USA w4x400 'lock' debate: Why so dominant?

[EPelle]

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

Literally and anatomically, no. As a figure of speech, yes.

[iain]

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

The brain isn't a muscle ...

[EPelle]

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

As everyone knows, Felix had Krivoshapka on her leg last year in London. Felix, with a 'suspect' hand-off runs 48,2 (maybe 47,9 to 48,0 if 'perfect'); the fastest woman on the planet over 400m last season, Krivoshapka, didn't cause Felix to panic or lose focus on the race or her run. As a matter of fact, she never caught her. For such reasons as this, I do not doubt for a minute that Felix wouldn't have panicked in Beijing.

You're conveniently overlooking the fact that Allyson ran a staggered leg which means that she had no idea where the other teams were when she got the baton, and when she broke off the turn, she had a commanding lead. Why would she have any reason to panic over another runner that she never saw during the entire race? There are no tactical decisions to be made on the second leg when you're the first one to the break.

I've not overlooked that fact. She had a 10m lead given to her by Trotter. Ever seen Felix race herself out of contention on any leg? Run so hard as to tie up and place her teammates' own chances of gold in jeopardy? I haven't. I don't suspect that she's done so on any international team. The leg she ran, notwithstanding, she still had Krivoshapka giving chase. That fact can create a sense of unease within any competitor. Yet after taking the baton, Felix created an additional 10m lead over the Russians. You don't find panic visible in Felix's run.

And you don't find that in Beijing. Or in Daegu. Or in any other championship where Felix had been called to 4x4 duty. Yet Richards-Ross had this to say about her own London leg: "It is a bit challenging to run at the front because you don't want to run too fast and mess it up."

Felix didn't run too fast despite having this 'commanding' 10m lead over the field. Ran within herself. Ran a blazing split. Maintained form and composure. Increased her lead. Brought the baton home to McCorory with an even greater command (20m lead) over the race than she'd been provided.

Again, Felix is the consummate professional. She's got this relay stuff in the bag. Whatever leg she's on, it's guts then gold then glory. But I needn't convince you of that. She's letting her own two feet and that huge muscle between her ears do it all.

And, that is all.

[olorin]

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

So...
was the 1.5sec hyperbole?
Felix was faster than the slowest lag by an average of 1.35 (1.57 if you take Deagu out of the equation). This is assuming that the athlete that will replace Felix will ran as fast an athlete that finished ahead of her in the US trials. If we look at the gap between Felix and the fastest lag in the qualification the average gap is 2.09sec.
So I stand by my original post - Felix is "worth" ~1.5sec to the American team.

Her contribution to the gold was pivotal in 2007, 2008 and 2011. Of course this is a what if argument that can never be solved but I doubt very much that the US would have won any of these three golds without her.

Finally, I am not a Bolt fan (in fact I would like anyone but him to win), but I would never argue that he is not the greatest sprinter that ever been.

[olorin]

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

When I have time, I'll look at who ran in the heats since 2007 and look at what their form was that year. Those alternates would be the people we're talking about exchanging for Felix.

Allyson Felix in the relays:
For each of the last five major championships I present the time by Felix, The difference between her time and the slowest lag by an American in the final (not including the first lag), The difference between her time and the fastest American athlete that compete in the qualifications but not in the final (this athlete is likely to be Felix’s replacement in case she didn’t run).
The final two rows present her contribution to the win. The first is the difference between her time and the time of the second lag athlete of the team that won the silver and the last line is my own assessment of her contribution.
I will demonstrate on 2007 and then present for 2008-2012
2007:
Felix time - 48.01
Faster than slowest American lag - Mary Wineberg ran 50.24 (third lag) so the gap is 2.23sec
Faster than fifth American - Hannangan is the fastest lag in the qualifications that did not compete in the final. She ran 50.01 so the gap is 2.09sec
Faster than Silver - the second Jamaican ran 50.05 so the gap is 2.04sec
Felix’s contribution - The gap between the US and Jam was 1.18sec so all the gap (more than 100%) is because of Felix. Another way to look at this is that except Felix all the other three Americans were slower than their Jamaican counterparts.

2008:
Felix time - 48.55
Faster than slowest American lag - 1.51sec
Faster than the fifth American - 1.42sec
Faster than Silver - 0.63sec (RUS)
Felix’s contribution - US won by a gap of 0.28. Again, the combine time of the other three American runners was slower than their Russian counterparts. The second lag Russian was actually the fastest lag by them.

2009:
Felix time - 48.75
Faster than slowest American lag - 1.35sec
Faster than the fifth American - 2.63sec
Faster than Silver - 0.89sec (JAM)
Felix’s contribution - The gap between US and JAM was 3.32 so Felix contributed roughly one quarter of the gap. Importantly, the second Jamaican athlete (Williams-Mills) was the fastest lag by the Jamaican

2011:

Felix time - 49.4
Faster than slowest American lag - 0.44sec
Faster than the fifth American - 2.25sec
Faster than Silver - 0.2sec (JAM)
Felix’s contribution - The gap between US and JAM was 0.62. As noted this was Felix’s worse relay after attempting the 200/400 double. Still very doubtful if the US would have won gold without her.

2012:
Felix: 48.2
Faster than slowest American lag - 1.19sec
Faster than the fifth American - 2.06sec
Faster than Silver - 1.6sec
Felix’s contribution - The gap was 3.36 so the US would have won without her. Still Allyson is responsible for half (!) of this gap

[Weights&Shoes]

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

Didn't realize my comment saying the USA wasn't a lock at this year's WC turned into this nice debate.

Carry on. 8-)

[26mi235]

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

[JumboElliott]

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

Looks like Sanya will be back next week at New York.

[jazzcyclist]

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

On thread, ¶2012 OG: w4x400–United States 3:16.87 WL, you agreed that the team of Trotter, Felix, McCrory, Richards-Ross seemed like the most logical for the team, yet you contended that "Maybe Drummond just wants to give other runners the opportunity to experience anchoring the U.S. to gold" when it was first announced that the team comprised of Felix, Richards-Ross, McCorory and Trotter. This proves that you believe that the anchor leg notwithstanding, the USA was going to claim gold. Why wouldn't the same hold true in the previous Olympics with Felix on anchor? Because she's Allyson Felix?

You're reading more into my post than I wrote. I don't believe that it's a forgone conclusion that the U.S. will win as evidenced by the fact that Sanya had to come from behind to win in 2008. However, Drummond may believe in the inevitability of a U.S. win since in 2011 he put McCorory on anchor and Sanya on scratch leg which I think was a mistake despite their eventual win. We already know for a fact that Sanya can handle herself regardless of the circumstances thrown at her, so why waste her on scratch leg?

As everyone knows, Felix had Krivoshapka on her leg last year in London. Felix, with a 'suspect' hand-off runs 48,2 (maybe 47,9 to 48,0 if 'perfect'); the fastest woman on the planet over 400m last season, Krivoshapka, didn't cause Felix to panic or lose focus on the race or her run. As a matter of fact, she never caught her. For such reasons as this, I do not doubt for a minute that Felix wouldn't have panicked in Beijing.

You're conveniently overlooking the fact that Allyson ran a staggered leg which means that she had no idea where the other teams were when she got the baton, and when she broke off the turn, she had a commanding lead. Why would she have any reason to panic over another runner that she never saw during the entire race? There are no tactical decisions to be made on the second leg when you're the first one to the break.

[EPelle]

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

I have no doubt that Felix is NOT 1.5 faster in the individual 400, but as you pointed out she is a much better in relays.

I didn't say that. Perhaps you're confusing me with Epelle.

Nope. Apparently extrapolated from your quote of: That's why Felix can run 48s relay splits but can't sniff sub-49 in the open 400.

On thread, ¶2012 OG: w4x400–United States 3:16.87 WL, you agreed that the team of Trotter, Felix, McCrory, Richards-Ross seemed like the most logical for the team, yet you contended that "Maybe Drummond just wants to give other runners the opportunity to experience anchoring the U.S. to gold" when it was first announced that the team comprised of Felix, Richards-Ross, McCorory and Trotter. This proves that you believe that the anchor leg notwithstanding, the USA was going to claim gold. Why wouldn't the same hold true in the previous Olympics with Felix on anchor? Because she's Allyson Felix?

As everyone knows, Felix had Krivoshapka on her leg last year in London. Felix, with a 'suspect' hand-off runs 48,2 (maybe 47,9 to 48,0 if 'perfect'); the fastest woman on the planet over 400m last season, Krivoshapka, didn't cause Felix to panic or lose focus on the race or her run. As a matter of fact, she never caught her. For such reasons as this, I do not doubt for a minute that Felix wouldn't have panicked in Beijing. That really is enough now. Believe as you wish. I'm not here to prove anything. Does it raise the price of milk if you're right or wrong? If I'm on base or far off in left field? They're just two cents. One and two.

[JumboElliott]

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

Also, the anchor legs can be slower for the winning team when the gap is big because the runner will not push as hard the last bit. In fact, other placers may do the same within the gap (too far behind to catch up but with a comfortable margin ahead of the next team).

Exactly, and the two guys who have run the fastest uncontested anchor legs are the greatest and arguably the second greatest 400m runners in history.

[jazzcyclist]

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

I have no doubt that Felix is NOT 1.5 faster in the individual 400, but as you pointed out she is a much better in relays.

I didn't say that. Perhaps you're confusing me with Epelle.

Typically, She is 1.0 -2.0 seconds better than the slowest lag in her team. In order to replace her you will need to choose someone that was ranked lower in the American trials that in all likelihood is going to be even slower.

When I have time, I'll look at who ran in the heats since 2007 and look at what their form was that year. Those alternates would be the people we're talking about exchanging for Felix.

Note: When I accuse someone of hyperbole, I'm not insulting them. It's more like I'm accusing them of exaggerating a lilttle and ribbing them in a good-natured way. I promise I didn't mean to offend you.

[jazzcyclist]

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

This is a link to the 4*400 in London:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awc-TN7qg3c
look at the change between Trotter and Felix. Allyson is taking two - three small steps and then start to ran after she get the baton.
Then, look at the 4*100 (when they roughly gained a second)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAfhf_u_QBI
Look at the American exchanges are the two remotely close?

The video that you posted is an example of a poorly executed 4x400 exchange by Felix. Of course you won't get the one-second differential with exchanges like that. Hell, you won't get the one-second differential with 4x100 exchanges when they're poorly executed either. I'm glad you posted this video because it also undermines Epelle's claim that Felix is as technically sound a relay runner as Sanya, who would never take the baton from a stand-still the way Felix did. You have to also remember that in the 4x400, there's a lot of drafting going on that doesn't happen in the 4x100. This is why on average, you'll find that a runner's best 4x400 relay split is a second faster than their PR in the open 400, and with some runners (eg. Allyson Felix, Jessica Beard), it's close to 1.5 seconds faster.

[olorin]

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

Being so smart maybe you can tell me which American 400m runner can have a split of sub 50 that is NOT already include in the original team during these years.
To help you a little bit - during 2007, 2008, 2009 only Felix and SRR ran below 50. The best lag between 2007 - 2012 by anyone other than SRR & FELIX is 49.39 (McCorory 2012) which is still almost 1.5 second slower than Felix at her best.
I suggest before you post any more silly comments - stop to think

Are you in junior high school? This isn't letsrun and I have no interest in getting into a pssing contest with you. I only called you out for hyperbole. FYI, neither Natasha Hastings, Mary Wineberg, Jessica Beard or Debbie Dunn are 1.5 seconds slower than Felix when they're in form. Of course they're all slower, but not 1.5 seconds slower.

Unfortunately, my junior high school days are many many years behind me. I may misunderstood the meaning of hyperbole (I believed that it is a stupid comment that make the entire argument laughable).
Therefore, if I overreact I am taking it back.
Still read my post without the personal part. I have no doubt that Felix is NOT 1.5 faster in the individual 400, but as you pointed out she is a much better in relays. Typically, She is 1.0 -2.0 seconds better than the slowest lag in her team. In order to replace her you will need to choose someone that was ranked lower in the American trials that in all likelihood is going to be even slower.

[olorin]

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

You gain roughly a second in the 4*100. In the 4*400 you gain much less. Re- my advice in the previous post

I think you're wrong on this, especially for runners like Sanya who are good about carrying the baton through the zone. That's why Felix can run 48s relay splits but can't sniff sub-49 in the open 400.

This is a link to the 4*400 in London:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awc-TN7qg3c
look at the change between Trotter and Felix. Allyson is taking two - three small steps and then start to ran after she get the baton.
Then, look at the 4*100 (when they roughly gained a second)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAfhf_u_QBI
Look at the American exchanges are the two remotely close?