It's Masai as Kenya claim the first track gold! High drama in Berlin
Everything about the women's 10,000m final last night looked predictable for about 9,950m. A slow start, then a surge in the pace after about 7,000m (courtesy Linet Masai), a slight drop off as the main protagonists prepared for the finishing kick, and then an Ethiopian sweep of the medals. No one could have bargained on the final 100m, where the lead changed three times, where the pre-race favourite's wheels came off, where the second favourite celebrated too soon and where Linet Masai timed her sprint to perfection to win Kenya's first gold of the Championships!
It ended an era of Ethiopian dominance that dates back to 1999, where Gete Wami won the title. Five more World titles, five more world champions. In fact, so dominant have they been that out of 15 medals in the last five world championships, they have won 10, including all the golds. Last night, they won an 11th and 12th, but not the one that really counts - that streak has been ended by Masai.
How it unfolded
Unlike the previous two editions of the World Championships, it was not Tirunesh Dibaba but Meseret Defar who positioned herself on the shoulder of the Kenyans as they passed through the bell. But like Dibaba, Defar swept passed on the back straight and seemed poised to pull away over the final 200m. Meselech Melkamu was positioned to claim second and Wude Ayalew was battling the Kenyans for bronze. And then it all went wrong.
With 80m to go, the signs were there that Defar was struggling. Melkamu clipped her from behind at least twice in the last 250m, including one with 70m to go, which suggested that Defar wasn't going all that fast. With about 40m to go, Defar's legs seemed to seize up, it looked for a moment as though she had strained a hamstring, her stride shortening with every step.
Melkamu moved past, and then threw her hands up in celebration, unaware of the fast charging Masai on her right. In slow-motion replays, her eyes actually drift right, and so I am amazed she did not see Masai, because it seemed as though she she looked right at her. She didn't register, obviously. Perhaps, like just about everyone else, she had figured that if she beat Defar, she won the race. Everyone except Masai, that is. Post race, she said "I was extremely happy we had retained gold" - a lesson to run through the line.
Defar, meanwhile, went from first to fifth in about 30 meters, and as soon as she had crossed the line, stumbled backwards, which was fitting, since her final 30m was just about backwards too. She said afterwards that her legs just did not want to respond - I thought she's strained a hamstring muscle, but in the end, she was run right out of it. A very disappointing day.
The pace - nothing special
Overall, the race was not spectacular, with a steady but conservative early pace set by the Russians. Halfway was reached in 15:45, which meant a second half of 15:06. Even that is not spectacularly fast - previous editions have been won in 30:04 (2003), 30:24 (2005), and 29:54 (in Beijing). (The 2007 time was slow - 31:55, in the hot and humid Osaka).
The relatively slow pace makes the final lap even more unexpected - Defar has shown the ability to produce a fast lap off a good pace in the 5,000m, and perhaps she found the 10,000m distance too great to do the same. The final lap was run in 63 seconds, also not spectacularly fast when you consider that Dibaba has broken 60 seconds in some of her victories. It puts into perspective what Dibaba actually achieved in her 10,000 victories.
Overall, then, a magnificent finish, a strange race, and a new champion for Kenya. The men's 10,000m is on Monday, and Linet Masai's brother, Moses, will take heart from her triumph. It seems anything can happen...however, I dare say that Bekele will prove slightly more difficult to dethrone and Ethiopia should square up the east African rivalry at 1-1. Then again, my last prediction was atrocious!
Join us later!
Ross
Great to watch real racing again - a pity that it only happens every 2 years, with the Olympics and the World Championships. Time is, for now, unimportant. It's man against man (or woman against woman), nothing else matters. Watching the 1500m heats was great - nothing spectacular, but everyone was in it in each heat, right up to the bell. Some should have done more to cater for their lack of 'kick', but then again, the heats are really a clean-out, that will come in the next round.
ReplyDeleteI wish they'd revolutionise the commentary - with cameo's of each runner - they do it well in minor sports like triathlon - so that we get an idea of who's who better..
Especially in the build up to the finals of each event...
from a sports science technoloy perspective (and we've had plenty on technology recently with the swimsuits), why don't they put some sort of sensor on the soles of the walkers..? It would sort out the problem of lifting for 2 reasons - it would audably "bleep" so that the walker could be warned, as well as being picked up by the referee electronically. Perhaps 10 strides without the walker making the necessary adjustment, and a maximum of 100 bleeps in total, would DQ the walker. The event would also then me more interesting for the viewer, with on-screen data relayed to TV (although every sport seems to have an aversion to givin the viewer enough data for some reason!)
ReplyDeleteThe issue would still be "what about the entry level of the sport"? But surely this couldn't be that expensive? Timing chips and GPS are common place these days - it couldn't be much more technology than that..?
Me again!
ReplyDelete3rd unrelated post on the athletics today...
Was it fair to disqualify the Colombian sprinter? Reminder: There had already been one false start, so the next false starter would be DQ'd. The Frenchman then false started, and you could see he was distraught. But the Colombian, who set off momentarily after the Frenchman on this right was surely unfairly prejudiced by the rule? It's almost impossible not to go off when the guy next to you does... surely only the first false starter in each restart should be DQ'd?
The new rules are, I understand, set to DQ the FIRST false starter. Surely this is also too harsh? I think the best solution would be for each meet to set it's own rules for that meet. This might allow for only 1 false start in the heats, 2 in the quarters and semi's, and 3 in the finals. That way, the meet can keep to schedule, but the tension of allowing the odd false start in the final - which to my mind adds to the excitement of the final which would otherwise only be a 10 second affair - would be enhanced..!
hi Ralph
ReplyDeleteTHanks for the comments.
Don't get me started on the commentary! I think the broadcast of athletics could really be improved dramatically. It would be difficult for heats when they come so quickly one after the other, but I think it would be possible for finals, and during longer races, to provide more insight into the race. Even basic stuff like time in the lead (as they do for cycling), projected pace (for people who are not expert at working it out for themselves), or even sound in the runner group. I've often thought that a camera fixed to the runner would be great - they do it for Formula 1 at almost no weight these days, and it would be awesome to see a race cam. ANyway, just day-dreaming...
About the walking, that might not be a good idea. I'm not sure whether GPS would work. I have a feeling the technology would need to be a bit more high tech than that, but definitely not impossible. It would need to be a chip in each shoe, and the chip would be programmed to beep as soon as both of them were NOT under pressure, since that would mean both feet off the ground.
We have done some research on sensors in shoes that are used to identify when the foot contacts the ground during a running stride, and it is quite tricky, actually, so it would be difficult. But, like I said, not impossible. Would certainly make the sport a little fairer...
And then finally, I also feel that the Colombian was unlucky. To me, the first false start (in this case, the Frenchman), should automatically negate everyone else's. They would disqualify a guy on the basis of a reaction time of less than 0.100 seconds, but if the French guy went at 0.06 and the Colombian at 0.08, then I'd argue that the Colombian actually didn't false start, by 0.02 seconds, because his response was to the other runner.
Anyway, they obviously apply the letter, black and white, but I'd say only one guy should ever be disqualified per false start.
Ciao
Ross
I presume you mean chips might not be a bad idea..?! (Thanks!)
ReplyDeleteIs the commentary universally bad, or is it just in SA? I don't find the Brits too bad (although they tend to rely too much on what they've picked up along the way, rather than doing enough pre-race homework) - they're a bit "Murray Walker" - they make it interesting even if they mess it up!! And Mr Gillingham's done well after learning the ropes whilst in SA - he's perhaps a good example of how doing some research can benefit your commentating...
the "live" section on www.iaaf.org is very good indeed. It provides the line up, with links to best times and bio's of each athlete, then provides the live results before it even comes up on the TV screen. An excellent accompaniment to the entertainment...
ReplyDelete"And then finally, I also feel that the Colombian was unlucky. To me, the first false start (in this case, the Frenchman), should automatically negate everyone else's. They would disqualify a guy on the basis of a reaction time of less than 0.100 seconds, but if the French guy went at 0.06 and the Colombian at 0.08, then I'd argue that the Colombian actually didn't false start, by 0.02 seconds, because his response was to the other runner."
ReplyDeleteIsn't it assumed that one cannot react at any quicker than .1 of a secong? If so, then if the Colombian was reacting to the French guy wouldn't the reaction time be 0.16, and not 0.08?
Never mind, this is flawed. The reaction could have been to the movement preceding the moment the Colombian exerted pressure on the blocks.
ReplyDeletehi Ralph
ReplyDeleteTHanks for the comments.
Don't get me started on the commentary! I think the broadcast of athletics could really be improved dramatically. It would be difficult for heats when they come so quickly one after the other, but I think it would be possible for finals, and during longer races, to provide more insight into the race. Even basic stuff like time in the lead (as they do for cycling), projected pace (for people who are not expert at working it out for themselves), or even sound in the runner group. I've often thought that a camera fixed to the runner would be great - they do it for Formula 1 at almost no weight these days, and it would be awesome to see a race cam. ANyway, just day-dreaming...
About the walking, that might not be a good idea. I'm not sure whether GPS would work. I have a feeling the technology would need to be a bit more high tech than that, but definitely not impossible. It would need to be a chip in each shoe, and the chip would be programmed to beep as soon as both of them were NOT under pressure, since that would mean both feet off the ground.
We have done some research on sensors in shoes that are used to identify when the foot contacts the ground during a running stride, and it is quite tricky, actually, so it would be difficult. But, like I said, not impossible. Would certainly make the sport a little fairer...
And then finally, I also feel that the Colombian was unlucky. To me, the first false start (in this case, the Frenchman), should automatically negate everyone else's. They would disqualify a guy on the basis of a reaction time of less than 0.100 seconds, but if the French guy went at 0.06 and the Colombian at 0.08, then I'd argue that the Colombian actually didn't false start, by 0.02 seconds, because his response was to the other runner.
Anyway, they obviously apply the letter, black and white, but I'd say only one guy should ever be disqualified per false start.
Ciao
Ross