If Hocker doesn't make the cut-off, it's time to burn down WA's algorithm and rebuild from scratch, as there will be at least 30 runners with poorer CVs.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
¶ '21 mOT 1500: Cole Hocker 3:35.28
Collapse
Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by NotDutra5 View Post
He would, in effect, displace Engels. There's no "insisting" involved.
Here's the list. Hocker is listed as 42nd currently by rank which qualifies him for the Olympics. He's actually 41st because Engels would not be entered by the US. Hocker would be. The possibility is that he falls behind 4 guys I guess but I think it is pretty remote at this point with just a couple of days to go.
https://www.worldathletics.org/stats...entId=10229502
Comment
-
Originally posted by Atticus View PostIf Hocker doesn't make the cut-off, it's time to burn down WA's algorithm and rebuild from scratch, as there will be at least 30 runners with poorer CVs.
I'm not saying he shouldn't go nor am I saying he isn't an interesting addition to the squad just that he hasn't run the type of time, YET, that should spur the lighting of torches.
As far as the youths are concerned, he'd fall behind Mu, Knighton, McLaughlin, and Harrison on my list of most exciting. I'm likely missing one.
Randolph Ross was missedLast edited by booond; 06-28-2021, 07:21 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DrJay View PostReally disappointed for Engels but he didn’t run a very smart race at all.
my son‘s over at the Wild Duck. He has a man bun and I guess he might look a little like Cole Hocker. Some sports writer gave him his card and told him he wanted to interview him.
Comment
-
Individual speed and placing data for last night's race:
https://twitter.com/athletetracking/...77579438526474
Converting the MPH data to 400m pace, translates to this (with some approximation of course):
Centrowitz was running 52 flat pace at the top of the final stretch. When challenged by Hocker, he ratcheted his pace down to 49.4 with 30-40 meters left, but it wasn't enough as Hocker peaked at 48.1 pace.
Nuguse and Engels ran similar races as far as their placing in the pack. Nuguse was just ahead of Engels going into the final straight. Engels nudged in front but Nuguse found another gear to peak at 50 flat pace and held it for longer than Engel's peak of 50.5.
Centrowitz was holding something in reserve for the straight and had to be very surprised that it wasn't enough. If he had pulled a Chelimo and taken Hocker out to lane 4, maybe he could have held him off. Otherwise, Hocker had the goods.
Engels was never going to beat Centro or Hocker and he beat everyone except Nuguse. So could he have beaten Nuguse with better tactics? Doubt it.
Best three are going to Tokyo.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alan Sigmon View PostIf mile times were considered for their equivalent 1500m value, Hocker would have a qualifying time rather easily. Hocker's 3:50.55 is worth 3:33.48 using the TFN formula, or 3:33 something using World Athletics' own tables (which score an indoor 3:50.55 as equivalent to 3:33.13).
ps--now I see what you're saying.... yes, it's indeed a travesty that if converted miles can count for your ranking score, why can't' they be a Q in and of themselves?Last edited by gh; 06-29-2021, 02:45 AM.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by TN1965 View PostIf you change this to "three per country" Hocker will move up to #33. (His name does not show up because he is not in the top three in the US. But he would be right behind Grethen at #32.)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alcyallen View PostNCAA power, so much for that.....long NCAA season....thing. How many NCAAers on the team?
Hocker&Nuguse here.
JuVaughn and Athing did OK.
Plus Ross, Jewett, Sullivan, Battle, Cockrell, Davis, Moore, Aquilla.
Comment
Comment