Good read - thanks.
Good read - thanks.
Hopeful Runner wrote:
Good read - thanks.
What he said.
Diggity Dawg wrote:
Wow that is one smart race director. Seems to be way ahead of the curve. So much for the myth of the "trampoline track".
rojo wrote:I talked to him about Monaco at the cocktail party I was at this weekend. I forgot how it came up. Maybe because the groom at the wedding once rabbitted Willis and I was complaining about how bad the rabbits are at most meets. I said, "Why don'tmeet directors simply hire someone to stand on the track at the 100m mark, 200m, 300 m mark so we get a perfect rabbit job?"
Anyway, he said one of the reasons why Monaco is so fast is because the meet director really does a great job on it. In addition to assembling a great job and hiring two or three rabbits, he also pays a racer to go with the rabbits. Becuase is no one goes with the rabbits, you won't get a fast time. So Tim C gets paid and everyone has the opportunity to run fast.
He also said the meet director is smart as he puts starts the big guns and guys who will get out fast (like Kiprop) next to guys who are likely to be slow starters (like maybe Gregson or Willis) so the big guns don't have to waste energy getting off the line.
Little details matter.
Willis also said he thought the DL format hurts the milers. Milers would probably make more money if the meet didn't have to pay out equal money for events that have little commercial appeal.
I agree with the apparent sarcasm, all race directors try pretty hard to get runners to go fast. If you're already paying people appearance money to show up and run fast for you, and then you pay one of them extra to make sure they actually do it, you're a sucker. Just don't invite them back next year if they sandbag.
What he said before about warmups doesn't ring true either. If that's worth 3 seconds, as Monaco is for so many, then they'd find a way to warm up that well everywhere.
If it's not a well-tuned bounce effect, it's a combo of the longer turns and lack of wind.
I was not being sarcastic. Race management is an ecosystem phenomenon, and that race director clearly takes the details seriously. I have long been frustrated by idiotic setups like Hayward filed with it's wind-funnel backstraight and tailwind-blocking front straight.
What is the director at Hayward supposed to do about the wind?
And how does every other RD take the details a full 3 seconds slower than Monaco's does?
Interesting read,not a lot that was totally new but Willis confirms what he has already said about his approach to 1500 running in both races and training. If there was a single word that summed up his approach it would have to be "moderation". This no doubt explains his very lengthy career at the sport's highest levels.
But, just a thought, has he ever won a major title? his approach to racing, lay well back in the field and make your big move in the last 400, has brought him medals - but not golds. It has always struck me that in major finals this was what he was aiming for; a medal rather than the win. His praise of Jenny Simpson, who seemed to adopt the same approach in London, says the same thing about him. In the women's 1500 Hassan at least made a bold effort to win the damn race rather than run for a medal. Isn't this approach to be commended rather more than Willis' more conservative strategy?
Commended when it works, when it doesn't you are simply losing. Making a stupid move in a race is always stupid and should never be seen as being brave or smart. Willis and Simpson have decided that is the way to run their best races. Occasionally they win races that way but often place high in championships. If either did better in Time Trial type races I bet they might try a different strategy.
Bad Wigins wrote:
What is the director at Hayward supposed to do about the wind?
And how does every other RD take the details a full 3 seconds slower than Monaco's does?
People it's not that hard. Monaco has good conditions, the race directors cares a lot about the 1500 and here is the most important factor - it's held at the perfect time of year. It's a huge advantage to be mid-July.
You're shocked that guys can run 3 seconds faster in mid-July than they can 6 weeks earlier in late May at Pre? Why? Pre is full of 3:48-349 performances.
Fact: 23 guys have broken 350 at Pre. A 3:50 mile is equal to like a 3:32.9 1500. If the conditions are worth a second and six weeks later worth another 2 it makes sense.
MrGambinus wrote:
And Asbel Kiprop seems to be a little bit lazy.
He does. I think because in the past, by his own admission, he'd compete and win whilst 70-80% fit, he took it for granted and didn't work as hard. Hopefully this season was a wake up call and he still has a few years of running in those skinny daddy long legs.
He won a competitive Commonwealth Games gold- not quite a world champs, but decent. Jim Ryun never won a major gold, but is regarded as one of the GOATs by most.Certainly I would put his career above Alan Webb's, and Alan had more talent.
mark b wrote:
Interesting read,not a lot that was totally new but Willis confirms what he has already said about his approach to 1500 running in both races and training. If there was a single word that summed up his approach it would have to be "moderation". This no doubt explains his very lengthy career at the sport's highest levels.
But, just a thought, has he ever won a major title? his approach to racing, lay well back in the field and make your big move in the last 400, has brought him medals - but not golds. It has always struck me that in major finals this was what he was aiming for; a medal rather than the win. His praise of Jenny Simpson, who seemed to adopt the same approach in London, says the same thing about him. In the women's 1500 Hassan at least made a bold effort to win the damn race rather than run for a medal. Isn't this approach to be commended rather more than Willis' more conservative strategy?
mark b wrote:
But, just a thought, has he ever won a major title? his approach to racing, lay well back in the field and make your big move in the last 400, has brought him medals - but not golds. It has always struck me that in major finals this was what he was aiming for; a medal rather than the win. His praise of Jenny Simpson, who seemed to adopt the same approach in London, says the same thing about him.
I get what you are saying and that's one reason why Webb still has special memories for me. When he was on fire 10 years ago in 2007, it seemed to be the one year in my adult life that there was a US born runner who could beat everyone in the world in his event when he was on. Now, clearly that didn't happen at Worlds an most importantly, it may have only been true as it was a down year for the 1500 with only one other guy under 3:31.00. If there had been a bunch of 328 guys, it would have been a different story.
But the criticism of running for a medal versus running up front is not good in my opinion. Willis gets to the finish line as fast as he can. He learned early on you can't force it.
The idea that you can force it "and run to win" isn't really true. If that's true, why didn't you win your state title in HS? It's not a matter of willpower.
You are aware of the fact that SImpson won a gold medal one year right?
mark b wrote:
Interesting read,not a lot that was totally new but Willis confirms what he has already said about his approach to 1500 running in both races and training. If there was a single word that summed up his approach it would have to be "moderation". This no doubt explains his very lengthy career at the sport's highest levels.
But, just a thought, has he ever won a major title? his approach to racing, lay well back in the field and make your big move in the last 400, has brought him medals - but not golds. It has always struck me that in major finals this was what he was aiming for; a medal rather than the win. His praise of Jenny Simpson, who seemed to adopt the same approach in London, says the same thing about him. In the women's 1500 Hassan at least made a bold effort to win the damn race rather than run for a medal. Isn't this approach to be commended rather more than Willis' more conservative strategy?
You must be a big fan of Laura Muir.
For most runners, if you don't have a realistic chance of gold it makes more sense to run for another medal than to end up 6th or 7th. Running is not purely a business, but runners have to eat and support their families. Going for a higher percentage bronze or silver vs. a lower percentage gold is a perfectly reasonable choice.
The irony is that in 2012 Willis was on fire heading into London so everyone expected him to go for the win since he had already won a medal in 2008. And by pushing for that he didn't run his normal race. In fact Manzano ran Willis's normal race and that's how he won the silver. Willis was working hard in the front end of the pack using energy to stay near the front instead of relaxing early and moving the second half. If he had run like normal then he'd possibly have three Olympic 1500m medals instead of two.
Thanks for the article.
Erratum on content: not the 3 fastest non-African.
I have for sure Cramm, Cacho, and Baala ðŸ‘ðŸ¼
Semi McGregor wrote:
Thanks for the article.
Erratum on content: not the 3 fastest non-African.
I have for sure Cramm, Cacho, and Baala ðŸ‘ðŸ¼
Cram's PR is 3:29.67. Willis' is 3:29.66.
Jonathan Gault wrote:
Semi McGregor wrote:Thanks for the article.
Erratum on content: not the 3 fastest non-African.
I have for sure Cramm, Cacho, and Baala ðŸ‘ðŸ¼
Cram's PR is 3:29.67. Willis' is 3:29.66.
You beat me to it. Also, the only non-African sub 3:30 in the ABP era (I think) which it more important.
Nick Willis Training Program – The Road to Athens
https://www.runnerprogram.com/product/nick-willis-training-road-athens/
Great stuff from a great human being. (Not you Gault!) Willis is easy to root for.
rojo wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:What is the director at Hayward supposed to do about the wind?
And how does every other RD take the details a full 3 seconds slower than Monaco's does?
People it's not that hard. Monaco has good conditions, the race directors cares a lot about the 1500 and here is the most important factor - it's held at the perfect time of year. It's a huge advantage to be mid-July.
You're shocked that guys can run 3 seconds faster in mid-July than they can 6 weeks earlier in late May at Pre? Why? Pre is full of 3:48-349 performances.
Fact: 23 guys have broken 350 at Pre. A 3:50 mile is equal to like a 3:32.9 1500. If the conditions are worth a second and six weeks later worth another 2 it makes sense.
If they are out of shape in Eugene, why do they nearly always run faster two weeks earlier in Doha? Usually much faster - multiple 3:29's in both 2012 and 2014.
Monaco isn't run in a vacuum either. The times there are about 3 seconds faster, for almost all runners, than Paris, Oslo, Lausanne, Lucerne, London, Rome, Stockholm, Berlin, and even Zurich and Brussels which are closer to when athletes aim to peak most years. That's a lot of meet directors who are 3 seconds less fanatic about fast races than Monaco's.
I say wide bends, no wind and maybe tuned springs.
Bad Wigins wrote:
rojo wrote:People it's not that hard. Monaco has good conditions, the race directors cares a lot about the 1500 and here is the most important factor - it's held at the perfect time of year. It's a huge advantage to be mid-July.
You're shocked that guys can run 3 seconds faster in mid-July than they can 6 weeks earlier in late May at Pre? Why? Pre is full of 3:48-349 performances.
Fact: 23 guys have broken 350 at Pre. A 3:50 mile is equal to like a 3:32.9 1500. If the conditions are worth a second and six weeks later worth another 2 it makes sense.
If they are out of shape in Eugene, why do they nearly always run faster two weeks earlier in Doha? Usually much faster - multiple 3:29's in both 2012 and 2014.
⤴funny, I was just reading something the other day that someone claims Doha is a really hard track (and no wind ???).