USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

[ATK]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

But, to address another fallacy in the OP's thesis...the USA would have probably won from 2000 to 2005 as well. The occasional rogue athlete was not enough to stop the USA from winning, imo, if we're encouraged to suppose that Allyson Felix is the key. The two squads, USA and RUS are just too close in ability and it's impossible to say that a drafted sprinter or 400/400h backup couldn't replicate the split depending upon where they are placed in the order. It happens every year that some athlete runs a split that no one thought they were capable of and the USA has far many more of these athletes than anyone else.

Exactly. Felix is not the key to the relay. The US could have won everything from 2000 to present. Like mummy said, all the US ladies raise their game when it's time for the relay. Regardless of what their previous performances were. McCrory ran below par in the London 400x but managed to run an amazing relay leg. SRR was completely off her game in Daegu but blew away the leadoff for the relay.

[iain]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

and for women, soccer and volleyball.

Since there are no pro leagues in these sports, they are weak examples IMO. The only women's sport that has much greater financial incentives than track & field is tennis.

Football (soccer) is a better example for women than baseball and US Football are for men. Almost nowhere plays baseball, and the US still don't win (although do some of the best pros not play?) and the US is the only country which plays 'football'.

[EPelle]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

I believe the Russian team are tired due to being under-raced prior to moving the stick around at either the Olympics or the World Championships.

Take either Kapachinskaya and Firova, for example. Both generally race sparingly throughout the season. They tend to run well at their national championships, and then run within their top-5 seasonal best times at the Olympic/world champs. In essence, they're peaking for their national champs and then running within range of their best times at the universal champs despite the qualification rounds.

During the 2011 season Kapachinskaya had three races before the Russian National Championships. Then she ran three races there in Cheboksary, the third of which was her eventual season's-best (49,35). Then no more races until Daegu. She pours her legs into Daegu, with her semi-final (50,41) and final (50,24) contested faster than any of her previous races (save that Russian national champ final). Then she finally got the stick for 4x400m duty. I believe she ran out of gas when it came to running hard/fast under pressure; didn't have anything left in the tank.

Firova only had four races (three finals) prior to London 4x400m duties. She ran two sub-50's in Cheboksary (49,76 and 49,72, respectively), and left everything on the track there. No more competitions ahead of London. Then gets the stick for two rounds of relays exected to contest against the always-on American team amongst others. Neither Firova nor Kapachinskaya had a season conducive to running at one's expected best.

Kapachinskaya had a similar experience last year as well. She ran three finals last season before London, with no fewer than zero races in the two prime-time months between Cheboksary and London.

[EPelle]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

Krivoshapka came out of the gates guns blazing last year, with her first outdoor 400m a 49,43 in Krasnodar. She'd run one more meet (two more races) prior to London, with the Russian National Championships producing 50,05 and 49,16 SB, respectively. Gets the entire month off between the Russian National Champs and London, then runs 50,7 - 49,8 - 50,1 at the Olympics. Not much left in reserve for a fast leg against the always-on Americans and the other contestants who provided competition. Proved that the longer she races, the better she runs, capping off a lengthy season (relatively speaking) of racing between january and september with her fourth sub-50 on the season (49,94) in Italy. Same kind of scenario in 2011: two-fastest times of the year in Russia (50,19/49,92, respectively) then a month break before lining up for Daegu, where two of her three races would eventually be her third- and fourth-fastest times on the season. After those efforts, it was on to the relay, where she was expected to be able to roll with the Americans and others on very taxed legs.

How do you spell r-u-s-t-y in Russian, again?

[JumboElliott]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

and for women, soccer and volleyball.

Since there are no pro leagues in these sports, they are weak examples IMO. The only women's sport that has much greater financial incentives than track & field is tennis.

Destinee Hooker.

[KevinM]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

and for women, soccer and volleyball.

Since there are no pro leagues in these sports, they are weak examples IMO. The only women's sport that has much greater financial incentives than track & field is tennis.

I think they're fine examples. Athletes like Destiny Hooker or Marion Jones aside, the vast majority of athletes will already be on one-sport tracks by the time professional money is a factor. To the extent that financial incentives play a part, I'd guess that the college scholarship system has a much greater impact on where kids end up.

[jazzcyclist]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

and for women, soccer and volleyball.

Since there are no pro leagues in these sports, they are weak examples IMO. The only women's sport that has much greater financial incentives than track & field is tennis.

I think they're fine examples. Athletes like Destiny Hooker or Marion Jones aside, the vast majority of athletes will already be on one-sport tracks by the time professional money is a factor. To the extent that financial incentives play a part, I'd guess that the college scholarship system has a much greater impact on where kids end up.

But I was responding to Jumbo's comparison of football, basketball, and baseball (men) to soccer and volleyball (women). In football, basketball and baseball, there are huge financial incentives luring boys away from track and field. That situation doesn't exist with girls in soccer and volleyball. The men's equivalent of soccer and volleyball would be wrestling and lacrosse.

[eldanielfire]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

I believe the Russian team are tired due to being under-raced prior to moving the stick around at either the Olympics or the World Championships.

Take either Kapachinskaya and Firova, for example. Both generally race sparingly throughout the season. They tend to run well at their national championships, and then run within their top-5 seasonal best times at the Olympic/world champs. In essence, they're peaking for their national champs and then running within range of their best times at the universal champs despite the qualification rounds.

During the 2011 season Kapachinskaya had three races before the Russian National Championships. Then she ran three races there in Cheboksary, the third of which was her eventual season's-best (49,35). Then no more races until Daegu. She pours her legs into Daegu, with her semi-final (50,41) and final (50,24) contested faster than any of her previous races (save that Russian national champ final). Then she finally got the stick for 4x400m duty. I believe she ran out of gas when it came to running hard/fast under pressure; didn't have anything left in the tank.

Firova only had four races (three finals) prior to London 4x400m duties. She ran two sub-50's in Cheboksary (49,76 and 49,72, respectively), and left everything on the track there. No more competitions ahead of London. Then gets the stick for two rounds of relays exected to contest against the always-on American team amongst others. Neither Firova nor Kapachinskaya had a season conducive to running at one's expected best.

Kapachinskaya had a similar experience last year as well. She ran three finals last season before London, with no fewer than zero races in the two prime-time months between Cheboksary and London.

EPelle, maybe not last season but I'm certain I've see Firova out in the diamond league on numerous occasions. I've always seen her as always the 3rd or 4th best Russian at best but she always runs a great relay leg while never quite with the talent to hit sub-50 individual time enough to contend for individual medals. But by gosh did she get it right in 2010. She seemed so pleased becoming European champion.

[EPelle]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

eldanielfire, yes, Firova's 2011 differed tremendously from her 2012 season. She ran in Eugene, Oslo, European Team Champs in Stockholm, and the Moscow Championships all prior to competing in the Russian Championships. Not qualifying for Daegu, she competed in the London Aviva Grand Prix, competed in Moscow the following day and concluded her season in Rieti with her 2nd-fastest time of the year (50,97). A world of a difference from 2012. Perhaps if she and others had competed more in 2012 rather than save themselves for the Games, Russia may have had a more positive outcome in the 4x4. It's all speculation, of course, but it does seem as though they'd have been successful in London individually and as a collective team had they given a couple of races the time of day during that month's hiatus.

[26mi235]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

It seemed like they held some 400m athletes out of the open 400 to allow them to be fresher for the 4x400, since they would almost certainly not medal in the open event.

[eldanielfire]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

eldanielfire, yes, Firova's 2011 differed tremendously from her 2012 season. She ran in Eugene, Oslo, European Team Champs in Stockholm, and the Moscow Championships all prior to competing in the Russian Championships. Not qualifying for Daegu, she competed in the London Aviva Grand Prix, competed in Moscow the following day and concluded her season in Rieti with her 2nd-fastest time of the year (50,97). A world of a difference from 2012. Perhaps if she and others had competed more in 2012 rather than save themselves for the Games, Russia may have had a more positive outcome in the 4x4. It's all speculation, of course, but it does seem as though they'd have been successful in London individually and as a collective team had they given a couple of races the time of day during that month's hiatus.

I agree. On Firova thanks for confirming that. I'm guessing in 2011 she was going into that season as European champion and her star was never higher to earn something from the track in appearance fees and sponsorship. As she is 30 now, I'm not sure she will make another Olympics, I kinda hope she does as I've always liked her, for all the criticism of the Russian 4x400m she has always been dependable to run a good lap and she seems to be one of the few English speaking Russians in Track and Field. You can't argue with 3 Olympic silver medals, a world championship medal and European champion.

[Gabriella]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

Between 2000 and 2007, when Felix came onto the team, the USA hadn't broken 3:20 legally.

2000 Sydney - 3:22.62 DQ (doping)
20001 Edmonton - 3:26.88 (dropped baton)
2003 Paris - 3:22.63 1st (Russia second in 3:22.91)
2004 Athens - 3:19.01 DQ (doping)
2005 Helsinki - 3:23.38 (DQ in heats)

Without the dropped baton in Edmonton they would have probably run a 3:19+, but in Paris they only just beat Russia in a 3:22 and their other sub 3:20 race was a DQ for doping.

Felix takes the team from a 3:19-3:20 team to a 3:16-3:18 team. Not necessarily single handedly, but through a combination of her fantastic second leg splits, and the confidence that gives the other women, who then raise their game.

[Speedster]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

Felix takes the team from a 3:19-3:20 team to a 3:16-3:18 team. Not necessarily single handedly, but through a combination of her fantastic second leg splits, and the confidence that gives the other women, who then raise their game.

Exactly, she has a lock on the second leg for as long as she's fit and healthy as she can create that space to allow the 3rd and 4th to run their best legs possible. Tactically if RUS, JAM or GBR put their best runners on second might be the only way to see this become a closer race.

[batonless relay]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

The goal isn't to run sub-3:20, the goal is to win. As I said before, in the absense of Marion Jones, Allyson Felix or Crystal Cox the USA still may have won. The time they ran is irrelevant.

I would also disagree that Felix gives the women confidence to "raise their game". It is very likely that they feel stronger with Felix and actually relax more; with a "weaker" member they may be more steeled to overcompensate and run even faster. Absolutely no way to say that the either happened, though. In a nutshell: USA is dominant because they have won, but the races are so close that RUS could have won, and if RUS had won then the title of the thread would read: RUS w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

[jazzcyclist]

Re: USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

Folks here are talking about Allyson Felix as though Sanya Richards and Deedee Trotter don't exist. They've been every bit as important to the relay over the last ten years as Felix has been over the last six years.