Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

¶ ’21 wNCAA 1500: Anna Camp (BYU) 4:08.53

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • ¶ ’21 wNCAA 1500: Anna Camp (BYU) 4:08.53

    T&FN formchart:

    1. Sage Hurta (Colorado)........................................ ................... Sr
    2. Krissy Gear (Arkansas)........................................ .................. Jr
    3. Julia Heymach (Stanford)........................................ .............. Jr
    4. Amaris Tyynismaa (Alabama)......................................... ...... Fr
    5. Whitni Orton (BYU)............................................. .................... Sr
    6. Danae Rivers (Penn State)............................................ ........ Sr
    7. Ella Donaghu (Stanford)........................................ ................ Jr
    8. Maudie Skyring’ (Florida State)............................................ Jr
    9. Presley Weems (Auburn).......................................... ............. Jr
    10. Kelsey Harris (Indiana)......................................... ................ Sr
    Last edited by gh; 06-13-2021, 05:26 PM.

  • #2
    Orton, Gear and Heymach out.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hurta looks to be the class of the field and probably enjoys Tyynismaa willingness to run everyone into the ground.

      Comment


      • #4
        Another PB for Maudie.

        Comment


        • #5
          advanced

          1. Sage Hurta (Colorado)........................................ ................... Sr
          2. Krissy Gear (Arkansas)........................................ .................. Jr
          4. Amaris Tyynismaa (Alabama)......................................... ...... Fr
          6. Danae Rivers (Penn State)............................................ ........ Sr
          7. Ella Donaghu (Stanford)........................................ ................ Jr
          8. Maudie Skyring’ (Florida State)............................................ Jr
          10. Kelsey Harris (Indiana)......................................... ................ Sr

          failed to advance
          3. Julia Heymach (Stanford)........................................ .............. Jr
          5. Whitni Orton (BYU)............................................. .................... Sr
          9. Presley Weems (Auburn).......................................... ............. Jr

          Comment


          • #6
            Why does the second heat go slower, knowing what times the first heat posted? Are they trying to make sire no one qualifies on time?
            And sure enough, there was a fall by Heymach at the end.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TN1965 View Post
              Why does the second heat go slower, knowing what times the first heat posted? Are they trying to make sire no one qualifies on time?
              And sure enough, there was a fall by Heymach at the end.
              You need a person willing to take the lead and push the pace. The first heat had that person.

              Comment


              • #8
                Is there something about this new track that makes it catch spikes? Before Heymach went down in the 1500 with an apparent stuck spike, one of the women in the 4x100 similarly stumbled.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TN1965 View Post
                  Why does the second heat go slower, knowing what times the first heat posted? Are they trying to make sire no one qualifies on time?
                  Because everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth, or in this context get moving on the track. I predict we're going to see similar illogical behavior in the OT 10,000m with its two time-trialed heats.

                  In the slower-seeded heat, with nobody having the Olympic qualifying standard before the race, I expect they'll jog the first 5K at a pace that gives them no chance of finishing with the Olympic standard. Or if they do run fast enough to give the top 3 the standard, the next heat will be a tactical affair that ends up slower than the first heat, entirely eliminating themselves and giving the spots to the women from the first heat.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by 18.99s View Post

                    Because everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth, or in this context get moving on the track. I predict we're going to see similar illogical behavior in the OT 10,000m with its two time-trialed heats.

                    In the slower-seeded heat, with nobody having the Olympic qualifying standard before the race, I expect they'll jog the first 5K at a pace that gives them no chance of finishing with the Olympic standard. Or if they do run fast enough to give the top 3 the standard, the next heat will be a tactical affair that ends up slower than the first heat, entirely eliminating themselves and giving the spots to the women from the first heat.
                    In the 10,000 one group will be slower/less talented than the other group which makes your scenario less likely to happen.

                    In the NCAA both groups have similar talents.

                    You want a fast pace you need to have someone willing to push a fast pace. Those people don't grow on trees as they may end up sacrificing themselves for the group.

                    So the second group jogs in a self-fulfilling death wish.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by booond View Post
                      In the 10,000 one group will be slower/less talented than the other group which makes your scenario less likely to happen.

                      In the NCAA both groups have similar talents.
                      In the OT 10,000, the first group has an obligatory time target; they must hit the Olympic standard or they're done. If they meet that target, the second group will then have an obligatory time target; they must crack the top 3 times from the first heat.

                      Whether it is having to beat times from a prior heat or having to hit the Olympic (or Worlds) standard, it is common for distance athletes to run as if their target time doesn't exist, so I strongly expect one of the two groups to fail to meet their target. But both can't fail, because if the first group doesn't get the Oly standard they're eliminated, and then the second group wouldn't have any target time to worry about (since most of them already have the standard).
                      Last edited by 18.99s; 06-12-2021, 06:04 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        And of course, my above analysis assumes that none of the women in the slower first heat are (or will be) high enough in the world rankings to qualify via that route, especially if they don't run fast enough to get the 31:25 Olympic standard.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Isn't there some consideration for the winner in terms of how this meet is ranked (or is that for the WCs)?

                          In the Trials, I would not be surprised if the slow heat runners get together to agree to push the pace, since that is the only chance for them. As someone indicated, this is absolutely not like the semis with balanced heats and at most two (sixth and seventh) going through. This is for ALL the marbles. Some times in conference meets a star does not have a qualifying mark and might be relegated to the slow heat and then have to push solo, but they might have a teammate rabbit for them. Something similar to this happened to Morgan McDonald who had been hurt and did not have a 5000 mark to make Regionals. Olin Hacker did rabbit for him but it was very windy and he missed by a couple of seconds.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Does JIll Montgomery understand the concept of anaerobic vs aerobic?
                            "Most people think the 1500 is middle distance. It's not. It's a sprint."
                            Even giving her some journalistic license, she is an . . . not correct.
                            At least no comment on their 'front-end-mechanics'.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Atticus View Post
                              Does JIll Montgomery understand the concept of anaerobic vs aerobic?
                              "Most people think the 1500 is middle distance. It's not. It's a sprint."
                              Even giving her some journalistic license, she is an . . . not correct.
                              At least no comment on their 'front-end-mechanics'.
                              What an idiot...thank God I'm not listening to that crap.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X