Miramar Invitational

[fasttrak85]

My cash is with the hungry 21 year old who just ran a 10.72 in April and displays passion commitment with a bit of attitude, over a 35 year old All time great who really has very little left to prove...Thompson is more of a threat.

As Ato Bolton says that's why they run the races. Your bet is a logical one and I may well bet like you if Im using my own money but if Shelly had nothing left to prove she could be a full time mom and wife. An injury free Elaine is a threat as well.

playing devil's advocate being fast too early CAN be a liability which is why we dont often see it. So her and her coach must be planning something crazy that hasnt been attempted. I for one will be watching

[ATK]

I personally have Shelly as the slight gold medal favorite until we see the rest of the season progress. 2019 was agruably the best year of her career and 2020 she was also consistent and fast despite the pandemic and limited racing.

If (when) Richardson makes the team though, Richardson and SAFP are equal favorites IMO.

[Atticus]

Only downside is she may be too fast too early.

Here's a scary (and quite possible) idea - this is just her April form. She's still building to a peak for the OT and OG.

[tandfman]

Early in this thread, there were several comments about the quality of the telecast. I did have one observation about the telecast that could be made about the on-air comments commonly made in this country, and also the live stadium presentation (both public address announcements and scoreboard displays).

The commentators recognize that most spectators in this country do not relate to metric measurement. So anytime there is a mention of a shot put of 18 meters or a long jump of 8 meters, there's an immediate translation of that into feet and inches, which makes a lot of sense. But there is never a translation of the wind readings. They often mention that the "allowable" limit is 2 meters per second, but what does that mean to anyone? Have you ever heard a weather reporter on tv, or a weather report in the newspapers that referred to wind as anything but miles per hour? No. 2 meters per second means absolutely nothing to people. But that's all we ever see or hear.

[Paced]

Only downside is she may be too fast too early. If Shelly was still young my money would be on her. She will watch everyone run their fast circuit times n set the track on fire when it matters. At 34 is the spark there still?

I'd assume so, she's made it clear she wants that 3rd Olympic gold and to run 10.6. The Women's 100m is one of the few events where the GOAT is still competing, and it would take a lot for me to bet against her. A 10.72 (+1.6) from another competitor, even in April, isn't even remotely enough considering we saw SAFP run faster in 2019 with essentially no wind.

As for it being too early, I'm sure no coach sets out for their athlete to set their SB in April, but unfortunately it does happen. When Michael Norman ran his 43.45 PB in April 2019 to become =4th fastest all time, he was touted by many to be an overwhelming favourite for Doha and a WR threat. In the end it remained his PB, with his only other sub-44 being a loss, and he didn't even make the 400m final in Doha due to injury issues.

A more relevant example is Justin Gatlin, who has the same coach as Richardson. In 2015 Gatlin blasted a 9.74 PB for his first 100m of the year, and while he was dropping 9.7x in almost every meet, he was unable to do so when it actually mattered, and that 9.74 remains his PB to this day. By contrast, in 2017 he opened his season with a 10.14 loss and ran a very modest 10.28 for his next race, but in the year he actually set his SB at the world championships and won big.

So while it could be that Richardson is in godly form, and I certainly don't want to put any limits on what she can do, I try not to get carried away with April PBs, they really don't tell us much about who will be standing on top of the podium come July/August.

[Wiederganger]

She ran 10.75 with a 1.6 two years ago at the NCAA Championships. I guess that doesn't meet your criteria, either?

No, not with the differences in drug testing protocols I'm afraid.

Richardson has thrown her hat into the ring, but, as ever, we need to see which Americans qualify for Tokyo first. I'm sure she will this time, 2019 was very different, but I am always reluctant to predict US medalists until I know they qualify!

Despite being beaten, Elaine Thompson, is over her injury woes. She's been pretty much overlooked the last few seasons since her London 2017 disaster, and with Doha going a similar way, we might have thought her best form was in the past, but we have to be mindful she did beat SAFP at the JAM champs in 2019, her injuries have gone, and she has been there before. As defending champ in both sprints she will be hungry. SMU looks sublime at the moment though, but Thompson has run faster.

[Trickstat]

As for the two meters per second, would American know anymore it they said 4.4 mph or six and a half feet per second. The 2.0 mps is a cleaner expression.

Also 4.4 mph as a wind speed doesn't sound like much even when compared with the kind of breezy days that are very common in the UK, let alone a hurricane or tornado. However, it is something you would notice if it was blowing in your face when you are running or walking briskly.

[jazzcyclist]

She ran 10.75 with a 1.6 two years ago at the NCAA Championships. I guess that doesn't meet your criteria, either?

No, not with the differences in drug testing protocols I'm afraid.

Richardson was already subject to USADA's random testing program while she was a college freshman and she was tested 5 times in 2019.

[Atticus]

Quick comment on the 2mps wind. I just double the mps to get mph (approx), but few people have a sense of wind speed. When I bike in the morning it is almost always 5+mph wind, but it does die in the afternoon. 5mph is just a noticeable breeze, so I'm always amazed that the wind is usually under 2mps at meets.

All that said, at meets, people only care if it's legal or not, so the mps works best.

[Wiederganger]

Richardson was already subject to USADA's random testing program while she was a college freshman and she was tested 5 times in 2019.

She may well have been, but WADA testing protocols were not employed at the NCAAs in 2019. If you can show me evidence that she was drug tested when the ran that in 2019 at that event, and it followed WADA protocols, then I'll remove that big pinch of salt. Unfortunately I am always dubious re fast times that come out of the NCAAs until I see that athlete in an internationally sanctioned race with the standard drug testing protocols. It's absolutely nothing personal against her in particular I'll add.

[gm]

She may well have been, but WADA testing protocols were not employed at the NCAAs in 2019. If you can show me evidence that she was drug tested when the ran that in 2019 at that event, and it followed WADA protocols, then I'll remove that big pinch of salt. Unfortunately I am always dubious re fast times that come out of the NCAAs until I see that athlete in an internationally sanctioned race with the standard drug testing protocols. It's absolutely nothing personal against her in particular I'll add.

No worries. I feel the same way (competition-wise) about Femke Bol. She has never raced in the U.S. as far as I know.

[beebee]

She may well have been, but WADA testing protocols were not employed at the NCAAs in 2019. If you can show me evidence that she was drug tested when the ran that in 2019 at that event, and it followed WADA protocols, then I'll remove that big pinch of salt. Unfortunately I am always dubious re fast times that come out of the NCAAs until I see that athlete in an internationally sanctioned race with the standard drug testing protocols. It's absolutely nothing personal against her in particular I'll add.

What a shitty baseless unfounded insinuation without any merit.

[ATK]

The plus point in having Muhammad and McLaughlin in the 4x4 is they will be more rested than the 400m flat runners, as the hurdles are right at the start of the programme. Runners 4 & 5 in the US Trials 400m may find themselves in the mixed relay, which isn't advisable for the 400mhurdlers as there is an overlap.

That mixed 4x4 gives the US so much room to play around with in terms of who runs. I'm not sure if Tokyo will be like Doha, but the US ran 4 different athletes in the heats and finals of the mixed relay and 4x4. Jasmine Blocker finished 8th the 400m at USAs and got a gold medal in Doha. Will London didnt even make the final at USAs and won 2 gold medals in Doha.

[jazzcyclist]

What a shitty baseless unfounded insinuation without any merit.

I agree 100%. College track and field coaches don't fool around with that sort of stuff, so college athletes who want to dope would have to do it on their own. Of the athletes who have come through the American collegiate system who have ever been popped for PED's, I would estimate that 99% of them got busted after they left their college coaches. As a matter of fact, I can't think of any pro athlete getting busted who was still being by his/her college coach.

[cigar95]

Quick comment on the 2mps wind. I just double the mps to get mph (approx), but few people have a sense of wind speed. When I bike in the morning it is almost always 5+mph wind, but it does die in the afternoon. 5mph is just a noticeable breeze, so I'm always amazed that the wind is usually under 2mps at meets.

All that said, at meets, people only care if it's legal or not, so the mps works best.

I'll add that the most important part about the wind reading isn't the absolute magnitude, but the ability to compare it to other races. So if we *always* cite the value in m/sec, we should be fine. We don't need a conversion to compare it to last week's race in Oklahoma city.
For that matter, if we quote wind readings in ginflarks, and we *always* cite it in ginflarks, that ought to be okay, even if no one knows what a ginflark is (I know I don't.). So if the limit for legal wind is 2.7 ginflarks, what is of most interest is if it's less than 2.7, more than 2.7, *way* more than 2.7, or possibly negative.