Men's 4 x4 "B" Team 2:57.77

They can only make two replacements.

Lewis just said this Olympics they can change the whole team.

3Mason wrote:

They can only make two replacements.

new rules

Why run Kerley who has run no 400's, Ross is fresh after his mistake in the rounds

dave_onthebrink wrote:

Why run Kerley who has run no 400's, Ross is fresh after his mistake in the rounds

Again, for the 50th time Kerley ran two 400's as recently as June. He's run 43.64 is a championship medalist at the distance and people question this?

Very tough to run hard 400's on back to back days, Regarding the B team.

In the final run Norwood, Norman, Cherry and Benjamin. 2:55.50

Is Trey Okay? wrote:

dave_onthebrink wrote:

Why run Kerley who has run no 400's, Ross is fresh after his mistake in the rounds

Again, for the 50th time Kerley ran two 400's as recently as June. He's run 43.64 is a championship medalist at the distance and people question this?

Very tough to run hard 400's on back to back days, Regarding the B team.

I will concede that Wil London is a good possibility instead of Kerley. He's very competent.

I guess Belgium hasn't run out of Borlees yet. Or they keep making more of them.

Running Kerley would be absolutely awful. He would get smoked. They have a certain victory with the Rai-Norman- Cherry and anyone from today's team. Unless you have been at the track and know that Kerley has been training for 400s. Running a 400 2 months ago is completely meaningless, even if you used to be fast. Heck, Ross ran 43.75 in the open 2 months ago and can't even touch that and he has been training for 400s. But you think Kerley is literally defying physiology and can maintain 400 endurance with no training for 2 months?

Looking good so far. Go USA!

3Mason wrote:

They can only make two replacements.

Wrong.

Dutch Sprinter wrote:

Running Kerley would be absolutely awful. He would get smoked. They have a certain victory with the Rai-Norman- Cherry and anyone from today's team. Unless you have been at the track and know that Kerley has been training for 400s. Running a 400 2 months ago is completely meaningless, even if you used to be fast. Heck, Ross ran 43.75 in the open 2 months ago and can't even touch that and he has been training for 400s. But you think Kerley is literally defying physiology and can maintain 400 endurance with no training for 2 months?

You don't know what you're talking about. You absolutely can maintain 400 distance even while training for the 200 which is what Kerley has been doing. FloJo hadn't run a 400 in years in 1988 and she anchored in sub 49.

You're a sprinter? You don't know dick.

It's unreal. Literally weeks ago people we're saying Kerley is throwing away his chance at a medal in the 400 . Now the narrative is he couldn't put together a legitimate relay performance?

Nope. You can't. He was t training for the 200 for past 5 weeks. There is no part of 100 training that involves endurance training. Or aerobic training. People were saying Kerley threw away his chance to medal in the 400, of course under a scenario where he trained for the 400.

Even if he trained for the 200, it is vastly vastly different than running 500 repeats in practice. You can throw insults, which is usually resorted for someone who can't actually make an argument. You are just saying "he can do it because he can do it." I'm saying no, elite athletes have to train for their events, and 400 training in very little ways overlaps with 100 training. Nothing in 100, or 200 training prepared an endurance system and lactic acid. At the University I ran for, they gave us a getting out of shape chart. It meant that if you weren't training for an event, how long would it take before you lost your training. After 4 weeks of not training for event, you will have lost 60% your peak fitness (assuming that's where you started). After just one week, you would lost about 20% of your fitness.

You can keep up with insults or your anecdotal experience, but I'm telling you this is a scientific fact. If Kerley were to run it, that means he has been training for it this whole time, which neither of us knows whether he had it hasn't.

Sorry, bud, but you're off base here. It has been shown repeatedly that sprinters who have never run a 500 in practice can drop a fast 4x4 split. I have zero doubt that Kerley could run a great leg right now.

Surprisingly Kerley did not look good in 200 m at US trials. Holloway in college routinely ran good 4x4 legs.

If the first three do their job a sub 45.5 carry from Kerley, Holloway or Norwood gets it done. I saw Cherry's post-400 interview yesterday and thought he had a great attitude. Tons of faith in him. And for Rai the same. Cherry said he and his teammates will help pick Norman up, this is his time for redemption.

If he can, then he has been training for it, which is fine! But this argument that you can run a 44 flat without 400 training in 2 months is silly. And as so many in this board know, 100-200 training, especially close to the Olympics, isn't similar to 400 training.

But you had a near 44 flat from Deadmon today....seems like a safe bet.