Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 154
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #81
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,563
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    Poland's male 2nd leg didn't create a big enough lead because it was too easy for him running by himself against all the women. For MMFF to work well, they'd need another team doing the same thing so the two 2nd leg men would push each other to a bigger lead ahead of the women. But they can't control what order other teams choose.
    If you don't have runners who can time trial (run fast all alone), you should just use the same order as all the rest of the teams. What I like about Poland's strategy is that it can cause undisciplined runners from the other teams to go out to hard chasing them, which is what Michael Cherry admitted he did in the post-race interview.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #82
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,563
    Quote Originally Posted by americantrackfan View Post
    overall a silly event, not really sure what the point is besides a free gold for the US and being able to say there was a WR set.
    What about creating a medal opportunity Bahrain, which has no chance in the single-sex relays?
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #83
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzcyclist View Post
    What about creating a medal opportunity Bahrain, which has no chance in the single-sex relays?
    So, all that nonsense just for a Bahrain type?

    To satiate a Bahrain type nation, can't we just do either a same gender sprint medley (200-200-400-800) or distance medley (1200-400-800-1600)?
    Last edited by OneWay; 09-29-2019 at 09:58 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,594
    I was neutral about this new event and waited to see how it would play out.
    As I suspected long ago most teams would go MFFM, it is the only way to go , IMO.
    But, as I learned today, an entire new squad could run today, not just the usual two subs
    allowed. The US, I bet, was the only squad to replace all four runners, which gives a
    Competitive advantage to large teams, i.e. the US. And as GH noted elsewhere just a gift wrapped 8 more medals for US athletes.
    I won't waste any more of my time on this joke of an event.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,563
    Quote Originally Posted by OneWay View Post
    To satiate a Bahrain type nation, can't we just do either a same gender sprint medley (200-200-400-800) or distance medley (1200-400-800-1600)?
    How is any nation lacking in depth any more likely to medal in those events than it is in the single-sex 4x400? It makes no sense.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,563
    Quote Originally Posted by DJG View Post
    I was neutral about this new event and waited to see how it would play out.
    As I suspected long ago most teams would go MFFM, it is the only way to go , IMO.
    But, as I learned today, an entire new squad could run today, not just the usual two subs
    allowed. The US, I bet, was the only squad to replace all four runners, which gives a
    Competitive advantage to large teams, i.e. the US. And as GH noted elsewhere just a gift wrapped 8 more medals for US athletes.
    I won't waste any more of my time on this joke of an event.
    You have a point. If the IAAF really wants to help small nations, it should run this event on the 2nd weekend along with the other 4x400's, and limit teams to two substitutions in the final. If they did that, even the U.S. would have to make decisions which require some thought, while small nations could put all their chips on the mixed 4x400 relay table.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,698
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiederganger View Post
    It's totally contradictory for the IAAF to ban DSD athletes on the basis of 'protecting women's athletics' and then have a mixed 4x4 that allows men and women to run against each other.
    I see it the opposite way. By demonstrating how men can obliterate women, it emphasizes the importance of keeping male DNA and male T-levels out of women's events.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    16,091
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    I see it the opposite way. By demonstrating how men can obliterate women, it emphasizes the importance of keeping male DNA and male T-levels out of women's events.
    Good point!
    Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by DJG View Post
    I was neutral about this new event and waited to see how it would play out.
    As I suspected long ago most teams would go MFFM, it is the only way to go , IMO.
    But, as I learned today, an entire new squad could run today, not just the usual two subs
    allowed. The US, I bet, was the only squad to replace all four runners, which gives a
    Competitive advantage to large teams, i.e. the US. And as GH noted elsewhere just a gift wrapped 8 more medals for US athletes.
    I won't waste any more of my time on this joke of an event.
    don't you just love how all the non athletes can't stopping ripping this event...ask athletes how they feel about the event.I say keep it and add 1 or 2 more relays for OGs
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Powell View Post
    Good point!
    agree with 18.99
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •