Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cheseret is awesome!

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • gr@sshopper
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    >And if Ritz were Kenyan, you wouldn't see him
    >in Athens either.

    If my aunt had a shlong then she would be my uncle, but she does not and is not nor is Ritz a Kenyan. Your point?

    Leave a comment:


  • Johnny Walker Red
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    I think it was the humidity that probably did Ritz in. Down the line, he's going to run much faster races of course.

    Leave a comment:


  • trackstar
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    >Maybe I did not make it clear enough, I have. No
    >one was trying to make any
    >excuses for Ritz, yet it is fairly certain that we
    >will not see Cheseret
    >racing in Athens this summer.

    And if Ritz were Kenyan, you wouldn't see him
    >in Athens either.


    Reminds of that funny line in T&FN back in 96. The top American marathoner complained, "I can't believe I'm only 25th in the world." And somebody replied in a letter: "I don't think he understands. He only finished as high as he did because each nation is limited to just three athletes. He probably wouldn't be the 25th fastest guy in Kenya."

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    If Ritz Were Kenyan

    If Ritz were Kenyan, he may have never run on the NCAA level, thus precluding any of us from seeing him on the college scene.

    Leave a comment:


  • KevinM
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    Maybe I did not make it clear enough, I have. No
    >one was trying to make any excuses for Ritz, yet it is fairly certain that we
    >will not see Cheseret racing in Athens this summer.

    And if Ritz were Kenyan, you wouldn't see him in Athens either.

    Leave a comment:


  • trackstar
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    Actually, for races 400 or longer, I think the conversion is .14, not .24.

    I did better on the men's 4x4: I was only .03 off.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    My math is fine: my typing just sucked! The original transposed a 1 and a 2.

    Leave a comment:


  • Midwest
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    Realist, you might want to check your math.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    >>These definitely are not perfect -- I was a bit off my total
    >time, as I timed him in 13:51.9, and his actual time was 13:52.13.>>

    Hmm, let me see. Since the 5K start is far-removed from the finish line, the "official" hand-to-auto rule of 0.24 seconds would apply. You got 13:51.9, plus 0.24 = 13:52.14.

    Get rid of that 0.24 anticipation factor at the finish line and you'll be one kick-ass timer! (This meant as a compliment actually: you just haven't applied the proper reaction-timing coefficent to your timing methodology)

    Leave a comment:


  • gr@sshopper
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    >He lost.
    >Accept it.

    Maybe I did not make it clear enough, I have. No one was trying to make any excuses for Ritz, yet it is fairly certain that we will not see Cheseret racing in Athens this summer.

    Leave a comment:


  • KevinM
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    >Not to take anything away from Cheseret, to win in that kind of scenario takes
    >major stones, but Ritz was probably running conservatively hard because he has
    >much bigger fish to fry coming up in Sacramento. If he was ending his season
    >that night, or at least much sooner than the Olympics, then there is little
    >doubt that he would have run a lot faster in Austin.

    He lost. Accept it. Cheseret, by the way, has a PR that is 5 seconds faster than Ritz, so it's arguable as to whether Ritz should truly have been the fave. Either way, he stepped to the line, is fit (as indicated by his 10k ACR), and is a fierce competitor. I'm sure he's not making excuses.

    Leave a comment:


  • trackstar
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    Ritz splitz:

    These definitely are not perfect -- I was a bit off my total time, as I timed him in 13:51.9, and his actual time was 13:52.13. Also, the first and second splits are iffy, as I was having trouble spotting him in the pack on lap one, and just pressed my split button when the middle of the pack passed by the line.

    1 - 67.0
    2 - 70.0
    3 - 68.0
    4 - 66.5
    5 - 65.9
    6 - 66.1
    7 - 67.0
    8 - 67.4
    9 - 67.2
    10 - 66.8
    11 - 65.7
    12 - 62.6
    last lap: 63.7
    last 200: 32.7

    Leave a comment:


  • trackstar
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    > Need to
    >clarify that running 66-67 sec 400's in the 5k isn't throwing down. That's only
    >about 14min pace. Not even enough to get you into the meet. If anyone has
    >spilts please post them. I'm curious if he wasn't running faster 4's.

    I do have splits and I'll post them when I get a chance. But you have to understand, the heat and humidity were awful. I promise you, under the conditions, it was indeed "throwing down." There was no pack at that pace, the field was totally strung out behind him. I'd say that if you had, say, Northern Californian or European-like weather, this race was worth a sub-13:30.

    Leave a comment:


  • gr@sshopper
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    Not to take anything away from Cheseret, to win in that kind of scenario takes major stones, but Ritz was probably running conservatively hard because he has much bigger fish to fry coming up in Sacramento. If he was ending his season that night, or at least much sooner than the Olympics, then there is little doubt that he would have run a lot faster in Austin.

    Leave a comment:


  • Since 1956
    replied
    Re: Cheseret is awesome!

    Yes, I was surprised Ritz lost--especially in a "slowish" time. Of course, depending on what the heat and humidity was, that may not be considered slowish.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X