Chicago 2017

talk about news, give advice, ask questions

Moderator: RunniNirvana

Chicago 2017

Postby Narddog » Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:57 am

Pretty terrific race. Galen for the win with a 1:03+ second half and PR of 2:09. Dibaba running a very strong ~2:18 and Jordan Hasay with an American course record and PR of 2:20:58.

I'll admit, I never thought Hasay would have success at this level. There are likely additional factors, but I'll give her credit for working really hard and executing in ways she hasn't since she was a high school miler.
User avatar
Narddog
Marathon Mastermind
 
Posts: 9047
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 9:38 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby RunniNirvana » Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:29 am

As Hasay pointed out, she was almost never lower than fourth in an NCAA championship in college. She may only have two national titles but she was always there.

She could have a solid case for most successful female at the HS, NCAA, and world level when all is said and done. I think Flanagan has that claim now though.
User avatar
RunniNirvana
Board Whore
 
Posts: 14074
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 10:47 pm
Location: Goat City

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby RunniNirvana » Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:32 am

I have very mixed feelings about the American efforts today given the Salazar connection. If not for that, I would root for Hasay unabashedly. How is it that the commentators went through a 3 hour broadcast without mentioning the USADA stuff once?
User avatar
RunniNirvana
Board Whore
 
Posts: 14074
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 10:47 pm
Location: Goat City

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby RunniNirvana » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:18 pm

Siqs, what's it like to watch Jordan now?
User avatar
RunniNirvana
Board Whore
 
Posts: 14074
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 10:47 pm
Location: Goat City

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby bodhisattva » Tue Oct 10, 2017 9:23 am

RunniNirvana wrote:As Hasay pointed out, she was almost never lower than fourth in an NCAA championship in college. She may only have two national titles but she was always there.


I never quite understood the argument that she had passed her peak in college/on the track as a pro. That is in large part probably because I wasn't following the sport yet when she was a high school stud, so I didn't see any fall from grace. But, in my time following the sport she still WON NCAA titles (and more importantly was rarely out of contention) and was 2nd in the 10K at USA's in 2013/2014. Then she got injured. Now she's really good at the marathon.

I've always been a staunch NOP apologist. I really want to believe, and I really like seeing American's win on the international level.

Doping aside, running isn't meritocratic. That much was clear from four years at Haverford. When Rupp won, I was viscerally excited for a couple seconds, and gleefully told the friends I was with, who know and care nothing about running. It sucks that that excitement was almost immediately followed by wondering if he was doping. But, I guess I'll hold onto that excitement for as long as I can.
bodhisattva
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:23 pm

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby Juan » Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:58 am

Doping aside, running isn't meritocratic.


You mean because of variations in innate talent? Hard work doesn't always prevail?
User avatar
Juan
 
Posts: 3051
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:18 pm

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby The Burmeister » Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:26 pm

Juan wrote:
Doping aside, running isn't meritocratic.


You mean because of variations in innate talent? Hard work doesn't always prevail?


bodhisattva wrote:That much was clear from four years at Haverford.


I think he's alluding to the massive amounts of doping that we did at Haverford.
User avatar
The Burmeister
 
Posts: 922
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 12:08 am

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby Narddog » Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:29 pm

Juan wrote:
Doping aside, running isn't meritocratic.


You mean because of variations in innate talent? Hard work doesn't always prevail?


Questions the guy who basically took a year off and subsequently ran one of that year's fastest 100mi performances.
User avatar
Narddog
Marathon Mastermind
 
Posts: 9047
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 9:38 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby Juan » Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:55 am

I wasn't skeptical of the claim he was making. Just trying to clarify what it means to say running isn't meritocratic. Meritocracy as a system that rewards ability is one way of thinking about it, with ability being a combination of in-born talent and cultivated skill. In that case it's totally meritocratic and pretty purely so. Whoever gets to the line first is clearly the more able one. Unlike in ball sports, there is less of a chance for randomness, the ball hitting a weird bump in the ground and getting past a player, etc.

But if you think of meritocracy as more a system that rewards those who deserve recognition, in the more moral sense of merit being tied to one's effort, commitment, and character, then it's probably not meritocratic because somebody without the right genetics is unlikely to catch somebody born to be a world class athlete, no matter how much work they put in.

But I think the real measure of excellence in running is actually found in each person's ability to max out their own potential and at Haverford that idea is pretty well represented in the size of the team and the attention paid to all the runners.

Greater attention in the sport goes to the faster people because it's hard, from a distance, to see the drama of particular runner's training and racing unfolding as an expression of character, hard work, and self-realization. So you take the people who seem to have risen to the top of some arbitrary categorization (D3, D1, women, men) and assume that there is a general parity of talent there, and what mostly is going on in the race is a battle of skill and will. The fact that anybody cares about any competition other than Worlds and Olympics would seem to suggest that the philosophical heart of running is actually in that notion of merit as more about character and self-realization. The talent portion is just an arbitrary genetic lottery, there's no drama or excellence there. It's just a starting point that helps determine your eventual grouping for competition. Once you're in a grouping that's decently fair for your talent, that's where things really start to matter.
User avatar
Juan
 
Posts: 3051
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:18 pm

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby slopoke » Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:52 pm

RunniNirvana wrote:Siqs, what's it like to watch Jordan now?


It's not surprising that she's having success at the marathon, especially since she's going after it at a relatively young age for an American athlete. Even when she was doing the 1500m stuff in high school, I think my dad always figured that long-term, she would be a 10k/marathon specialist. Her strength has always been her strength, rather than flat out speed.

Regarding the Salazar connection, it sucks. I'm hopeful that Jordan is confident and stubborn enough to do things the right way, but I really think she should have left Salazar after ABQ 2014.
But to wear out your brain trying to make things into one without realizing that they are all the same- this is called "three in the morning."
User avatar
slopoke
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 7:42 pm
Location: SLO

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby medgoattx » Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:51 pm

Juan wrote:But I think the real measure of excellence in running is actually found in each person's ability to max out their own potential and at Haverford that idea is pretty well represented in the size of the team and the attention paid to all the runners.


Yes.
User avatar
medgoattx
Fck Seniority
 
Posts: 1133
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:40 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby Robocop » Thu Oct 19, 2017 7:17 am

Interesting marathon stat on LR boards this morning, Columbus Marathon finishers have dropped by 40+% in 3 years and marathon finishers overall are slightly down. A few posters postulated broad theories about millenials. From guys on the boards who have run marathons, does it seem like there is a larger dropout rate at races than there used to be? I have a few coworkers and friends who typically train for races like this and sign up but then don't run them or don't finish them.
Robocop
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:58 am
Location: Detroit Police Department

Re: Chicago 2017

Postby greg not hairball » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:57 pm

Someone posted later that the number of marathon finishers in the US annually is declining but is still above average, with a peak in 2014. I could see there being a bit of a bubble that's bursting, as stuff like Rock N Roll, color runs and Boston Strong made finishing a marathon a goal for more people. After running one, maybe they're sticking to 5ks now. This is from someone who swore to never run another marathon after finishing Philly in '09 (I'll probably run another marathon).
User avatar
greg not hairball
 
Posts: 1144
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:19 pm


Return to Running

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron