

Agreed. I don't have anything against Tarmoh, but I rather have B Knight on the relay oppose to Tarmoh. On the first leg in the 4x100, she didn't ley Fryser-Price get away from her, and at Penn, she ran a hell of 3rd leg on that 4x100. I would like to see what she opens with in the 100, and Tarmoh might get the best of her, but that doesn't mean that B Knight is not a better leg for the 4x100. However, It's going to get really tough by USA Champs. The USA women are looking very good in the sprints area....other areas as well.
TxHottrack
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Speedster » Fri May 11, 2012 5:57 am

Who is to say both won't be in the pool for the 4x100m? On early form I wouldn't bet against it.

Tarmoh ran a full NCAA season last year and was burnt out by the time she got to Daegu, which was late in the year for a World Championship, had it been earlier she might have held onto form. Knight ran PRs at Trials and a good leg in Daegu and what looked like a better leg at Penn Relays.

But with Tianna Madison's super indoor runs and what appeared to be a great leg at Penn, perhaps Knight and Tarmoh might be the two subs during the 4x100m heats?
Speedster
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue May 15, 2012 11:49 am

For a perfect illustration of why neither the Jamaican or American women have broken the WR despite superior footspeed to the WR holders, check out this video that I came across yesterday. It's a great video of the 1988 Women's final in which the U.S. edged out the East Germans.

[pirate video removed by mods]

The Americans' first exchange was as good as the East Germans' exchange, but that's to be expected when you have an LSU alumnus receiving the baton. But then look at the second exchange to Flo-jo and the third exchange to Ashford. The U.S. lost significant ground to the East Germans on both of those exchanges because neither Flo-jo or Ashford got out agressively. Conversely, the East Germans got out like they were running an open 100. If instead of "waiting" for the baton, Flo-jo and Ashford had gotten out as agressively as Sheila Echols did, this race would not have been close, but luckily for us, we had superior footspeed to make up for our inferior passing.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby mump boy » Tue May 15, 2012 1:07 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:For a perfect illustration of why neither the Jamaican or American women have broken the WR despite superior footspeed to the WR holders, check out this video that I came across yesterday. It's a great video of the 1988 Women's final in which the U.S. edged out the East Germans.



The Americans' first exchange was as good as the East Germans' exchange, but that's to be expected when you have an LSU alumnus receiving the baton. But then look at the second exchange to Flo-jo and the third exchange to Ashford. The U.S. lost significant ground to the East Germans on both of those exchanges because neither Flo-jo or Ashford got out agressively. Conversely, the East Germans got out like they were running an open 100. If instead of "waiting" for the baton, Flo-jo and Ashford had gotten out as agressively as Sheila Echols did, this race would not have been close, but luckily for us, we had superior footspeed to make up for our inferior passing.


US were lucky Marlies was injured, Flo Jo barely made up any ground on was it Auerswald :?

those commentators are appalling apparently the last US pass was 'very good' !!
mump boy
 
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Gabriella » Wed May 16, 2012 3:25 am

Yep, our Ingrid, aka The Sewing Machine :D

We've been through this before, and on this thread too, but the GDR would start from a sprint start, not standing start; they would pass the baton after around 12-13 steps, as opposed to the 8 average from other teams; they would use the upward baton pass, not downward. So, this combination of getting the most acceleration from their start, using more of the exchange zone to get into full speed and using a safer baton pass, means more gained!

I never understand why most teams use the downward pass nowadays :? To me, there's much more risk and it's much more difficult to get your thumb round the baton, whereas with the upward pass, the baton safely goes in between the fingers and thumb.
Gabriella
 
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:59 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed May 16, 2012 6:01 am

Gabriella wrote:Yep, our Ingrid, aka The Sewing Machine :D

We've been through this before, and on this thread too, but the GDR would start from a sprint start, not standing start; they would pass the baton after around 12-13 steps, as opposed to the 8 average from other teams; they would use the upward baton pass, not downward. So, this combination of getting the most acceleration from their start, using more of the exchange zone to get into full speed and using a safer baton pass, means more gained!

I never understand why most teams use the downward pass nowadays :? To me, there's much more risk and it's much more difficult to get your thumb round the baton, whereas with the upward pass, the baton safely goes in between the fingers and thumb.

I think you making too much out of the pass technique, but you hit the nail on the head with regards to them using more of the exchange zone. The East Germans didn't run fast because of their upward passing. They ran fast because they used more of the exchange zone and because they got out hard. I'm not sure what you meant when you said they started from a sprint start and not a standing start. No one is allowed to start beyond the acceleration zone, so therefore everyone starts from a standstil. The key is that the East Germans started as agressively as if they were running and open 100, Flo-jo started like she was running an 800 and Ashford started like she was running a marathon.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Gabriella » Wed May 16, 2012 7:02 am

jazzcyclist wrote:I think you making too much out of the pass technique, but you hit the nail on the head with regards to them using more of the exchange zone. The East Germans didn't run fast because of their upward passing. They ran fast because they used more of the exchange zone and because they got out hard. I'm not sure what you meant when you said they started from a sprint start and not a standing start. No one is allowed to start beyond the acceleration zone, so therefore everyone starts from a standstil. The key is that the East Germans started as agressively as if they were running and open 100, Flo-jo started like she was running an 800 and Ashford started like she was running a marathon.


No, the pass technique is significant, because with the downward pass, teams are often fumbling to get the baton securely in the hand; the upward pass is way more efficient.

On 'sprint start' read 'set position'. Everyone else on the second, third and fourth legs is standing upright; but the GDR girls are all in the set position, allowing them to drive.

It is the combination of starting from the set position and using more of the exchange zone that means they exchange at a higher speed. The pass technique just allows them not to have to slow down so much, as often happens with the downward pass.
Gabriella
 
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:59 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed May 16, 2012 8:26 am

Gabriella wrote:No, the pass technique is significant, because with the downward pass, teams are often fumbling to get the baton securely in the hand; the upward pass is way more efficient.

I wasn't comparing it to the downward pass, I'm comparing it to the forward pass, in which the incoming runner holds the baton in the vertical position and drives it between the thumb and forefinger of the outgoing runner.

Gabriella wrote:On 'sprint start' read 'set position'. Everyone else on the second, third and fourth legs is standing upright; but the GDR girls are all in the set position, allowing them to drive.

On this we agree. The three-point stance is defintely faster than the two-point stance. Allyson Felix give a perfect example of how much slower the two-point stance is in Daegu. However, as DJG pointed out, some people may opt for the two-point stance because they have trouble seeing the go-marks from the three-point stance.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Dutra5 » Wed May 16, 2012 8:51 am

mump boy wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:For a perfect illustration of why neither the Jamaican or American women have broken the WR despite superior footspeed to the WR holders, check out this video that I came across yesterday. It's a great video of the 1988 Women's final in which the U.S. edged out the East Germans.

The Americans' first exchange was as good as the East Germans' exchange, but that's to be expected when you have an LSU alumnus receiving the baton. But then look at the second exchange to Flo-jo and the third exchange to Ashford. The U.S. lost significant ground to the East Germans on both of those exchanges because neither Flo-jo or Ashford got out agressively. Conversely, the East Germans got out like they were running an open 100. If instead of "waiting" for the baton, Flo-jo and Ashford had gotten out as agressively as Sheila Echols did, this race would not have been close, but luckily for us, we had superior footspeed to make up for our inferior passing.


US were lucky Marlies was injured, Flo Jo barely made up any ground on was it Auerswald :?

those commentators are appalling apparently the last US pass was 'very good' !!


On each of those exchanges it appeared the last step the outgoing US runner took prior to receiving the baton was their slowest. The pass from FloJo to Ashford was awful.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Tue May 22, 2012 11:37 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
Gabriella wrote:No, the pass technique is significant, because with the downward pass, teams are often fumbling to get the baton securely in the hand; the upward pass is way more efficient.

I wasn't comparing it to the downward pass, I'm comparing it to the forward pass, in which the incoming runner holds the baton in the vertical position and drives it between the thumb and forefinger of the outgoing runner.

Gabriella wrote:On 'sprint start' read 'set position'. Everyone else on the second, third and fourth legs is standing upright; but the GDR girls are all in the set position, allowing them to drive.

On this we agree. The three-point stance is defintely faster than the two-point stance. Allyson Felix give a perfect example of how much slower the two-point stance is in Daegu. However, as DJG pointed out, some people may opt for the two-point stance because they have trouble seeing the go-marks from the three-point stance.


JazzC, That would be go-mark, as IAAF rules allow only One piece of tape, not two like the NCAA. I have watch hundreds of relays exchanges, and the teams that use the three-pt stance almost always leave after the incoming runner is well past their go-mark.
Runners in two-pt stances can drive (accelerate) just as well as three-pointers and the upward pass is not better than downward. The baton must be adjusted in the hand after the up
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Tue May 22, 2012 11:40 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
Gabriella wrote:No, the pass technique is significant, because with the downward pass, teams are often fumbling to get the baton securely in the hand; the upward pass is way more efficient.



Gabriella wrote:On 'sprint start' read 'set position'. Everyone else on the second, third and fourth legs is standing upright; but the GDR girls are all in the set position, allowing them to drive.

On this we agree. The three-point stance is defintely faster than the two-point stance. Allyson Felix give a perfect example of how much slower the two-point stance is in Daegu. However, as DJG pointed out, some people may opt for the two-point stance because they have trouble seeing the go-marks from the three-point stance.


JazzC, That would be go-mark, as IAAF rules allow only One piece of tape, not two like the NCAA. I have watch hundreds of relays exchanges, and the teams that use the three-pt stance almost always leave after the incoming runner is well past their go-mark.
Runners in two-pt stances can drive (accelerate) just as well as three-pointers and the upward pass is not better than downward. The baton must be adjusted in the hand after the upward pass, with the downard pass no adjustment is necessary.
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby lonewolf » Tue May 22, 2012 2:02 pm

DJG wrote:[ the upward pass is not better than downward. The baton must be adjusted in the hand after the upward pass, with the downward pass no adjustment is necessary.

Hmmm??? As a lifelong proponent of the upward pass, I have to ask..why is adjustment more necessary than for the downward pass?
Maybe things were simpler 60 years ago.....as I recall, the upward pass was standard.. we even ran blind upward passes on the 4x440..
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8817
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue May 22, 2012 3:20 pm

DJG wrote:Runners in two-pt stances can drive (accelerate) just as well as three-pointers

I respectfully disagree. Check out Allyson Felix in Daegu 2011 to see what I'm talking about.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Tue May 22, 2012 3:37 pm

lonewolf wrote:
DJG wrote:[ the upward pass is not better than downward. The baton must be adjusted in the hand after the upward pass, with the downward pass no adjustment is necessary.

Hmmm??? As a lifelong proponent of the upward pass, I have to ask..why is adjustment more necessary than for the downward pass?
Maybe things were simpler 60 years ago.....as I recall, the upward pass was standard.. we even ran blind upward passes on the 4x440..


LoneWolf, I don't know about 60 years ago, but I was watching Chariots of Fire last night and the movie's depictions of relay exchanges in 1924 was pretty close to what I learned in 6th grade- the hand cupped on the hip and the baton placed into the cradle.
As for the adjustment, with the upward pass the outgoing runner is now holding the top of the stick and must adjust before passing to the next leg. With the downward pass, that is eliminated because the baton is positioned already for the next pass.
And the upward pass calls for the runners to be closer together as the arms do not get extended (stretched, as JC and I like) as much. If upward were better, more teams would use it. I rarely see anyone use it on any level.
As you most likely know, what was standard 60 yrs ago, is not standard today.
Last edited by DJG on Tue May 22, 2012 3:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby DJG » Tue May 22, 2012 3:39 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
DJG wrote:Runners in two-pt stances can drive (accelerate) just as well as three-pointers

I respectfully disagree. Check out Allyson Felix in Daegu 2011 to see what I'm talking about.


I respectfully accept your disagreement. We have agreed too much lately and I'm not used to so much agreement.
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Speedster » Tue May 22, 2012 9:38 pm

DJG wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:
DJG wrote:Runners in two-pt stances can drive (accelerate) just as well as three-pointers

I respectfully disagree. Check out Allyson Felix in Daegu 2011 to see what I'm talking about.


I respectfully accept your disagreement. We have agreed too much lately and I'm not used to so much agreement.


It's all about what the athlete is most comfortable with, if that's what works for Allyson then there's no reason to tinker with it, especially in an Olympic year.
Speedster
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby mump boy » Tue May 22, 2012 11:58 pm

But that's the whole point, it shouldn't be 'what the athlete is more comfortable with' it should be what is the most efficient, fastest and best for the team. Do you think Marlies got to use the technique she was most comfortable with ??

This is why GDR still hold the world record and teams that are faster on paper have fail to break the record 27 years.
mump boy
 
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Speedster » Wed May 23, 2012 2:06 am

mump boy wrote:But that's the whole point, it shouldn't be 'what the athlete is more comfortable with' it should be what is the most efficient, fastest and best for the team. Do you think Marlies got to use the technique she was most comfortable with ??

This is why GDR still hold the world record and teams that are faster on paper have fail to break the record 27 years.


I also think Marlies would have been given countless opportunities to practice the three point start with her team mates, likely to be the exact person she would change with, something that's not available to Allyson at any point, outside of the very limited training camps the US team hold.

The GDR team hold the record because of training over and over again to nail those exchanges with a common group of athletes. Given the selection of US teams, that's not going to happen so having athletes confident with the arrangements provides the greatest chance of success.
Speedster
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby norunner » Wed May 23, 2012 3:03 am

Speedster wrote:I also think Marlies would have been given countless opportunities to practice the three point start with her team mates, likely to be the exact person she would change with, something that's not available to Allyson at any point, outside of the very limited training camps the US team hold.

The GDR team hold the record because of training over and over again to nail those exchanges with a common group of athletes. Given the selection of US teams, that's not going to happen so having athletes confident with the arrangements provides the greatest chance of success.
Ingrid Auerswald and Marlies Göhr were running position three and four in the GDR relay for 9 years, they were also in the same club, SC Motor Jena. So they had more opportunity to practice and run together than you could possibly give anyone else nowadays.
norunner
 
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:21 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby mump boy » Wed May 23, 2012 3:37 am

Speedster wrote:
mump boy wrote:But that's the whole point, it shouldn't be 'what the athlete is more comfortable with' it should be what is the most efficient, fastest and best for the team. Do you think Marlies got to use the technique she was most comfortable with ??

This is why GDR still hold the world record and teams that are faster on paper have fail to break the record 27 years.


I also think Marlies would have been given countless opportunities to practice the three point start with her team mates, likely to be the exact person she would change with, something that's not available to Allyson at any point, outside of the very limited training camps the US team hold.

The GDR team hold the record because of training over and over again to nail those exchanges with a common group of athletes. Given the selection of US teams, that's not going to happen so having athletes confident with the arrangements provides the greatest chance of success.


I'm not blaming Allyson, it is what it is but i'mnot sure that any of the team are that confident in any of the exchanges :?
mump boy
 
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby t_monk » Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:34 am

I think that there is still one spot (at least) in the 4x100 that is open.... As it now stands I would say...

Madison
Felix
Jeter (iffy)

are set on the relay.

BK is not 'owning' that 4th spot in the relay and unless Jeter finds her 10.9/10.8/10.7 form she might find herself on the outside looking in at Trials in the 100 and the 200.

With the performances of Duncan, SRR, Gardener and Tarmoh... I think things might not be as clear cut as some assumes. Note we haven't taken into consideration the likes of Anderson, Barber, Williams, Lee who (although unlikely) might spring a surprise.

Do they tinker with that Madison - Felix - Knight - Jeter formation for someone faster/more in form or do they leave it as it is and hopes that practice makes perfect?
t_monk
 
Posts: 4338
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:03 pm
Location: New Haven, CT + Kgn, JA

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby ATK » Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:57 am

Like I just posted in the sanya thread, Jeter and Felix have their legs locked as long as they make the team. Yes jeter looks iff in her past races, but she is not going anywhere on that relay.
Madison-Felix-Duncan-Jeter is a solid team that I think could be faster than last year by London.
Sanya could replace Duncan if she runs faster and makes the team ahead of her in the 200, and Duncan doesn't run something crazy in the 100. I don't know if she would make the team better though.
ATK
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby guru » Sun Jun 10, 2012 12:12 pm

Knowing relay guru Jon Drummond's thoughts on the issue, I believe nothing short of a failure to make a Trials final will remove Knight(who put up a sparkling 11.29 yesterday) from the 4x1, even if she runs over 23. It's mind-boggling.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Speedster » Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:34 pm

What is the priority? The win or the time? I think the US team with Knight in 11.29/22.46 form has the measure of anything JAM can put up at this stage, unless Simpson and Stewart are in a big block of training to prepare for their trials.

The Penn Relays team is the one I would go with if the Trials go to form to maintain consistency.
Speedster
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: London

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby ATK » Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:46 pm

Speedster wrote:What is the priority? The win or the time? I think the US team with Knight in 11.29/22.46 form has the measure of anything JAM can put up at this stage, unless Simpson and Stewart are in a big block of training to prepare for their trials.

The Penn Relays team is the one I would go with if the Trials go to form to maintain consistency.

The way its looking, the US can throw together multiple teams and will probably still be able to beat Jamaica. Only half of Jamaica's team looks like they will be where they should be come London,
ATK
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby preston » Wed Jun 13, 2012 12:08 pm

guru wrote:Knowing relay guru Jon Drummond's thoughts on the issue, I believe nothing short of a failure to make a Trials final will remove Knight(who put up a sparkling 11.29 yesterday) from the 4x1, even if she runs over 23. It's mind-boggling.

It's not mind-boggling, it's unfair. All that nonsense about chemistry and experience is BS; Knight hasn't run enough relays compared to collegiates or other pros to be a "priority" above athletes who are clearly faster at 100m - or running around a turn. I hope it doesn't come down to it, but if Knight doesn't make the 100m final and also doesn't make top-3 in the 200m, and is placed in the relay over another athlete who has, then I would hope the athlete who loses a spot would sue.
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:48 pm

I agree with Drummond's decision not to worship the false god of footspeed, but if Knight's baton skills are so great, why does he have her running the scratch leg where coaches normally hide sprinters with weak baton skills? It doesn't take much practice to get someone ready to run the scratch leg.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby guru » Wed Jun 13, 2012 2:57 pm

preston wrote: I hope it doesn't come down to it, but if Knight doesn't make the 100m final and also doesn't make top-3 in the 200m, and is placed in the relay over another athlete who has, then I would hope the athlete who loses a spot would sue.



Top 8 in 100, or top 4 in 200. Barring that, going by the published Olympic team processing rules she's out.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby ATK » Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:13 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:I agree with Drummond's decision not to worship the false god of footspeed, but if Knight's baton skills are so great, why does he have her running the scratch leg where coaches normally hide sprinters with weak baton skills? It doesn't take much practice to get someone ready to run the scratch leg.

Knight's never ran outdoor in college, and has ran a professional relay 3 or 4 times so far...
Duncan has been running LSU relays for the past 3 years.
Yet Bianca has more experience.
ATK
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:27 pm

ATK wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:I agree with Drummond's decision not to worship the false god of footspeed, but if Knight's baton skills are so great, why does he have her running the scratch leg where coaches normally hide sprinters with weak baton skills? It doesn't take much practice to get someone ready to run the scratch leg.

Knight's never ran outdoor in college, and has ran a professional relay 3 or 4 times so far...
Duncan has been running LSU relays for the past 3 years.
Yet Bianca has more experience.

Not only has Duncan run three years of college relays without a single mishap, she's run second, third and fourth legs, which means that she's comfortable using both her left and right hands, to give and recieve the baton. LSU did have a couple of DQ'sand DNF's while she was there, but it never happened on her exchange. She even made a great save on one occasion when the incoming runner came in on the wrond side of the lane.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby ATK » Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:38 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
ATK wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:I agree with Drummond's decision not to worship the false god of footspeed, but if Knight's baton skills are so great, why does he have her running the scratch leg where coaches normally hide sprinters with weak baton skills? It doesn't take much practice to get someone ready to run the scratch leg.

Knight's never ran outdoor in college, and has ran a professional relay 3 or 4 times so far...
Duncan has been running LSU relays for the past 3 years.
Yet Bianca has more experience.

Not only has Duncan run three years of college relays without a single mishap, she's run second, third and fourth legs, which means that she's comfortable using both her left and right hands, to give and recieve the baton. LSU did have a couple of DQ'sand DNF's while she was there, but it never happened on her exchange. She even made a great save on one occasion when the incoming runner came in on the wrond side of the lane.

Thanks I didn't even know those facts.

How was it that she beat out Solomon for a relay spot in the final last year? and all the 100m and 200m runners who finished ahead/made the team last year?
She was the 25th fastest American over 100m and 6th over 200m, and she probably is at the top of the list of athletes with the least relay experience...
ATK
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby j-a-m » Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:36 pm

Just looked at the list of Trials entries on the USATF website. I know there's still plenty of time to declare, and many athletes that are gonna compete aren't listed yet, but still: Why is Kimberlyn Duncan's 100m entry listed as scratched?
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:41 pm

j-a-m wrote:Just looked at the list of Trials entries on the USATF website. I know there's still plenty of time to declare, and many athletes that are gonna compete aren't listed yet, but still: Why is Kimberlyn Duncan's 100m entry listed as scratched?

Because she announced on a local sports talk radio show a couple of days ago that she's not running the 100 at the trials.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby j-a-m » Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:43 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
j-a-m wrote:Just looked at the list of Trials entries on the USATF website. I know there's still plenty of time to declare, and many athletes that are gonna compete aren't listed yet, but still: Why is Kimberlyn Duncan's 100m entry listed as scratched?

Because she announced on a local sports talk radio show a couple of days ago that she's not running the 100 at the trials.

Thanks, didn't know that.
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby TrackDaddy » Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:50 am

preston wrote:
guru wrote:Knowing relay guru Jon Drummond's thoughts on the issue, I believe nothing short of a failure to make a Trials final will remove Knight(who put up a sparkling 11.29 yesterday) from the 4x1, even if she runs over 23. It's mind-boggling.

It's not mind-boggling, it's unfair. All that nonsense about chemistry and experience is BS; Knight hasn't run enough relays compared to collegiates or other pros to be a "priority" above athletes who are clearly faster at 100m - or running around a turn. I hope it doesn't come down to it, but if Knight doesn't make the 100m final and also doesn't make top-3 in the 200m, and is placed in the relay over another athlete who has, then I would hope the athlete who loses a spot would sue.


This isn't all that difficult for me to understand. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like but has it occured to anyone besides me that Adidas wants a face on the relay?

In the past they had some combination of BK, Corvette (pregnant) and AF who now runs for Nike. If Sanya and Jeter -who both run for Nike- are on it in London and Nike has already approached and secured Duncan...

I'll defer to Mars Blackmon for further analysis.
TrackDaddy
 
Posts: 4785
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:06 pm
Location: The Command Post

Re: About That London US Women's 4x100

Postby Smoke » Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:27 am

I say we just take the winning 4x100 from NCAA and run them. They have had all year of practice, hand offs are crisp, and can over come the foot speed of VCB and SAF. Right?!

Stop it with the under hand passes, no team with that hand off wins. Yes you MUST adjust the stick to make the next hand off. It requires the incoming runner to get closer to the out going and slow down the stick more than overhand, i.e. push passes. I will repeat this until someone gets it, flawed handoffs are as much about the race as is hitting a hurdle in a hurdle race. You train all the time to not have these things happen but they do. As far as the US mishaps the glaring problem that some of you love to ignore, is that the mishaps have not been the same! 2005, incoming runner does not release the stick, drop. 2009, all hand offs completed safely, UK protest for an EARLY hand off, which resulted due to a safe mark so we did not drop the stick, dq (on I think was bogus and wrong). 2011, incoming runner collides with opposing team, nothing to do with stick work at all. So upon further review this is just mental masturbation for you all. I can go back farther but we will find medals, and success. Further eroding the false perception that there is something wrong with our relay program. BTW, I have the same arguments with some of the folks in USATF that also believe we need some wide sweeping changes. Those changes that have been implemented, and produced last years mishap, but don't tell anyone. Oops, we are talking about the women. There is even less to draw on when we discuss when women relays. SMDH
Smoke
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests