Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2017 Weltklasse

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by scottmitchell74 View Post
    I noticed that and was wondering, aaronk. But when they showed the replay, it didn't seem to affect placement. I wonder if they would have DQ'ed him if he had literally displaced one of them from the standings?
    He's been DQ'ed!!

    Comment


    • #47
      So I wonder aloud again, how much merit should we give SM-U's win here. This race is anti-climactic for Schippers, and I'm not so sure she should lose traction in the Rankings for this 4th place finish. I understand the Rankings are expressly related to a 'season's' oeuvre, but at some point mustn't the rankers give allowance for the 'significance' (or lack thereof) of a particular meet in the context of Championship season. And yes, I realize there was a lot at stake in this race in this meet, but at some point we must 'forgive' DS for her loss of focus here.

      Comment


      • #48
        Im happy for Makwala, but Im also just a bit bitter that he did not have the focus and discipline in London to deliver a medal. All the stars were aligned and he blew it.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Atticus View Post
          So I wonder aloud again, how much merit should we give SM-U's win here. This race is anti-climactic for Schippers, and I'm not so sure she should lose traction in the Rankings for this 4th place finish. I understand the Rankings are expressly related to a 'season's' oeuvre, but at some point mustn't the rankers give allowance for the 'significance' (or lack thereof) of a particular meet in the context of Championship season. And yes, I realize there was a lot at stake in this race in this meet, but at some point we must 'forgive' DS for her loss of focus here.
          SMU looked so smooth & powerful on the straight that I'm not so sure DS at her best could have beaten her!!
          I think SMU is ready to drop a 21.5 or 21.6!!

          Comment


          • #50
            This new rule that winner of final meet takes the Diamond is just stupid. All the work, consistency in the season doesnt matter. and fluke winners are more likely now.

            Comment


            • #51
              It's not a new rule; it's the old Grand Prix Final/World Athletics Final rule, which they're calling a new rule because "new rule" sounds better than "old recycled rule that was never good in the first place."

              Comment


              • #52
                I was most impressed with Miller-Uibo today. Her equalling her 100m PR in Birmingham suggested she was ready to run something under 22 today, and I figured it'd be good enough to win, but wasn't sure she could run a new PR. Now that she has, I wonder if she can break 49 seconds next week in Brussels. She should at least be in PR shape over the 400m as well. I'm not sure Felix can get close to her in Miller-Uibo's present form, but if the conditions are good, it should be a fast race.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Atticus View Post
                  So I wonder aloud again, how much merit should we give SM-U's win here. This race is anti-climactic for Schippers, and I'm not so sure she should lose traction in the Rankings for this 4th place finish. I understand the Rankings are expressly related to a 'season's' oeuvre, but at some point mustn't the rankers give allowance for the 'significance' (or lack thereof) of a particular meet in the context of Championship season. And yes, I realize there was a lot at stake in this race in this meet, but at some point we must 'forgive' DS for her loss of focus here.
                  I don't know how many factors go into determining the world rankings, but I do know Schippers only beat Miller-Uibo by .1s in London after Miller-Uibo had to endure rounds of the 200 and 400. The other two times they met over the distance, Miller-Uibo defeated her soundly. That makes her the #1 in my book, but let's see what the powers that be say.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by bhall View Post
                    So the shoulder is part of the arm and not the torso?

                    https://livecache.sportresult.com/no...SH_1250040.JPG
                    It is considered part of the arm and not the torso at least in terms of judging track races.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Was a bit disappointed that Coburn was so flat in a race where she could have PRed...was it true she said she was ready to go under 9:00 as said by the commentators? Or was that just hype?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Trickstat View Post
                        It is considered part of the arm and not the torso at least in terms of judging track races.
                        Not exactly. It is a judgement call on where the arm ends and torso begins when the shoulder leads. The reader has to visualize where the acromion process is. As I said, I know the process. I think the photo read is questionable.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Cannon View Post
                          Was a bit disappointed that Coburn was so flat in a race where she could have PRed...was it true she said she was ready to go under 9:00 as said by the commentators? Or was that just hype?
                          There have been a lot of flat performances post WCs.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            W3000 steeple rankings will be interesting.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Any splits for the women's 4x100m? That was pretty quick from Elaine.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by damiansport2 View Post
                                This new rule that winner of final meet takes the Diamond is just stupid. All the work, consistency in the season doesnt matter. and fluke winners are more likely now.
                                True dat. And it encourages those with a few wins early in the season to skip the remaining meets before the final, since at that point they've done enough to qualify for the final and there's no additional benefit to more points.

                                I believe the goal of this new format was to avoid situations where the leading athlete already has enough points to clinch the DL title before the final meet. But this approach takes it to the other extreme, seriously diminishing the importance of the rest of the season.

                                I think a better balance would be to define the overall DL winner as the athlete who has the most points out of the top 3 placers in the final. Thus no matter how many points you have you still have to put in enough effort to be in the top 3, and you also have to take the rest of the season seriously because the point standings will determine whether you need to place 1st, 2nd or 3rd to win the DL trophy.
                                Last edited by 18.99s; 08-25-2017, 01:10 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X