Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1500m/Mile - no interest?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • 1500m/Mile - no interest?

    There has been no separate thread for international 1500m/Mile races this year. And, this is inspite of a very good start to the season with the running of the fastest 1500m for years, and with a "new" exciting Olympic champ in Kiprop. Why, I wonder, has interest in these events dropped. Could it be connected to the demise of Alan Webb's fortunes?

  • #2
    Re: 1500m/Mile - no interest?

    Originally posted by FrankS
    There has been no separate thread for international 1500m/Mile races this year. And, this is inspite of a very good start to the season with the running of the fastest 1500m for years, and with a "new" exciting Olympic champ in Kiprop. Why, I wonder, has interest in these events dropped. Could it be connected to the demise of Alan Webb's fortunes?
    Sure, and add in the rest of the US 1500m/Mile outlook. To date, most our interest is in the younger prospects as no one is even speaking about the US athlete headed to Berlin.

    I still think Lagat can medal in a tactical race. Manzano has some ability to make it thru at least a round, maybe at the final if he could get in some good races before the Champs are here (Where is he by the way???)

    However, all the other hopes are pretty much done. Who the heck knows whats going on in the Webb triangle. I think he pretty much is in need of a new coach. Its time for him to at least consider a change. He never should have changed his training from a yr-2 yrs ago, just tweaked it.

    Why would someone who's had success off of the tremendous base that he had, change that to go with a more leaner method that didn't get him fit enough? You would think his coach knows that by now, that is, what worls and does not work for Webb. Very unfortunate. He better begin that move to the 5K before he's not capable of producing the types of results that he always dreamed about. He's got some time....but not a lot of it anymore.

    Comment


    • #3
      In part it's due to no Yanks being in the mix, especially with Lagat having ignored the race this year- so far- but it's also due to the fact that there are no consistent matchups. Choge looked good early, but he and Kiprop have avoided each other. There seem to be a lot of Indians but no Chiefs....yet.

      Kiprop certainly seems to be the next heir apparent, but with the sudden emergence of Lalou as a 1500 man, maybe the Berber Arabs will find another one of their own.

      Comment


      • #4
        The 1500 is my second favorite race to watch behind the 800. I think the reason most people don't find it too interesting in the States anymore is because the top finishers are always Kenyans/Ethiopians. Without any Americans contending on the international stage really, it's hard to stay as interested in it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Well, the U.S. would probably be a lot more interested in track and field if it was The Mile instead of The 1500. If the official race distance for all the major track meets was always 1 mile instead of 1500 meters, the U.S. crowd would probably be much more interested, since we all have to run the mile when we are in high school or in P.E. or whatever at least once a year, so we are all familiar with it, but none of the general population has any clue wtf a 1500 is.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by The Atheist
            Well, the U.S. would probably be a lot more interested in track and field if it was The Mile instead of The 1500.
            Yes, yes, yes, a million times yes. And the 100 yards and the quarter mile, and the half mile, etc. We've pummeled this horse quite frequently on these boards. The truth is that the US public--for better or worse--has very little idea of what metric means. Whether they're "stupid" is beside the point. They don't HAVE to understand metric, so they don't. Why should they understand the concept of counting in base-12? 1500 meters? Why not 1400 meters or 1800 or 2200? None of this really means squat here.

            Comment


            • #7
              The picture has been muddied a bit by the fact that "all" modern field-eventers understand their events well in metric. So a male javelin thrower is struggling like mad to get to the 80-meter mark, for example.

              But if you ask the same thrower if he was impressed by X's 20-meter put in the shot, he'll go, "Huh?" Tell him it's close to 70 feet and he'll get it.

              All kinds of people "speak metric," but don't really.

              The true test is what you think of when you pick something householdish up and figure what it ways, or calcultate how far it is from here to the other side of the room. If the answer isnt' available without calculation you don't really speak meters at all.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by gh
                All kinds of people "speak metric," but don't really.
                Exactly. Just like I "speak French." I can muddle through with ordering a meal, understanding directions, reading the headlines of a paper, and so on, but I'm a blithering idiot and don't genuinely understand the language. Unless you comprehend directly--without mentally "translating"--you don't genuinely understand...

                Comment


                • #9
                  US Distance runners are non existent overseas. When they attend Grand Prix or Golden League meets they run timidly and shy from the pace. For a bunch of guys who worship Pre I think that's a damn shame. They need to grow some and attack these damn races.
                  Afrikan

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Completely unrelated to the post, but, I've always wanted to know...

                    Why is your name "Taliban"

                    Are you pro Taliban?

                    Anti Taliban?

                    Neither?

                    I remember you had the same screen name on trackshark too, so I suspect there is some significant meaning or purpose for your name, considering you've picked that name on two different sites.

                    If you would rather explain in a private message, that's fine too, or if you don't want to talk about it that's fine too.

                    I am just curious, thanks.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by The Atheist
                      Completely unrelated to the post, but, I've always wanted to know...

                      Why is your name "Taliban"

                      Are you pro Taliban?

                      Anti Taliban?

                      Neither?

                      I remember you had the same screen name on trackshark too, so I suspect there is some significant meaning or purpose for your name, considering you've picked that name on two different sites.

                      If you would rather explain in a private message, that's fine too, or if you don't want to talk about it that's fine too.

                      I am just curious, thanks.
                      No interest because there are no Americans making a buzz in the event.

                      I do not support terrorist.
                      Afrikan

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Taliban
                        US Distance runners are non existent overseas. When they attend Grand Prix or Golden League meets they run timidly and shy from the pace.
                        You've officially mixed up distance runners with the actual topic of 1.500m runners. Last I recall watching, Tegenkamp and Solinsky were toughing it out near the front in big Euro meets the past couple of years (specifically at 3.000m).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Perhaps a naive question but I have never figured out how to time splits in the 1500? Do you time the first 300m and then the three 400 meter splits or do you time the first three 400 splits (if you can figure out the starting line from across the track) and the final 300? :?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Both. Having run the 1.500m, it had become imperative for me to know what I was splitting at each 400m segment of the race, but also at each 400m interval from the finish line. Therefore, splits at 300m-700m-1.100m were equally important to me as those at 400m-800m-1.200m were.

                            The past USATF/OT has provided splits from both lines.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Thanks, EPelle, Makes sense but that is a lot of splitting. How did they do that before modern multiple split watches and auto time?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X