2022 women's AOY

[J Rorick]

Here's a question? If SAFP retired today, would she have any competition in women's track and field for the title of "Greatest Career Ever without setting an individual WR? Do even any male competitors come close to her career? (Barshim?)

Dibaba in 10K, Val Adams & Perković would be competitive. And maybe even Kipyegon.

[18.99s]

This is a really silly argument, as it can all be trumped by "the best kids don't run track and field," they play _____________ (fill in the sport that makes more money)

Even if track & field only had second-rate athletes who failed at other sports, that's irrelevant because the T&FN AOY is comparing T&F athletes against each other, not against other sports.

One can easily argue that the 100 meters is by far the easiest event in track and field, and perhaps the easiest event in all of sports.

It is indeed among the easiest events to get started in. Almost any able-bodied 6-year-old can sprint from one end of a track or field to the other with no training (if they understand what they've been instructed to do).

But that ease of getting started paradoxically also makes it one of the hardest events to become the best in the world, because you have to rise to the top of millions who also found it easy to get started.

Anyway, I'm not saying the 100m should be given more weight in AOY voting than the triple jump or hurdles because of the greater worldwide depth in the 100m. All events should be treated equally unless an event is new and world records are falling like rain (like the women's pole vault in the early 00's).

[DET59]

Im all for Sydney being AOY, but honestly her short seasons leave alot to be desired. There are athletes who get themselves up after championships and run races tired or not, that is apart of the sport. I guess the decision is whether her season was long enough to be athlete of the year.

SAFP and Rojas were all impressive in their seasons. Amusan, I would say had too many losses but her season was impressive nonetheless.

It's clear from SAFP that it's possible to have a great career into your 30's and have a family... What's the main reason athletes who are great in college and early 20's don't?

I would venture to say injuries and financial pressure to "get a job in the real world." Like you said competing tired or not is part of T&F. I admire Sydney for her "long game" approach to the sport, especially if she adds the open 400. The rewards of the sport, financially, have always been of the "make hay while the sun shines" type... often ending careers way too early. Sydney has the potential to be a 4 or 5 time Olympian with medals in more than one event. Going to Europe to run in some (for her) mediocre races probably doesn't make any sense.

[Atticus]

I admire Sydney for her "long game" approach to the sport, especially if she adds the open 400. . . . Sydney has the potential to be a 4 or 5 time Olympian with medals in more than one event. Going to Europe to run in some (for her) mediocre races probably doesn't make any sense.

Precisely. She delivered, in spades, her season's objectives.

[18.99s]

Precisely. She delivered, in spades, her season's objectives.

She accomplished her own objectives, but that doesn't mean she should be the AOY. Her 4-meet season was too sparse compared to Rojas and SAFP, and she's not in an event like the 10K where 4 meets is considered a full season.

[berkeley]

This is a really silly argument, as it can all be trumped by "the best kids don't run track and field," they play _____________ (fill in the sport that makes more money)

The bottom line is the best in whatever the event/sport is all show up at the World Championships pretty much in all traditional Olympic sports. That's all we can go by. Pole Vaulting and triple jumping are way way harder than running 100 meters in a straight line, and so is hurdling. One can easily argue that the 100 meters is by far the easiest event in track and field, and perhaps the easiest event in all of sports. Should we discount SAFP's success because it is so easy ? In track and field being the best in the world, Olympic Gold Medalist, world record holder means you are the best no matter what the event is.

Events that have been around without change for 30+ years have world records that are not easy to achieve. If they were they would be broken more often or more competitors would be challenging the record. There's no difference between a women's event started in 1928 and one in the 80's or 90's, What Yulimar and Sydney have done is pretty rare this century, breaking a WR multiple times and dominating the all-time top 10 list. . SAFP is a great runner but she has not seriously challenged a world record (yet), though you'd think her best event would be the indoor 60 with her amazing start. I will admit, though, there's an elephant in the room with all the women's sprint through 800 records (as well as SP and DT), but that's a whole other discussion.

We're kind of in a golden era of track and field, with multiple world records in men's and women's event being broken and quickly rebroken by the same young athletes. Not one off. late in career marks. The fact that then there are second place competitors (400ih, Shot put) surpassing the previous records is even more amazing, yet some people take that as a sign that a record was "soft." Two guys throwing 23 meters, well beyond throws from a bygone era, and surpassing top 10 marks that seemed to be written in stone just a few years ago is remarkable. Enjoy while we can.

Preference has to be given to those who break world records in the AOY selection. It's what the sport is all about. There can be no argument that "it was a weak year in event x,y, or z (like the men's LJ right now)" when the world record is broken.

Here's a question? If SAFP retired today, would she have any competition in women's track and field for the title of "Greatest Career Ever without setting an individual WR? Do even any male competitors come close to her career? (Barshim?)

I don't think it's silly at all. The 100 is and will always be the premium event in track and field. I firmly believe that many (not all) athletes in other events are there because they could not be successful as sprinters. They may have gravitated at an early age, but they started out wanting to beat that other kid to the end of the street - not throw something farther or jump farther or run 10 times around the block faster. If they beat all comers to the end of the street, guaranteed they'll keep doing that, not something else.

Having said that, I'm not sure SAFP should be AOY ahead of Syd. It's a close one.

[Atticus]

She accomplished her own objectives, but that doesn't mean she should be the AOY. Her 4-meet season was too sparse compared to Rojas and SAFP

Rojas had 5 meets.
SAFP was not undefeated, and had the 3rd best time ever. Syd had the # 1 and # 2 times ever.

[ATK]

Rojas had 5 meets.
SAFP was not undefeated, and had the 3rd best time ever. Syd had the # 1 and # 2 times ever.

7 meets

[DET59]

Originally posted by Atticus View Post
Rojas had 5 meets.
SAFP was not undefeated, and had the 3rd best time ever. Syd had the # 1 and # 2 times ever


Not only did Syd add # 1 and # 2 (both WRs) to the list, she also ran # 6 and #10 this year (one of those a semi- when was the last time someone achieved a top 10 all-time mark in a qualifying round ?) I'll take quality or quantity any day.

[TN1965]

I don't think it's silly at all. The 100 is and will always be the premium event in track and field. I firmly believe that many (not all) athletes in other events are there because they could not be successful as sprinters. They may have gravitated at an early age, but they started out wanting to beat that other kid to the end of the street - not throw something farther or jump farther or run 10 times around the block faster. If they beat all comers to the end of the street, guaranteed they'll keep doing that, not something else.

I have to question the conventional wisdom on 100m after seeing Kerley and Jackson in the last two years. Are we really sure that the best 100m talents are all competing in the 100m?

[18.99s]

I have to question the conventional wisdom on 100m after seeing Kerley and Jackson in the last two years. Are we really sure that the best 100m talents are all competing in the 100m?

In the case of Shericka Jackson, as her coach explained years ago, she was specializing in the 400m in the early years of her pro career because she kept getting injured in the 100m, and his plan was to have her spend some years focusing on the 400m to build up her resilience while doing serious work in the weight room, and then switch to the 100m later in her career when he thought her muscles could handle the explosiveness of it. So in that sense she was in the 400m because she was a failed 100m sprinter at the time.

Michael Johnson also stayed away from the 100m because he was injury-prone in it. I don't know Fred Kerley's reason for specializing in the 400m in college and his early pro years.

[DET59]

In the case of Shericka Jackson, as her coach explained years ago, she was specializing in the 400m in the early years of her pro career because she kept getting injured in the 100m, and his plan was to have her spend some years focusing on the 400m to build up her resilience while doing serious work in the weight room, and then switch to the 100m later in her career when he thought her muscles could handle the explosiveness of it. So in that sense she was in the 400m because she was a failed 100m sprinter at the time.

Michael Johnson also stayed away from the 100m because he was injury-prone in it. I don't know Fred Kerley's reason for specializing in the 400m in college and his early pro years.

18.99, fantastic observation..... do you think most of the "members" of the sub10,sub20,sub45 (or women's sub11,sub22,sub51) club did so working down from the 400 rather than up from the 100?

[CD203]

Originally posted by Atticus View Post
Rojas had 5 meets.
SAFP was not undefeated, and had the 3rd best time ever. Syd had the # 1 and # 2 times ever


Not only did Syd add # 1 and # 2 (both WRs) to the list, she also ran # 6 and #10 this year (one of those a semi- when was the last time someone achieved a top 10 all-time mark in a qualifying round ?) I'll take quality or quantity any day.

Amusan's WR in Eugene, Holloways =WR in Belgrade as well as his 12.81 last year at the Olympic Trials, Fred Kerley this year with 9.76 at the trials, and of course Flo-Jo's WR was in the quarterfinals back in '88. For the short sprints and hurdles it's actually relatively common. This is likely due to the fact that the pressure in heats and sf might feel less compared to the final so some athletes are more relaxed, leading to faster times.

For longer sprints and hurdles it is pretty much unheard of for times to be that fast outside of finals tho

[jb2]

Amusan's WR in Eugene, Holloways =WR in Belgrade as well as his 12.81 last year at the Olympic Trials, Fred Kerley this year with 9.76 at the trials, and of course Flo-Jo's WR was in the quarterfinals back in '88. For the short sprints and hurdles it's actually relatively common. This is likely due to the fact that the pressure in heats and sf might feel less compared to the final so some athletes are more relaxed, leading to faster times.

For longer sprints and hurdles it is pretty much unheard of for times to be that fast outside of finals tho

There may well be more recent examples, but Steve Lewis's 44.11 in the 1988 OT semis was # 3 ever at the time (Evans 43.86A, Reynolds 44.10). Indoors, Wilson Kipketer set a WR in the 800 heats at the 1997 WIC.

[berkeley]

In the case of Shericka Jackson, as her coach explained years ago, she was specializing in the 400m in the early years of her pro career because she kept getting injured in the 100m, and his plan was to have her spend some years focusing on the 400m to build up her resilience while doing serious work in the weight room, and then switch to the 100m later in her career when he thought her muscles could handle the explosiveness of it. So in that sense she was in the 400m because she was a failed 100m sprinter at the time.

Michael Johnson also stayed away from the 100m because he was injury-prone in it. I don't know Fred Kerley's reason for specializing in the 400m in college and his early pro years.

Quincy Watts also moved up to 400 only because he kept getting injured in the 100. van Niekerk often said he really wanted to be a sprinter and improve his 100/200 times.