|
|
Post by cacofonix on Jul 28, 2007 22:11:24 GMT -5
What excellent performances, and at the right time of year, and yet we have no-one worthy of representing us at Osaka??? To clarify, even with the best possible scenario (following the IAAF standards), we'd have only ONE person worthy of representing us at Osaka. I fully believe Reid should go, but no one else has met the criteria that is there for the rest of the world as well. This shouldn't be made out to be a large-scale screw over of the Canadian 5000 squad. |
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 4:57:53 GMT -5
Call me a stickler; you forgot Sullivan's 13:19. Right. That was an 06 list. I think that was the only missing time. A stickler would have said 13:19.27. |
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 5:03:01 GMT -5
Actually, I'd put the onus on you to justify your statement! Ron suggested that this was the greatest day in history for Canadian men at 5K, with three guys going 13:21, 13:22 and 13:25. If that's not the greatest day, then what day was? The only day I could imagine being arguable is Schiebler's 13:13 -- but that's a single performance. What stands out about today is the combination of depth and top times. As far as the world record advancing over the years... If you're running 13:21, it doesn't matter if the WR is 12:58 or 12:37, you're not running for the win either way. You have to consider the times of the period. If you don't, then someone like Zatopek would be considered a nobody. Look up his times. |
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 5:08:18 GMT -5
I don't know what else was going on behind these guys but you could make the case that these canucKs performed better RELATIVE TO WORLD CLASS TIMES ON THAT DAY:
1987 OTTAWA JUL 31
G 13:37.62 PAUL MCLOY NF;S 13:38.81 PAUL WILLIAMS BC;B 13:44.24 CAREY NELSON BC
1986 OTTAWA JUN 20
G 13:41.86 PAUL WILLIAMS BC;S 13:46.0 ROB LONERGAN BC;B 13:46.91 JOHN CASTELLANO ON
|
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 5:32:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 8:14:00 GMT -5
By the way, apropos of nothing, I believe Reid is a dual citizen?
|
|
|
|
Post by herodotus on Jul 29, 2007 8:26:24 GMT -5
Slight change of topic for now, but.... I think Gary Reed is ready for SOMETHING BIG. I thought that in that "Webb" race (  ) Gary displayed concrete cahones, making a move with 300 out, having gone sub 50 to the bell? That last 50m was rough, but... He seems to be displaying greater confidence this year, and greater range of tactics, and he looks stronger to me. Slim, but very strong. Even sub 1:43 could be on the cards before this season is out. And I have a really good feeling about Osaka. |
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 9:07:54 GMT -5
The only day I could imagine being arguable is Schiebler's 13:13 -- but that's a single performance. Hardly on both counts. Try June 2, 1962. You won't get any argument on that from Scribbler himself. |
|
|
|
Post by cacofonix on Jul 29, 2007 9:42:51 GMT -5
By the way, apropos of nothing, I believe Reid is a dual citizen? Which wouldn't exactly make it any easier to get to World's or Olympics. Notice how many USAnians have A standard this year in the 5000? |
|
|
|
Post by mwilson on Jul 29, 2007 9:46:30 GMT -5
I don't know what else was going on behind these guys but you could make the case that these canucKs performed better RELATIVE TO WORLD CLASS TIMES ON THAT DAY: 1987 OTTAWA JUL 31 G 13:37.62 PAUL MCLOY NF;S 13:38.81 PAUL WILLIAMS BC;B 13:44.24 CAREY NELSON BC 1986 OTTAWA JUN 20 G 13:41.86 PAUL WILLIAMS BC;S 13:46.0 ROB LONERGAN BC;B 13:46.91 JOHN CASTELLANO ON In terms of comparative performance for the era, Eugene 06-Jun-87 would have to be on a par: 4. Paul Williams, 13:33.7 6. Graeme Fell, 13:34.3 11. Paul McCloy, 13:39.3 In terms of depth and a purely domestic field, nothing comes close to the 1986 championship: 1. Paul Williams, 13:41.86 2. Rob Lonergan, 13:46.06 3. John Castellano, 13:46.91 4. Carey Nelson, 13:48.07 5. Phillipe Leheurte, 13:51.72 6. Ray Paulins, 13:53.08 7. Dave Reid, 13:54.04 8. Jean Legarde, 13:55.45 9. Robert Guy, 13:55.46 10. Gord Christie, 13:57.66 11. Richard Lee, 13:59.78 And that field didn't even include the likes of McCloy, Butler and Boileau who contested the 10,000m a couple of days later! |
|
|
|
Post by ahutch on Jul 29, 2007 11:33:10 GMT -5
You have to consider the times of the period. If you don't, then someone like Zatopek would be considered a nobody. Look up his times. Of course you have to consider the times of the period -- that's why I mentioned 12:58, which was the world record in 1987. Look it up. My point was that 13:21 wasn't in the hunt for a WC or OC medal in 1987 either, so it's not like that was a golden age for Canadian 5000m where we were winning medals left right and centre. As for the possible days in history that you mention, of course we could debate it. You mention a day in 1987 where three guys ran between 5.0% and 7.9% off the WR. I mention a day in 2007 where three guys ran between 5.8% and 6.3% off the WR. You say to-may-to and I say to-mah-to, but it's hardly "hyberbole" to argue that the latter performance is worthy of being considered the best ever. |
|
|
|
Post by ahutch on Jul 29, 2007 11:43:01 GMT -5
Hardly on both counts. Try June 2, 1962. You won't get any argument on that from Scribbler himself. Obviously Kidd's run was fantastic, probably the greatest single performance by a Canadian distance runner on the track, at least in modern times. But you miss the point I was trying to make in mentioning Schiebler's time. When Scott Russell throws a javelin 84 metres, I consider that a great day for Scott Russell. When Felicien, Whyte and Lopes all run 12.6 or better in a single race, I consider that a great day for Canadian sprint hurdling. It's the difference between a single fantastic performance and a pattern suggesting depth. If we're talking single performances, then obviously Schiebler's 13:13 and Sully's 13:19 are better than any of the performances at Heusden. As I said before, I would put Kidd's run at the top of the list. Williams' 13:22 at Oslo is definitely up there too. But if we're talking more generally about a great day for Canadian men's 5000m running, I personally agree with the guy who said that yesterday may have been tops. And even if you disagree, I don't think it's "hyperbole" to argue that. |
|
|
|
Post by BillyWalsh on Jul 29, 2007 11:55:36 GMT -5
its funny that Alan Webb just beat our Canadian 800m specialist and now has a faster PB now than Reed (1:43:83 webb, 1:43:93 Reed)
and webb is a 1500m and up distance guy
|
|
|
|
Post by jimdoyle13 on Jul 29, 2007 11:57:20 GMT -5
Slight change of topic for now, but.... I think Gary Reed is ready for SOMETHING BIG. I thought that in that "Webb" race ( ) Gary displayed concrete cahones, making a move with 300 out, having gone sub 50 to the bell? That last 50m was rough, but... He seems to be displaying greater confidence this year, and greater range of tactics, and he looks stronger to me. Slim, but very strong. Even sub 1:43 could be on the cards before this season is out. And I have a really good feeling about Osaka. i dont think anybody doubts reeds ability to run a really fast time such as 1:43 low or better, but it seems like every time hes at a meet with prelims, semis and finals, he seems completely wasted in the final and is a non factor. i hope this time is different, but he needs to show that he can run that many races in that short of a time period. |
|
|
|
Post by coldneck on Jul 29, 2007 12:06:14 GMT -5
I think if you run under 1:44 you're no longer considered a "1500 and up distance guy". But man does Webb have amazing range!!
And Grant McLaren's 13:34 in 1974...
|
|
|
|
Post by jasonbee on Jul 29, 2007 12:31:47 GMT -5
So AC could send Reid to race if they wanted to correct? If so, he should consider taking this up legally. I'm not sure he'd win in a court of law but it would be interesting to see AC sweat a bit. Paging jasonbee. Been there done that. Not quite...it was Dave Reid that did the suing...I merely went on National TV and my coaches were polling the COC and Athcan. I also have supporters in teh US that were offering to foot the bill top sent me to Atlanta. The COC initially used the "we'd love to send him, but he's past standard deadline and we can't afford it" excuse. The "Past standard" excuse was dea in teh water when they re-RAN the HJ finals at the trials that year because Charles Lefrancois had problems competing in the first final he won - they re-ran the HJ finals by voiding the original results with little or no warning for the other competitors. They competed largely drunk - Charles we well rested fo course and he got is Oly standard. David Reid sued to be allowed the same privilege, and won, but failed to get standard. I got standard teh next day but I didbn't sue, and was thus not named to the team. Mind you let's all keep the circumstances in perpsective. I had a teammate from Arkansas who died in the TWA Flight 800 distaster that next week after all the kerfluffle. I was willing to let (Oly fight) it end before it became a circus and I also had some moments to recollect why I was competing in the first place. Oddly I was happy to miss the Games. I was not happy that I was ready to run far faster and was in the best shape having come off a really bad two week long cold after NCAAs in June. That's all old news anyway - what really matters here is that I'm now the SECOND fastest from my friggin high school. Where's the damn whisky...I need a drink...  Way to go Reid...I've been waiting for this day! JB |
|
|
|
Post by herodotus on Jul 29, 2007 12:49:22 GMT -5
Haha!
Hello from Courtenay, JB! What you doin these days? PM if you wish.
|
|
|
|
Post by HHH on Jul 29, 2007 12:59:17 GMT -5
Not quite...it was Dave Reid that did the suing...I merely went on National TV and my coaches were polling the COC and Athcan. I also have supporters in teh US that were offering to foot the bill top sent me to Atlanta. The COC initially used the "we'd love to send him, but he's past standard deadline and we can't afford it" excuse. The "Past standard" excuse was dea in teh water when they re-RAN the HJ finals at the trials that year because Charles Lefrancois had problems competing in the first final he won - they re-ran the HJ finals by voiding the original results with little or no warning for the other competitors. They competed largely drunk - Charles we well rested fo course and he got is Oly standard. David Reid sued to be allowed the same privilege, and won, but failed to get standard. I got standard teh next day but I didbn't sue, and was thus not named to the team. Mind you let's all keep the circumstances in perpsective. I had a teammate from Arkansas who died in the TWA Flight 800 distaster that next week after all the kerfluffle. I was willing to let (Oly fight) it end before it became a circus and I also had some moments to recollect why I was competing in the first place. Oddly I was happy to miss the Games. I was not happy that I was ready to run far faster and was in the best shape having come off a really bad two week long cold after NCAAs in June. That's all old news anyway - what really matters here is that I'm now the SECOND fastest from my friggin high school. Where's the damn whisky...I need a drink... Way to go Reid...I've been waiting for this day! JB Thanks for clearing that up for us Jason. I think we all agree that Reid should be going to worlds. The question is: Does he want us to try and do something about it? |
|
|
|
Post by jasonbee on Jul 29, 2007 13:09:38 GMT -5
It's not worth it - save the money for later. AthCan needs to be hollowed from the inside and rebuilt anway - we can save our money for that fight . They should at least be sending a single b-standard athlete like they're entitled to. But again I find they are less focused on development options than is cashing in when the athletes finally get really good. It's different if you're from the Netherlands where you're drowning in competitive opportunities - ergo you go to World's when you're A-standard worthy and not one race before that. However, from here when you're lacking consecutive weekly opportunities to run fast locally, then that b-standard might have cost you far more in terms of $$, resources, and travel in order to achieve. Given he's proven that he can travel and race well, and has several good races from 1500 to 10k under his belt - it's worth the trouble to send him. They'd bill you the cost of travel plus the national team fee (do they still charge that?) so let you go anyway so it's not that much of a fee in the end. Reid will be far better eventually...then like Donovan Bailey they will beg foir his time. |
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 13:55:34 GMT -5
I personally agree with the guy who said that yesterday may have been tops. And even if you disagree, I don't think it's "hyperbole" to argue that. That is the crux of my point. The "guy" in question is a distance coach who is intimately familiar with the players in question and here is what he said: "The greatest day in the history of Canadian Men @ 5K" That is a very definitive statement coming from a guy with the credentials to make it so one is tempted to take it at face value. Clearly, since we are having a debate about it( and those two examples I gave were just the easiest ones I could find-I figured there were more, particularly the Eugene results from 86 and 87 which I was in the process of trying to dig up and mwilson has provided one), you can't take it at face value. If, like you, he would had said "may have been" or "arguably", I would have given it a pass. Perfectly understandable comment given how great the performances were but I stand by my characterization of the post. |
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 14:21:56 GMT -5
In terms of comparative performance for the era, Eugene 06-Jun-87 would have to be on a par: 4. Paul Williams, 13:33.7 6. Graeme Fell, 13:34.3 11. Paul McCloy, 13:39.3 Look at Eugene from 1986: 6. Paul Williams CAN 13:27:55* NR 7. Paul McCloy CAN 13:27.65* 12. Rob Lonergan CAN 13:34.45* |
|
|
|
Post by ahutch on Jul 29, 2007 14:33:54 GMT -5
I guess we're disagreeing not about track and field, but about what the word "hyperbole" means. Just because you disagree with an assessment, that doesn't make it an "extravagant exaggeration, not meant to be taken literally." It just means you don't agree with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 14:35:52 GMT -5
Well, I'm certainly not going to win a wordsmith battle with you!
|
|
|
|
Post by ahutch on Jul 29, 2007 15:06:05 GMT -5
We'll call it a draw, SI! I know we both agree that it was a great race yesterday, and it was nice to dig up a little historical perspective too.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronb on Jul 29, 2007 15:09:04 GMT -5
SI,
I offer the following amendment to my original wording ...... "one of Canada's finest days
in Men's 5000 metre running". I trust this is acceptable, and will get us back on task.
I see 3 Canadians running 13:25 or better in a race, and I think all are capable of more
in the future (good points by JB and Hero), and I would love to see them getting a shot
at the next level.
So, we have 2 guys in the 27:50's in the 10K, and 3 guys @ 13:25 and faster in the 5K,
and I believe all these guys have room to improve, and we may have no-one in these
events at Osaka. I don't think this is how we are going to get better.
Our best guy, at least, with IAAF standard, should be able to have a go.
I worry that the "own the podium" stuff has the potential of a huge trickle-down effect,
and soon only "likely" medallists will be the only ones we send anywhere;
much to the detriment of our Sport, from the Elite Level on down, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Moulton on Jul 29, 2007 15:20:40 GMT -5
I don't think it is a given we won't have anyone in the 5k. I think AC will select Morrison under the Rising Star category. 13:22 just off the A standard, well inside the B, a 4 second PR and a two other times just outside of the B. I believe Reid can not use the Rising Star as he used that in Helsinki. Also Bairu should go in the 10 under this criteria as well. Tough to swallow right now though as it takes a bit of the luster off an incredible day.
|
|
|
|
Post by SI on Jul 29, 2007 15:31:06 GMT -5
Yikes!! Great for Morrison but that strikes me almost as the impact of the law of unintended consequences.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronb on Jul 29, 2007 15:58:07 GMT -5
Chris,
That is exactly why I used the words "MAY" have no-one in these events.
And if it happens that way, great for Paul and Simon, but really cruddy for Reid.
He may just have to get in a few more good races, and smash his PB's.
Selection criteria are always tricky to craft, as there will usually be a circumstance
no-one could have predicted ahead of time....perhaps this is one such instance.
Also, on the Heusden results, Gary ran very well and only relinquished the lead to
Webb in the last 15 metres +/-, at which point Gary was starting to tie up. In a
fantasy "do-over", it would be fun to watch Gary force Webb to lead the back-stretch,
and then attack, and see the result. Maybe the same, maybe not...
Regardless, great running by the Canadians, eh ?
|
|
|
|
Post by herodotus on Jul 29, 2007 16:07:00 GMT -5
Agree. Maybe Gary wanted to force the pace and take sting out of Webb's last 50m sprint, and who thunked that Webb was going to go 1:43 anyway?
When does AC announce the team?
|
|
) Gary displayed concrete cahones, making a move with 300 out, having gone sub 50 to the bell? That last 50m was rough, but... He seems to be displaying greater confidence this year, and greater range of tactics, and he looks stronger to me. Slim, but very strong. Even sub 1:43 could be on the cards before this season is out. And I have a really good feeling about Osaka. 
