Taoufik Makhloufi NOT Competing in Moscow

Can someone clarify what it is about skipping Worlds and running in Zurich that looks bad? I don't get it. Thanks.

clarified wrote:

Saving himself for Zurich apparently.

agreed. that was a good one

killarney wrote:Still, it's not totally unreasonable to me that he was perfectly peaked in 3:29 shape and no one else was healthy and better than 3:32 shape...

there's nothing 3'29 about his peak form last year

he's a 1500 guy who also ran 800

he ran an outrageous 800 after games :

dead last at 190m, running in lane 2, about 26-flat at 200 & then charging off like kirani, reaching bell in ~ mid-50

that's a mid-24 there, running wide !

he keeps going with aman gritting his teeth to stay with him & just holds him off in the stretch

aman soon after ran a 1'42.5 beating rudy on a wet & cold zurich night, probably worth low-1'42, maybe even 1'42-flat in good conditions

that has to give maloofi something like mid-1'42 ability that day

in games, i have no doubt he had 1'42.5 ability

with expected speed of 46.5 - 47.5, his potential in london couda been

1'42.5 with

46.50 ->2'11.95 , 3'28.34

46.75 ->2'11.75 , 3'27.49

47.00 ->2'11.55 , 3'26.64

47.25 ->2'11.34 , 3'25.79

47.50 ->2'11.14 , 3'24.94

an experienced eye indicates i'd go for the middle line as prelim

think more of a 3'26 calibre guy...

800 dude wrote:

Leo got silver because Makhloufi obliterated the rest of the field that tried to go with him. That just doesn't happen at 300 meters out in the 1500. You have guys that make moves and are able to hang on for the win, but you don't have people who are able to break a world class field and seal a win all in the first 150 meters of a 300 meter kick. The race was over before the home stretch.

Please watch 1964 Olympic 1500m final on youtube.

This comment shows how little you know about this event.

I would rebut and say over the course of history have you ever seen somebody so easily destroy what should be (quad-annually) the best field in the event they way he did? The final was a total non event. He ran from 300m to go to 100m to go in 25.2 seconds and basically free-wheeled up the straight.

No one in history has ever had the talent to do that in an Olympic final - not Coe, not El G no one. The only guy comparable is Rashid Ramzi - same career progression, same shi$$y running form and insufferable idjits like yourself had the same politically correct opinion about him when he robbed the sport in 2004 and 2005.

Now go away.

AKMarmoset wrote:

Or perhaps like at least one dominant U.S. road racer, steer clear of championships but find domestic races with big cash prizes and probably no drug-testing infrastructure?

Who's that? Someone help me out. Hall?

Makh does move very swiftly through the field during that 2nd 200, coming from a strung out 2nd to last up to not far from the front. But you don't have the #'s to figure a 3:26, because you don't have either a 400m or a higher figure other than 800m--a time not that great 1:43.7--and actual 1500m over 3:30. It may be that he had sub 1:43 with better tactics, but so did Cram, Coe, and even Webb had 1:43.84-winning and getting injured in that very race-and probably with health could have gone faster. Yet, those guys weren't any better than 3:29 mid or slower. I can't say that he ever looks like he is trying very hard.

(1) It's 1964. You've got significantly less depth, and you also have one of the greatest middle distance runners of all time, who would still be world class today.

(2) Snell didn't break the field. He made a move and nobody went with him. Now, you can say this means that he would've broken them had they tried to cover, which is fair. But I think a major distinction is that nobody tried to go with him because people weren't surprised. Everyone knew they were racing for silver after he went. In 2012, you've got guys going with Makhloufi who aren't able to stay with him for even half the distance. And it's not like in some races where he got the jump on them and they were trying to play catch-up. They saw him move, they covered the move, and they fell apart almost immediately from the effort.

Just think to your own running experience. I've been in tactical races over 1500, 3000, and 5000, where the winners were guys who were in another class from me. I'm talking guys who can run 2 seconds or more per lap faster at PR pace. Yet in the bell lap, these guys never open up daylight on me until the home stretch. For me to tie up 200 meters out while they push through, I would have to be ridiculously weak aerobically compared to them, because the tying up comes from being too anaerobic too early.

philemon rippersnitch wrote:

This comment shows how little you know about this event.

I would rebut and say over the course of history have you ever seen somebody so easily destroy what should be (quad-annually) the best field in the event they way he did?

Keyword "SUPPOSED" to be. It wasn't. Chibesa, Kiprop, and Kiplagat were all clearly not in form. Willis peaked way too early and may have been dealing with an injury. The rest were simply in ~3 seconds slower of shape than Makh and he beat them comfortably.

The final was a total non event. He ran from 300m to go to 100m to go in 25.2 seconds and basically free-wheeled up the straight.

Is this a joke? El G close his 1500 in 2004 FASTER, after an even faster penultimate lap. The only difference was he had Lagat on his back. Tactics are overrated when you're the best guy in the field.

The major problem with your opionion is, if a healthy Kiprop were in the field he could have stayed right with Makhloufi, and we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Your argument basically hinges on what the rest of the field did rather than on what he did.

youre outta your mind. this guy didn't pass the smell test of many of the top 1500 runners in the world and for very understandable reasons.

when you come from nowhere to crushing the best in the world to spotty performances after the fact your should be raising some very high red flags. watching his final felt like watching the old caster.

smell tester wrote:

when you come from nowhere to crushing the best in the world to spotty performances after the fact your should be raising some very high red flags. watching his final felt like watching the old caster.

I'm confused, were we talking about Makhloufi, or about Leo Manzano and Matthew Centrowitz?

smell tester wrote:

when you come from nowhere to crushing the best in the world

Which best guys in the world did he crush again? He lost to Kiprop, Nick Willis, Chepseba, and Amine Lalou at Monaco. Those were the best in the world. Lalou got busted before the Olympics, then Kiprop, Chepseba, and Willis took the last three spots in the final because they clearly weren't healthy so he didn't have to worry about them. He was not the fastest in the world last year, not even close, he was just the fastest on the right day.

Maybe he's really sick because he's viraling off greens. That way they can't detect them because the traits are locked in. Maybe we'll see another Bernard Lagat- still doing well in his late 30s.

Thumbs up to you if you get this reference!

Makhloufi reportedly has been suffering from Hepatitis A.

jjjjjjjjj wrote:Makh does move very swiftly through the field during that 2nd 200, coming from a strung out 2nd to last up to not far from the front. But you don't have the #'s to figure a 3:26, because you don't have either a 400m or a higher figure other than 800m--a time not that great 1:43.7--and actual 1500m over 3:30. It may be that he had sub 1:43 with better tactics, but so did Cram, Coe, and even Webb had 1:43.84-winning and getting injured in that very race-and probably with health could have gone faster. Yet, those guys weren't any better than 3:29 mid or slower. I can't say that he ever looks like he is trying very hard.

watch it closely

he runs a lotta extra distance in that 800

as they approach the 200, aman is already in lane 1 at 19.9s whereas maloofi is still in lane 3 !

probably close to 1m extra there

he runs that bend in lane 2 all the way ( on edge of line in straight )

that's ~ 3.14 * 1.0 minimum = 3.14m

i'd go more like 4m as he looks from side-on as being well in lane 2 for part of it

i'd add 5m extra run for that lap

he runs from bell to ~ 450 well in lane 2

that's an extra

~ 3.14 * 1.2 * 0.5 = 1.9m

call it 2m as he's still on 2nd lane line at ~ 450m before fully cutting in

then on final bend, last ~ 40m he's running in lane 2 to pass duane !

that's an extra

~ 3.14 * 1.2 * 0.4 = 1.5m

he ran a total extra of

~ 1 + 4 + 2 + 1.5 = 8.5m

meaning

~ 808.5m in 1'43.71

-> for 800 :

1'42.6

caveats :

- had drafting on 2nd lap but bugger all on 1st as he's running wide all of it - got nothing overall ( probable a coupla tenths detriment )

- wild distribution of energy in starting so slow & charging off like newhouse in '76

1'42.6 is bare worst he can be offered that run from extra distance

from wild pace distribution, you gotta offer him at least 2 or 3 tenths off that & probably coupla tenths for lack of overall drafting

he was very likely if that was "perfect" tt set up for him & ideally run

1'42.1/1'42.2

that is for a primary 1500 guy who runs 800 of it

try again 3'26 potential in london...

( incidentally, his line of fit to me looks increasingly like noah '99 when running

2'11.9wr ( terrible paced raced & unrested ) / 3'43

noah had very likely slightly better 800 speed but inferior over-1500 endurance, but their crossing point of ~ 3'26 wouda very likely coincided )

Ventolin - regardless of whether people believe the 3:26 number or not, how does this compare to the form of other athletes (at any moment) in the past 10 years or so? Is it reasonable to think Makh's domination is due to an unusually weak/unhealthy field rather than Makh being an outlier?

asbel maybe been good for mid-3'27, silas for 3'28-flat, nixon looking at 3'29-flat if all peaked/healthy for london

maloofi wouda blown them all away

that 800 shows ~ 1'42-flat ability

no one in 1500 brought that to the table

you don't possess that without some awesome 400 simultaneous

he'd have destroyed them long way out or short

i only saw briefly highlight of ramzi's 3'29-flat ( missed the satellite & pulled from youtube ) but he ran that off ludicrous start

he was in something like 3'26/3'27 shape that day from what others have speculated

So Ventolin has turned Makhloufi into a 3:26 guy. This is all very entertaining, but it really has no basis in reality. Makhloufi is a 3:30 runner who managed to beat a weakened field in which Leo Manzano got the silver. That is all...Maybe Makhloufi was in 3:29 shape in London. Maybe...

philemon rippersnitch wrote:

This comment shows how little you know about this event.

I would rebut and say over the course of history have you ever seen somebody so easily destroy what should be (quad-annually) the best field in the event they way he did? The final was a total non event. He ran from 300m to go to 100m to go in 25.2 seconds and basically free-wheeled up the straight.

No one in history has ever had the talent to do that in an Olympic final - not Coe, not El G no one. The only guy comparable is Rashid Ramzi - same career progression, same shi$$y running form and insufferable idjits like yourself had the same politically correct opinion about him when he robbed the sport in 2004 and 2005.

Now go away.

That's not true.

Makhloufi ran the 200m stretch from 300 out to 100 out in 25.3. He couldn't sustain that burst and slowed in the straight to 14.0. O.K., he eased a little in the last 20m, but he was slowing down all the time in the last 100.

In the 91 Worlds, Morceli ran that same 200m stretch in 25.4 (just 0.1 slower), in what was an overall faster time of 3:32.85, and he didn't slow as much in the last 100m, 13.4. Morceli's last 800 in that race was 1:50.1, compared to Makhloufi's 1:50.2.

In the 92 Olympics, Cacho ran that same 200m stretch in 24.6! His last 100 was also much quicker, 12.8, as was his last 800, 1:48.5.

And to be honest, it doesn't really matter whether the burst is from 300-100 out, 400-200 out. or 200 to the finish. There are lots of examples of 25.** 200 stretches in the last lap of a major 1500m.

So there are plenty of comparisons to what Makhloufi did. There was nothing out of the ordinary about Makhloufi's run, accept for the fact we had never seen HIM run so well. The rest of the field really ran poor races.

There is nothing to indicate anything better than 3:29 ability there.