Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

the timing of the U.S. selection meet

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #76
    I just sent max Siegel àn email relating to the US performance in Beijing.

    Comment


    • #77
      Am I correct that the interval in 2016 between the Trials and OG is just 33 days?

      Comment


      • #78
        Right. Here's a bold prediction - we do better there than we did here. I know that a regression to the mean is in order, but even if we do NOT do better, USATF still needs to do a thorough re-analysis of EVERYTHING.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by huntinwr View Post
          Am I correct that the interval in 2016 between the Trials and OG is just 33 days?
          Not exactly. Olympic trials July 1-10. Olympic track on Aug 12 - 21

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by donley2 View Post
            Not exactly. Olympic trials July 1-10. Olympic track on Aug 12 - 21
            Closer to 42/43 days.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Atticus View Post
              Right. Here's a bold prediction - we do better there than we did here. I know that a regression to the mean is in order, but even if we do NOT do better, USATF still needs to do a thorough re-analysis of EVERYTHING.
              Of course they should do that every year whether it is a good medal year or a bad one. But aren't we foolish in believing that the incompetent will become competent during a session of soul searching?

              As to regression to the mean, I would guess they do better only because a few fourths should turn into medals and the disasters - LJ and 100h should improve. However, bad stretches like this one - 19-17-17-13-16 - between 1995 and 2003 can happen, too.

              Comment


              • #82
                After reading the debate I have to admit that I'm curious as to whether an earlier or later date for "trials" would result in better performance at a major. I'm all for whatever will result in athletes being at their absolute peak at a major.

                I've never heard that double peaking is a problem, but then again I've never asked the direct question of the right people. I've just grown accustomed to seeing our (Jamaican) athletes do it; peak for "trials" on the same weekend as the USA then peak again for the major two months later. For the most part, with absolutely no research, I can't think of any Jamaican athletes that this has been a problem for. Certainly have not heard any complaints, but again I caveat that by saying that I've never asked the direct question.

                This is intriguing; what is the optimum period of time between a "trials" and a major for peaking purposes? One week? One month? Is it better to ask the athlete, or the coach?
                Regards,
                toyracer

                Comment


                • #83
                  The USA has the concomitant 'problem' that we go into world meets with the most medal favorites and therefore when they bomb, it is more readily apparent, because they leave a more obvious impression.

                  That said, we have more depth too, so you'd think for every Bershawn Jackson/Johnny Dutch or Nelvis/Harper/Harrison/Rollins fiasco there'd be a Cassandra Tate or Emily Infield. Unfortunately there were far more of the former than the latter.

                  USATF simply needs to ASSUME that it's THEIR fault (regardless of the level of culpability), so that improvements can be assessed and implemented where necessary.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Atticus View Post
                    The USA has the concomitant 'problem' that we go into world meets with the most medal favorites and therefore when they bomb, it is more readily apparent, because they leave a more obvious impression.

                    That said, we have more depth too, so you'd think for every Bershawn Jackson/Johnny Dutch or Nelvis/Harper/Harrison/Rollins fiasco there'd be a Cassandra Tate or Emily Infield. Unfortunately there were far more of the former than the latter.

                    USATF simply needs to ASSUME that it's THEIR fault (regardless of the level of culpability), so that improvements can be assessed and implemented where necessary.
                    That would a break through for usatf to admit anything like that. It is easy to blame the individual athletes and coaches. For next year the USOT are much closer to the Olympics than the usatf was to the worlds this year (5-6 weeks) so maybe that would help some and the "prestige of the Olympic Games" would be enough to motivate more athletes. I am sure usatf is banking on those two factors but it doesn't seem that any change is in store unless the us team underperforms next year too!

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by tm71 View Post
                      That would a break through for usatf to admit anything like that.
                      Now compare that to MLB (Sabermetrics) and the NFL's endless analyses - from breaking down every play on film - to the time of the shuttle test at the Combine, both of which leave no stone unturned in their quest for the Trophy!

                      The USATF's way is no way to conduct the business of a professionally-run corporation . . . oh . . . I think I just stumbled across the problem . . .
                      [big rolly eyes].

                      I'm pretty sure I would have not made it to Commander in the Navy had I conducted the Navy's business as USATF does. Or even made it to my 25th year of teaching!

                      A good organization is PRO-active. They are not even RE-active. Sigh.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Atticus View Post
                        Now compare that to MLB (Sabermetrics) and the NFL's endless analyses - from breaking down every play on film - to the time of the shuttle test at the Combine, both of which leave no stone unturned in their quest for the Trophy!

                        The USATF's way is no way to conduct the business of a professionally-run corporation . . . oh . . . I think I just stumbled across the problem . . .
                        [big rolly eyes].

                        I'm pretty sure I would have not made it to Commander in the Navy had I conducted the Navy's business as USATF does. Or even made it to my 25th year of teaching!

                        A good organization is PRO-active. They are not even RE-active. Sigh.
                        The NFL and MLB arent using big data and film analysis, the Red Sox and the Raiders are doing that. Your comparison is bit invalid in this case. MLB and the NFL likely have more money to play with than the USATF, too.
                        Last edited by booond; 09-02-2015, 06:53 PM.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X