"Rabbits," are they really relevant?

[trackloyalist]

Why would an event-favourite chase a "rabbit" who set blazing paces, at the risk being winded? But do they(non-rabbits) really fall for the "rabbit hoax"? Are they really pulled by rabbits? It doesn't seem that way to me, at least not in recent times.

Nobody seems to be risking a winners' check to attempt a world record, as was evident in the late 90's. These Rabbits set obvious, sometimes ridiculously abnormal paces that not only overly-animates the sports but makes a mockery of it.

[Asterix]

Re:

Um, do you have some specific examples you are referring to? Off the top of my head, I can't think of any distance world record set in the last 10 years that did not involve a rabbit. "Rabbit hoax"?

Pretty much every race an El G or Geb ran involved rabbits. El G often made use of Martin Keino, William Tanui and even Canada's Graham Hood on occasion as they were know for not only being quick, but being able to set a consistent pace.

Even Tergat's world record last fall involved a rabbit, one who took him out at a "ridiculously abnormal pace". Guess that one second showdown really made a mockery of the event.

[malmo]

Re: Re:

>Even Tergat's world
>record last fall involved a rabbit, one who took him out at a "ridiculously
>abnormal pace". Guess that one second showdown really made a mockery of the
>event.

The nerve of that guy not to drop out!!!! Oh shi!t, here we go again?

[[email protected]]

Re: Re:

>Um, do you have some specific examples you are referring to? Off the top of my
>head, I can't think of any distance world record set in the last 10 years that
>did not involve a rabbit. "Rabbit hoax"?

Pretty much every race an El G
>or Geb ran involved rabbits. El G often made use of Martin Keino, William
>Tanui and even Canada's Graham Hood on occasion as they were know for not only
>being quick, but being able to set a consistent pace.

Even Tergat's world
>record last fall involved a rabbit, one who took him out at a "ridiculously
>abnormal pace". Guess that one second showdown really made a mockery of the
>event.


Though I could certainly be wrong, I sense that the original poster meant rabbits who earn that title by default, in going out noticably faster than the field in, just for example, a championship setting as a personal tactic ... rather than the type that agrees in advance to take the pace, usually in return for compensation.

[Asterix]

Re: Re:

Though I could certainly be wrong, I sense that
>the original poster meant rabbits who earn that title by default, in going out
>noticably faster than the field in, just for example, a championship setting as
>a personal tactic ... rather than the type that agrees in advance to take the
>pace, usually in return for compensation.

That may be the case, but their post seems to contain an inherent contradiction. Based on that interpretation, the first part seems to bemoan the fact that no one is willing to grab the bull by the horns and think that they can actually run the kick off of an El G or Geb by going out at a "blazing" pace.

But then the last sentence appears to state the belief that anyone who does follow that methodology cause negative consequences by "overly animating" the sport and making "a mockery of it".

As long as you have championship level athletes like the above mentioned studs who can drop a mind blowing kick off a slow or fast pace (Geb's 25 second closer in the 95 10,000, running about 27:12ish or Bekele's sub 13 second half last summer), no one is going to be daft enough to try and run away from them in the early going in the hopes of stealing the race.

[gor_gan]

Re: Re:

The point the original poster is making is that in recent years, event-favourites are ignoring "rabbits" in races as a safety measure. Hence rabbits are becoming irrelevant to the sports. I think he/she is saying also, that some rabbits do exaggerate thier role by going out too fast, much to the annoyance of spectators.






>>Um, do you have some specific examples you are

[kuha]

Re: Re:

Asterix: Re the point you raised above, the only relatively recent WR done without rabbits of any kind that I'm familiar with was Kiptanui's first sub-8 steeple at Zurich in '95. He specifically said he didn't want rabbits and led pretty much every step of the way. Other than that, pacesetters are, of course, very common.

On this matter, I guess I have a "non-traditional" attitude: rabbits are just fine, and the more the merrier. Fast races are mostly honest races--everyone is tested over 100% of the distance, and not some small fraction thereof.

[trackloyalist]

Re: Re:

Do they contract rabbits for marathon races? If so, How much distance are they contracted to cover before dropping out?

[Asterix]

Re: Re:

>Do they contract rabbits for marathon races? If so, How much distance are they
>contracted to cover before dropping out?

You want the lengthy Paul Pilkington thread:
http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/tfn/di ... sage=46241

Despite some naysayers, the generally accepted consensus is rabbits can be contracted to run whatever distance the contract awarder wants (halfway, 30km, full distance). They are also not obligated to drop out and are free to finish however they want once their contractual duties are completed.

Read the above linked thread for all the arguements and counter-arguements yay and nay for this issue.

[Sprint Stat Man]

Re: Re:

>Fast races are mostly honest races--everyone is tested over 100% of the distance, and not some
small fraction thereof.

I agree. It always amuses me that when a competitor takes it out, trying to win by running his rivals off their feet, this is described as "making an honest race of it", but when a pacemaker takes the pace, this is "artificial". The same thing is happening - all the competitors are being tested to the limit.

[tafnut]

Re: Re:

Doesn't El G have his own personal rabbit? He's trained to go through the splits that are deemed necessary. Rabbits will continue to be MORE and MORE relevant as we approach more surreal times (like 3:26!). A 3:42 mile requires splits like 55 - 56 - 56 - 55. It would require an unreal will to run that alone. A 1200 of 2:47 is near madness, unless you're stopping there.

[Helen S.]

Re: Re:

Madness? Evidently not everyone thinks so- Certainly not for Mr. El G, nor Mr. Lagat. If I were coaching a miler with 47 400 speed with the propensity for hard training and a high pain tolerance, he would have to think of 2:47 for 1200 as doable. A goal to attain. As long as our milers think of that as madness, they won't do it by accident!

[kuha]

Re: Re:

...or even more to the point, as long as US milers think of it as "madness," they won't do it at ALL.

[sunriseflash]

Re:

WELL IF YOUR GOING TO TAKE YOUR 800 OUT IN 47-48,OR THE MILE IN 1:48-1:49 NO.I DONT THINK ENOUGH OF THESE YOUNG GUNS ARE EMPTYING THERE TANKS TOO MUCH.U HAVE TO USE RACES TO GO WAY OUT THERE AND SEE.EVEN IF IT IS ONLY 49 OR 1;52

[Conor Dary]

Re: Re:

Only an idiot writes in capitals.