Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2021 multi-event

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by gm View Post
    I have coached podium athletes at all three NCAA levels (I, II & III), and in my experience there are great coaches at all three levels. As our friend Atticus mentioned, D2 & D3 don't generally get the blue chip recruits that the "big" schools get, so any elite performers that come out of those places are the product of excellent coaching. Look at someone like Al Carius at North Central College (D3). His distance program through the years has been awesome, and I would wager that those kids wouldn't have done any better at a "big" school. In fact, they might not have done as well.

    Development in the collegiate system in the U.S. is dependent upon so many variables, you can't just say that an athlete would automatically do better at one of the elite schools.


    I definitely agree that there are good coaches in all three divisions as well as in high school and so on.
    BUT
    1. On average, the coaches in division one are the best coaches because in most cases division II and III coaches will jump on the opportunity to coach in division one while the opposite basically never happen. So in most cases, a coach in elite program will be better than the one in a lower division.
    2. The resources that NCAA-1 coaches have are greater than those of the lower divisions coaches. This is likely to allow them to build a better "coaching team" next to them, which is vital in the case of multi-event athletes. Putting it differently, I believe that if you put Rod Cowan as the new head coach of Georgia and transfer Williamson with him, he will achieve with her much more than in Saginaw. Are you arguing differently?
    3. Even if we assume that the coaching team in Saginaw is similar in quality to than of Georgia/Arkansas there is the question of training partners. Williamson is leading her school in seven events - do you think that she gets the same quality of training partners as they get in the big schools? or aren't quality training partners important based on your experience?

    Finally, can you educate me about successful athletes that move to a lower divisions to enjoy the better coaching? (this is not sarcastic, as I never heard about such a thing among multi-events athletes).

    Comment


    • Originally posted by gm View Post
      Development in the collegiate system in the U.S. is dependent upon so many variables, you can't just say that an athlete would automatically do better at one of the elite schools.
      North Carolina A&T may be Div I, but it sure isn't a big or elite program, and the coach there is killing it in the sprints!

      Comment


      • interesting graphic previews of Götzis dec and hept now posted to home page

        Comment


        • Originally posted by olorin View Post
          Originally posted by gm View Post
          I have coached podium athletes at all three NCAA levels (I, II & III), and in my experience there are great coaches at all three levels. As our friend Atticus mentioned, D2 & D3 don't generally get the blue chip recruits that the "big" schools get, so any elite performers that come out of those places are the product of excellent coaching. Look at someone like Al Carius at North Central College (D3). His distance program through the years has been awesome, and I would wager that those kids wouldn't have done any better at a "big" school. In fact, they might not have done as well.

          Development in the collegiate system in the U.S. is dependent upon so many variables, you can't just say that an athlete would automatically do better at one of the elite schools.


          I definitely agree that there are good coaches in all three divisions as well as in high school and so on.
          BUT
          1. On average, the coaches in division one are the best coaches because in most cases division II and III coaches will jump on the opportunity to coach in division one while the opposite basically never happen. So in most cases, a coach in elite program will be better than the one in a lower division.
          2. The resources that NCAA-1 coaches have are greater than those of the lower divisions coaches. This is likely to allow them to build a better "coaching team" next to them, which is vital in the case of multi-event athletes. Putting it differently, I believe that if you put Rod Cowan as the new head coach of Georgia and transfer Williamson with him, he will achieve with her much more than in Saginaw. Are you arguing differently?
          3. Even if we assume that the coaching team in Saginaw is similar in quality to than of Georgia/Arkansas there is the question of training partners. Williamson is leading her school in seven events - do you think that she gets the same quality of training partners as they get in the big schools? or aren't quality training partners important based on your experience?

          Finally, can you educate me about successful athletes that move to a lower divisions to enjoy the better coaching? (this is not sarcastic, as I never heard about such a thing among multi-events athletes).
          Nope, sorry. Sometimes great coaches enjoy where they are and are compensated well so they stay. Or, for some reason, they never get a look at the "elite" jobs because of so much competition for them.

          In the case of Williamson and her decathlete teammate, honestly they never would have had a chance to develop at an elite school because those schools wouldn't give them the time of day. No way an elite school pays attention to someone who had these PRs coming out of high school:
          Long Jump 17-6.5
          100 Meter Dash 12.76
          100 Meter Hurdles 15.07
          200 Meter Dash 26.06
          300 Meter Hurdles 46.05
          Same with Black, the decathlete. He was a 6-2 HJer in high school who ran 39.49 in the 300H. No elite program is going to give him the time of day at that point.

          It's just not a cut and dried system. People thrive in different environments and there are great coaches at all levels. D2 and D3 coaches, in my mind, might be even better because the raw materials they work with don't start off nearly as good as those blue chip recruits at the "elite" level.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by gm View Post
            It's just not a cut and dried system. People thrive in different environments and there are great coaches at all levels. D2 and D3 coaches, in my mind, might be even better because the raw materials they work with don't start off nearly as good as those blue chip recruits at the "elite" level.
            The 'rough' ones are more fun to coach because they don't have bad habits, they listen and have so much up-side. PRs galore!!

            Comment


            • I have worked a lot of D1 and D2 national champs. I cannot/would not judge the comparative quality of coaches at each level. Big schools usually/probably get the first shot at premier athletes. I don't know if it is the coaching but there are many D2 athletes who would thrive at the next level. I will say that, overall, the D2 kids are a pleasure to work with.

              Comment


              • Why isnt anyone here familiar with Jack Flood? He took third at the indoor USATF Indoor Hep Feb of 2019. I “think” he also won the ncaa division III championship either outdoor or indoor or both that year or 2018. I think he was at at least in one two outdoor USATF decathlons, 2018 or19 or both. Big guy, correct, he cant run a 400 but neither can Uiebo nor has many Big European decathletes in the last 45 years. Flood has the size to be a very very good thrower, I believe that will come with time. The throws take time, even for big guys.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wamerdam View Post
                  Why isnt anyone here familiar with Jack Flood? He took third at the indoor USATF Indoor Hep Feb of 2019. I “think” he also won the ncaa division III championship either outdoor or indoor or both that year or 2018. I think he was at at least in one two outdoor USATF decathlons, 2018 or19 or both. Big guy, correct, he cant run a 400 but neither can Uiebo nor has many Big European decathletes in the last 45 years. Flood has the size to be a very very good thrower, I believe that will come with time. The throws take time, even for big guys.
                  Who said no one here was familiar with Flood?

                  He was the D3 dec and hept champ in 2017, and was 8th at the USATF Champs in 2019. Flood is a good jumper who has improved his dec at a steady pace. Not a traditional American speedy dec, but solid in a bunch of events.

                  Comment


                  • Referring to Miketandf post, said he never hear of jack flood. He has always been around and is very good. He said only heard if him the week he showed up on the Deca Newsletter. He is always in the newsletter.

                    05-21-2021, 06:13 AM
                    Originally posted by miketandf View Post
                    Jack Flood was off my radar as well olorin. I only knew of him after reading this week's Deca Newsletter ([URL] Depth-wise, the decathlon at the Trials will be really good.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Wamerdam View Post
                      Referring to Miketandf post, said he never hear of jack flood. He has always been around and is very good. He said only heard if him the week he showed up on the Deca Newsletter. He is always in the newsletter.

                      05-21-2021, 06:13 AM
                      Originally posted by miketandf View Post
                      Jack Flood was off my radar as well olorin. I only knew of him after reading this week's Deca Newsletter ([URL] Depth-wise, the decathlon at the Trials will be really good.
                      That's quite a stretch from "Why isn't anyone here familiar..." but hey, it doesn't matter. Flood is one of those guys who is solid and steady enough to place pretty high at the Trials.

                      Comment


                      • American post-mortem - what can we learn from Gotzis.
                        After a good start to the season that includes PBs from Brooks and Zamzow and the emerges of Anna Hall as a future force to be recon with, American heptathletes went to Gotsiz and came back empty handed. Only Williams finished the heptathlon with a very mediocre result. Notably, many of the other contenders were also in so-so shape (Uibo, the Germans, the Cubans to mention few) but even compared to this low standard American performances were bad.
                        Below are my own observations about the American nightmare and what we can learn from it about the five contenders.

                        Kendell Williams – I was expecting a resultof8500+ points, with some good performances in individual events. In reality Williams were nervous and looked miserable at times, performing well below the level she already achieved this year.
                        Good news – looked a bit more comfortable in the SP and the shot slightly slipped before the threw it to 12.99 SB. My prediction of a new PB in the 200 stands after a good result in Gotzis.
                        Bad news (1): at the age of 26 she is still without a single international successful competition as a senior.
                        Bad news (2):” still no improvement in the throws.

                        Erica Bougard – I was expecting something similar to Williams’s actual performance. Instead, she ran a good 100h and then jumped only 1.71, something that she probably hasn’t done since high school. Bougard still without a single good mark (close to her PB) in 2021.
                        Good news – With Kunz DNF and Brooks questionable appearance, she is likely to be in Tokyo regardless of her form in the trials.
                        Bad news - something is fundamentally wrong with the start of the season of Bougard. I was hopping that she is trying to peak later, but she should be able to score ~6,500 points in the trials to ensure her place in Tokyo. Right now, she looks like a shadow of the woman that scored 6,725 points in Gotzis three years ago.

                        Annie Kunz – The only American that came to compete for real in Gotzis was in a very good form in the first day before succumbing to the wind in the LJ. Set a PB in the 100h and was very close to her PB in the 200.
                        Good news – show that she can score 6420 and secure the third spot.
                        Bad news – didn’t get the auto-Q and now depended on the trials. She may qualify even if she finishes behind Brooks or Zamzow, but I’m sure that she doesn’t want to take this chance.

                        Taliyah Brooks – won the 100h and then had NM in the HJ. In her interview, she gave me the impression that she cares more about the atmosphere and her 100h time than the Heptathlon. My bold prediction is that she will select the 100h over the Heptathlon.
                        Good news – the level in the 100h is relatively low in the US this season. Has a chance to finish in the top 3.
                        Bad news – with a DNF in Gotzis she will need 6420 points to qualify as the does not have high scoring heptathlon to go along with her trial result. I don’t think she is capable of it (but would love to be wrong).

                        Riley cooks – no show in Gotzis.
                        Good news – her situation remains the same, needs the meet of her life to qualify.

                        Bad news – her situation remains the same, needs 6420 points to qualify.

                        Comment


                        • awesome olorin...

                          Comment


                          • Quick update on the qualification lists for Tokyo after Götzis.

                            Decathlon :

                            Van der Plaetsen (BEL) gets the auto-Q with a PB of 8430. That makes him the 16th guy to do so.
                            It means there are only 8 spots available via the rankings. Zhuk (BLR) was not far from the qualification mark but misses it by a mere 14 points, a performance which makes him past Roe (NOR) for the 3rd q.
                            Braun (NED) is rather safe, even if he doesn't get the Q. Behind him is Simmons (USA), whose biggest concern is Eugene. Then Zhuk, Roe, Dolezal (CZE), Urena (ESP), Duckworth (GB) and Wiesiolek (POL).
                            Zhuk and Wiesiolek are running out of time for another competition, last chance will probably be on the 26/27th of June, though Zhuk is somehow in a comfortable position whereas the Pole is on the brink of being left out. Dolezal pulled out after the discus, don't know why. Urena competed last week so he could try Ratingen. No indication about Duckworth.
                            Those at the back are in the relegation zone, we may have one more > 8350 US athlete by the end of June, guys like Ehammer (SUI), Owens (PUR), Hubert (FRA) too.

                            Heptathlon :

                            Vetter (NED) now qualified, quite logical, that makes it 10. Way more quotas to be decided by the rankings (14).
                            The big winners of the Austrian meeting are Huntington (FIN, 4th 6318) and Sulek (POL, 6th 6315 PB). They climb from 23th and 25th to 6th and 12th and become virtually qualified. That leaves Kunz out of the list.

                            Comment


                            • South-American champion Evelis Aguilar will climb high with 2 GL wins now.
                              Last edited by jupo; 05-31-2021, 01:38 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by jupo View Post
                                South-American champion Evelis Aguilar will climb high with 2 GL wins now.
                                Didn't see her result. Two GL wins but rather weak scores, < 6200 each time. She climbs up to the 7th q spot, much safer than her previous position, and leaves Gittens, Sulek and A.Rodriguez at the bottom. Compared to the men, it seems unlikely that athletes outside of the current qualification list could get the auto-Q (maybe Shukh), so they're in a danger zone but have some room to spare.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X