300m ?

[Tigger Heston]

I couldn't help but notice LaShawn Merritt higher up on the AT 300m list than JW. I don't have the stats to back this up, but it seems the key to JW's success at 400m is his strong last 100m. (he dies off less than his competitors.) He oftentimes has someone on his shoulder coming off the curve and then pulls away. When you here of someones most 'natural' distance, this latest 300m jaunt convinces me the 400m is in fact JW's natural distance. (and not the 800m!!)

[Peter Michaelson]

Mikli, you are entitled to your opinion.

But, track and field is not like swimming where many people are good at more than one event. Wilson Kipketer dominated the 800 and rarely ran above or below. Michael Phelps is good at so many events he has to eliminate some of them just because the schedule doesn't allow him to do them all. Guys like Carl Lewis, Said Aouita, and Geb are the exception rather than the rule.

Imagine you are Martin McGrady. Is it fair that there is no official outdoor 600 when you can beat everyone else in the world (including Lee Evans) at the indoor 600?

I say more 300 races. More 600 races so we can see Wariner vs. Kaki, Lashawn vs. KD vs. Borza vs. Angelo Taylor. I just missed the men's low hurdle era (I'm 53) but would pay to see Liu and Robles and AJ race Kerron and Bershawn and the quick new college guys in the 200 lows.

Just my opinion.

While we're on this subject, and forgive me if it has been answered, why ARE there more 100-200 swimmers than 400-800 runners? If the durations are about equal (for 100 swimming and 400 running, and for 200 swimming and 800 running) then shouldn't the energy systems be the same? Is it possible they are not the same? Or are other factors more important than energy systems?

[26mi235]

My sense is that swimming and running are very different. For instance, what runners do 20 x race distance at a hard pace. Then, the come back and do it again in the afternoon. And, the short distance types probably do more total distance than the runners - not time, distance.

[Daisy]

While we're on this subject, and forgive me if it has been answered, why ARE there more 100-200 swimmers than 400-800 runners? If the durations are about equal (for 100 swimming and 400 running, and for 200 swimming and 800 running) then shouldn't the energy systems be the same? Is it possible they are not the same? Or are other factors more important than energy systems?

Is it all to do with which are perceived as the blue riband event? Since I don't follow swimming I'm not sure if 100m in swimming has the say brand recognition as the 100m in track?

Mojo, here, is very knowledgable about energy systems so she might be able to give some perspective on that angle.

[mikli]

Mikli, you are entitled to your opinion.

As much as you are entitled to your opinion, which I very much appreciate. By the way, what do you mean by "there more 100-200 swimmers than 400-800 runners"? More exercises of the swimming events?

[Daisy]

By the way, what do you mean by "there more 100-200 swimmers than 400-800 runners"? More exercises of the swimming events?

I assumed he mean't there are proportionally more compared to the total number of compaetitors.

[Peter Michaelson]

What I mean is that there are more athletes in swimming that do both the 100 and 200 well (in their stroke) vs. runners that compete well at both 400 and 800.