IAAF World Champs: 800m women, questions but few answers

Women's 800m: Savinova pips Semenya

The women's 800m event deserves a post all of its own.  I'll post on the rest of the day's action a little later, but the women's 800m gold has just been won, and it wasn't Caster Semenya winning it.  Instead, it was Mariya Savinova of Russia who won in a very quick 1:55.87, edging Semenya in the final 50m.  Semenya ran 1:56.35, easily the fastest time she has done since her Berlin triumph two years ago, when the controversy began, and Janeth Jepkosgei took bronze, reward for her efforts in setting the race up with a very fast first lap.

The race was an intriguing tactical one - Janeth Jepkosgei took the pace out hard (26.61s first 200m), and led through the bell in 55.86s, with Semenya in fifth and Savinova sixth, about 5m behind.  Savinova had clearly decided that she would mark Semenya the whole way, and as Semenya made her move down the backstraight, she followed.  600m was reached in 1:26.07, a 30-second interval for Jepkosgei, probably half a second quicker for Semenya, who was on the shoulder of the leaders and poised to move clear.

Coming off the final bend, Semenya had taken the lead, and it looked like a dead certainty that she would run away from the field.  Given the fast pace up to 600m, a repeat or even an improvement of the 1:55.45 of Berlin looked on the cards.  But Savinova held her, and with 50m to go, began to close the 3m gap that she'd held her at down the back straight.  In the final, 20m, Semenya faded and Savinova come through to win gold.

Caster Semenya - the questions will continue

Semenya again looked very relaxed, casual even, when being passed for gold in the final 20m, and I am sure that there will once again be suspicions that she "lost deliberately".  In the aftermath of her semi-final, where she looked completely dominant, that theme began to reappear, with chat forums resonating with the theory that Semenya had been losing races on purpose this season to keep the attention off her.

I am sure that the questions will continue, and Semenya will again be labeled as either a cheat (if she wins), or a 'fixer' (when she loses, as people suggest, on purpose).  I think both are slightly unfair accusations, and require some clarification and context.  Certainly, she is not a cheat - she may well have had an advantage as a result of whatever intersex condition may have led to increased testosterone levels, but that's not the same as cheating.  So again, I'd caution against "personalizing" the debate, making it about Semenya.  It's not too different from Pistorius case, actually - it's not a question of cheating, but is a question of unfair advantage.  And that's certainly a valid concern, which is why the post-Berlin process happened.

In Semenya's case, and I've written this before, I am fairly certain that in the aftermath of Berlin, she did receive some medical treatment.  There is no other explanation for the length of time that it took to clear her to run.  A legal issue would have taken weeks, maybe a few months, but to miss nearly a year can only be explained if there was medical intervention that required observation.  Also, if you look at the IAAF's latest position stand on intersex conditions, they have clearly learned from the Semenya experience, and it's no co-incidence that the statement includes mention of correcting testosterone to normal female levels.  The IAAF, I think, knew that they had to intervene, and I believe they did, setting a precedent that they then wrote into future policy.

So I'm confident in saying that there was chemical treatment to reduce the testosterone levels.  That would also explain the injury problems, the inconsistencies, and the relatively poorer performances in the last twelve months.  If that is the case, then people can of course still object to Semenya's participation on the grounds that she has "historical" advantage because of the shape of the skeleton etc.  But I believe that most advantages would diminish soon, and certainly will over more time.

My opinion is that if her testosterone levels have been within the normal range for six months, and continue to stay there, then I'd be satisfied that the advantage is no longer of concern for competition.  She would be at the extreme in certain respects, but not threatening to cross the 'line' we draw to make the distinction between male and female competition.  Of course, when she runs 1:56.35, less than a second slower than the Berlin time, people will question the effectiveness of the treatment, and that will be an interesting debate to follow in coming weeks.

Monitoring of an intervention?

The big question, however, is monitoring of those levels.  The irony is that if Semenya has received chemical treatment, then she may be one of the only athletes in the world who is required to use drugs.  And failure to use the drugs (dope) would be the problem.  If Semenya's participation is dependent on lowering the testosterone levels, then ensuring the effectiveness is crucial.

Now I don't know how this has been monitored.  Is it possible that Semenya can stop medication and return to the Berlin situation?  I don't know enough about the process, how long the treatment would last or how effective it might be (will make some enquiries with endocrinologists) and so I'll steer clear of speculating on that detail. But I believe that if the testosterone levels were raised (which is a near certainty), then the right thing was done in reducing them, and I have no objections to Semenya's participation, providing it is monitored regularly.

Semenya's racing strategy

As for the theory that Semenya is running slowly on purpose, I can appreciate why people think that, because certainly, I can't think of many athletes who look as casual as Semenya in any race situation - it is so startling how she seems to "jog" when others are failing.  But I see it differently.  There are far better ways to win a silver medal, lose a race and divert attention of yourself than what Semenya did today.  If she was deliberately trying NOT to win, then it would be far easier to come through late, especially in a race like today's where early pace is fast and the gaps are large.   Would a late charge from sixth to second (possible if you watch the race) not divert attention more than a fade into silver?  But instead, Semenya attacked the race with 250m to go, assumed the lead, ran in front for the world to see, and looked to be going away before losing gold.

That's a sure way to attract attention, not to deflect it, (for proof of this, see the forums which are already buzzing with allegations of "tanking on purpose").  I remain unconvinced about this deliberate loss argument.  I think it more likely that Semenya is just a runner who always looks casual, regardless of race situation or effort.  Back in 2008, at the World Junior Championships in Poland, Semenya finished seventh in her heat and looked the same as she did today - she seems not to have it in her style to lose form and look like she is straining.  It may be the shape of her skeleton, the large upper body and that she seems to 'lope', and I think this is more likely than the theory that she hit the front, opened up a lead in the final 50m of the World Champs, and then decided to lose the race on purpose from there.

The lack of transparency

In all this, the biggest issue has been the lack of transparency and the secrecy.  The initial leak was of course wrong, and Semenya should never have been subjected to public speculation about her biological sex.  But once out, once the world knew there was a problem, it was critical to resolve the situation, or at least reassure people that something had been done to ensure fair competition (even if that meant announcing that there was no advantage to begin with - people wouldn't have believed it, but it would be something).

That was, of course, Semenya's prerogative.  The IAAF could not announce that there was a condition and that it had been treated, because the medical information belongs to the patient.  So I felt from the outset that Semenya needed to disclose something.  Not the full details, not a complete description, but something to assure people that her participation had been cleared and perhaps that she would continue to co-operate with the authorities in the future.  Maybe even release testosterone level results today, in the same way that some cyclists have taken to making public their blood data as part of the biological passport system.

The problem we have now is that everyone knows half the story, and in the absence of facts, they will create the other half!  And, whether the result of being misinformed, ignorant or hostile, the blanks that are filled in will almost always be worse than the reality.  The end result is that Semenya loses either way, and the only way I can see this being overcome is to control the information herself.

But instead of truth, what we have is a shroud of secrecy, mostly from Semenya's management.  Her management team have made some extra-ordinary statements, including one that she was going to win the double in Daegu, even though she was not even entered into the 1500m.  They have asked for millions for sponsorship back here in South Africa.  They also hinted recently that she would be asking for money to give interviews to the media, which is astonishing.

You can't blame Semenya for her mistrust of the media, but the moronic press releases made by her PR and management teams defy belief, and only serve to heighten the focus (and negative attention) on her.  She'll find a great deal of sympathy (as she should) for her character in continuing the sport, for her resolve, which has been incredible.  But she'll also face a great deal of hostility because of how little people know about the science and the process involved.

And she can control the flow of that information, including the public perception, by talking about it.  Again, cycling has set the precedent that cyclists sometimes disclose their blood data, and Semenya could do the same.  She'll never win everyone over, but I think many will accept what has happened as the best possible resolution, provided they know it.  As it stands now, few people will because they simply don't know.

On that note, it was very good to see the smiles and interaction with her fellow competitors after this race.  It's easy to be a good sport when you're winning, but even Savinova seemed more amiable than her previous comments might have suggested.  These are good signs, not proof, but hopefully a sign that among fellow athletes, things are returning to normal.

An insoluble problem?

Ultimately, Semenya's situation asks questions for which there may be no answer.  I compared it earlier to the Pistorius case, but in truth, it's even more complex, because a) there is less scientific evidence available to quantify the Semenya advantage than for Pistorius' advantage and b) there seems to have been some treatment to correct the possible advantage.  If that has happened, and the process has been followed, then what next?  Either it didn't work, or it should be accepted.  Key there is simply disclosing it, and if that were to happen, I'd encourage people to accept the treatment and the IAAF decision.   As it stands, we don't know, so how can anyone be asked be blindly accept it?

If there was no treatment, or if the treatment has not been monitored properly, well, that's a different situation, and goes all the way back to 2009 and the debates we had about eligibility at the time.  And so I'd also love for there to be some kind of disclosure so that people at least know that this has happened (if it has, of course).  And finally, I'd hope that Semenya opens up, maybe that someone saves her from her own management team, and maybe even uses this as an opportunity to inform and educate.  Full transparency, testosterone levels, the truth.

Ross

IAAF World Champs: USA's hat-trick on a day of surprises

IAAF World Champs report Day 6:  The USA claim three on a day of surprises

Six finals, and four nations won medals today, as the USA delivered a hat-trick of titles in what was a day of mild (and big) surprises.

The USA's medals came in the form of Jesse Williams in the high jump (least surprising - he was the world leader after all), Lashinda Demus in the 400m hurdles (mildly surprising, though she was second in Berlin and is a class act, always competitive), and then Jennifer Barringer-Simpson, in the biggest surprise of all, in the women's 1500m in a very peculiar race.

Also claiming gold were Ezekiel Kemboi of Kenya (Steeplechase), Dai Greene of Great Britain (400m hurdles) and Olha Saladuha of Ukraine in the triple-jump.

A short summary of the track finals is below, along with YouTube clips of some, for those who missed them!

Kemboi explodes, celebrates and entertains for Kenya's fourth gold

Ezekiel Kemboi of Kenya defended his 3000m steeplechase world title with an incredible explosion of speed in the final 200m, opening up such a huge lead that he actually won the race in lane 7 by the end.  The sprint was on after a slow race, yet Kemboi got so far clear that he had time to celebrate pretty much from the final barrier, and drifted out into lane 7 doing so!  Brimin Kipruto got silver, holding off a fasting finishing Mahiedine Mekhissi-Benabbad on the line.

This was always going to be a fascinating race.  Earlier in the year, France's Benabbad had delivered a huge warning to Kenya that their dominance in the Steeplechase would be challenged in a big way in Daegu, when he ran away from a strong field, including Kemboi, to win the Paris Diamond League event.  On that occasion, Benabbad ran 8:02, and won by five seconds from Kemboi, and it was a performance that gave the Daegu final an added dimension - not only would it see great competition, but it might bring out a great tactical battle.

Kenya, of course, had four athletes in the race, by virtue of the fact that Kemboi was defending champion.  The other was Brimin Kipruto, who had missed the world record by 1/100th of a second earlier this season, having been led by Paul Koech in a great Diamond League race in Monaco.  Koech had been left out of this race, and so it was expected to be a Kipruto-Kemboi battle against Benabbad.  And given Benabbad's great finish in that Paris race (he put five seconds on the field in the final lap), I fully expected Kenya to send one of their two "lesser" runners out and make this a super fast race, given that Kipruto and Kemboi had run 7:55 or faster earlier this year.

That didn't happen. Then again, Bennabad didn't seem to be quite as strong as he had been in Paris, because he ran the whole race about 5m off the Kenyans, never in among them, which was surprising.  The early pace was set by Ramolefi, but it was slow - 2:47 to the first kilometer.  That was followed by 2:46, by which time the east Africans (three Kenyans and two Ugandans) were in front, and Benabbad and Tahri, also of France, just behind.  Down the back-straight, it was Kemboi and Kipruto who went clear, and only a massive late charge by Bennabad got him bronze, and in truth, he nearly caught Kipruto from behind (when you watch the video below, look at how far behind Benabbad is coming into the final straight, and watch how close he comes to catching Kipruto - he makes up about 2 seconds in 80m!  That kind of speed was however "wasted", and Benabbad, in my opinion, ran a strange race to allow that gap to appear in the first place.  I was surprised that he wasn't more attentive throughout the race, given his Paris victory and his obvious speed)

But Kemboi was untouchable today.  He was beaten into second by Kipruto in that Monaco race, running 7:55.76, but this was a championship race, and he has been remarkable in medal races in the last eight years.  Here is the list of performances:  2nd in 2003 World Champs, 1st 2004 Olympics, 2nd 2005 World Champs, 1st 2006 Commonwealth Games, 2nd 2007 World Champs, 1st 2009 World Champs and 2nd 2010 Commonwealth Games.  The only blemish was a 7th in Beijing, but other than that, Kemboi has been a 'guaranteed' silver or gold!

The video below shows the final 500m and watch for the Kemboi kick as they clear the third-last barrier at the end of the back straight.  It's so good, as mentioned, that he had time to start celebrating after the final jump, 50m from the line.  He danced over the line, and continued to celebrate, stripping off the vest and dancing, perhaps the Kenyan equivalent of Usain Bolt's "chicken dance" from Beijing!  Kemboi is a great entertainer, the sport needs it.  In all, it was a magnificent performance - that final 200m was as impressive a sprint as anything I've seen.

In case you missed it, here is a clip (not English, but the quality is the best I could find on YouTube now).  It really is worth a watch.

Jennifer Barringer-Simpson wins the 1500m title

The biggest surprise came from Jenny Barringer Simpson, who won gold in the women's 1500m in what was a strange race for a number of reasons.  For one, none of the favourites came through.  A fall with 550m unfortunately took out one of those favourites, Morgan Uceny of the USA.  Even more strange was that the big favourite, Maryan Jamal of Bahrain, began drifting away from the front of the race as early as 450m to go, was completely out of contention with 250m to go, and trailed in last place, fully 17 seconds behind the winner.  And yes, she shut down once out of contention, but her "challenge" was notable because, well, it was completely non-existent in the final 300m (she was seemingly bumped with about 450m to go, and perhaps that affected her finish.  She certainly has developed a habit of producing massively inconsistent performances though)

The USA would have had high hopes for this race, but most of them were with Uceny, who had been winning Diamond League races this season.  Barringer-Simpson was, not to be unkind, "the other American", though her 1500m credentials are impressive, including a sub-4 PB back in 2009.  It's jsut that she hadn't really showed that kind of form this year.  And so when Uceny went down in a pretty spectacular tumble with 550m to go, it seemed that the USA's chances took a drastic turn for the worse.

Not according to Barringer-Simpson - she ran a perfect race, always in contention, avoiding the barging and congestion that comes with a slow pace.  She moved out into lane two with about 150m to run, and as the final straight unfolded, she was right there, with clear track in front of her, and she took advantage.  Hannah England was a strong (and delightedly surprised) second, and Natalia Rodriguez of Spain (another pre-race favourite) faded somewhat having led into the final straight to come third.

In the end, the pace was slow, which made it all the more peculiar.  The first lap was 68.78, followed by a 65.16, leading to the congestion that would ultimately end Uceny's challenge in the fall.  The pace was ramped up with 500m to go, when Rodriguez went to the front.  She led through the bell, and all the way to about 40m to go, when Barringer-Simpson swept by. 

The final 300m were covered in about 46s, which is fast, but not spectacular - final laps of under 60 seconds have been run before (sub 45s for final 300m), off more or less the same pace.  But in the end, it was a race of attrition, a wide open race to begin with, that opened up repeatedly during the final, and Barringer-Simpson was there, deservedly, to move through and claim gold.  The race is below if you missed it

Men's 400m hurdles - Dai Greene for Great Britain

Great Britain have had a good, though perhaps slightly disappointing World Champs until tonight.  They would have been very positive about their chances for gold with Jessica Ennis in the heptathlon and Mo Farah in the 10,000m, but ended up with silver instead.

Tonight would have rectified their predictions somewhat - first came Hannah England's silver in the 1500m (surely an unexpected medal), and then Dai Greene delivered by claiming the men's 400m hurdles gold with a storming final 80m.  It's perhaps not a huge surprise - Greene was always going to be in contention, and looked strong in the semi-finals, but he was not an overwhelming favourite.  He beat Javier Culson into silver, while LJ van Zyl of South Africa claimed bronze, holding off a fast finishing Felix Sanchez.  Bershawn Jackson and Angelo Taylor finished sixth and seventh, which is significant because it's the first World Championships since 2001 where a medal has not gone to the USA in the event.  Greene's medal also has historical significance - it's the first medal for GBR in the event since 1991!

The time was also relatively slow - 48.27s.  There was some wind, of course, but it's interesting to note that this was the slowest winning time in the 400m hurdles in the history of the World Championships, dating back to 1983.  The 400m hurdles has been this way all season, in fact - since LJ van Zyl's world leader back in April, very few sub-48s performances have been seen.  Like the women's 1500m, the 400m hurdles is wide open leading into London.

Women's 400m hurdles - Demus runs a perfect race

"Slow" is not a word you'd use to describe the women's 400m hurdles final.  In fact, it was the third fastest race in history, as Lashinda Demus of the USA picked up the gold with a brilliant 52.47 performance, holding off Melaine Walker, the Jamaican defending champion who started out in Lane 8 as a result of her relatively poor semi-final performance.

Walker had a great race, actually, running a season's best of 52.73s (anything sub-53s is rare - only 15 women in history have done it), but Demus was just better.  They raced into the final hurdle together, Demus slightly ahead, but Demus had the stride pattern perfect, hit the hurdle at speed, and extended the margin to win, improving on her silver from Berlin two years ago.  The race is below

Bolt's false start and Blake's 'twitch' - the actual start block data explained

The official start data from the 100m final - Blake's twitch doesn't register

This is a final post on the Bolt false start controversy, since as you'll all know, there was some talk that Yohan Blake in Lane 6 (immediately to Bolt's right) might have "twitched" while in the "set" position, and that perhaps he should have received the false start, that he "pushed" Bolt into the false start.

So yesterday, I posted on this question about whether Blake's twitch might have constituted a false start, and wrote the following:

• If you believe that Bolt was 'triggered' to jump by Blake's movement, then Bolt should NOT have been disqualified, but Blake should have been
• If you believe that Bolt was unaffected by that movement, then BOTH should have been disqualified
• And if you believe that Blake's movement was too small and not "irregular", then Bolt is the only athlete who should have been disqualified

So today, I can provide you with the actual data from the starting equipment during the race, courtesy a reader and journalist in Daegu (Thank you so much Remo!).

The image from Lanes 4, 5 and 6 is shown below, for clarity.  You'll recall that Walter Dix is the athlete in Lane 4, while Bolt is in 5 and Blake in 6.  The image should be fairly self-explanatory, but I've explained it briefly below (click to enlarge)

So the vertical grey lines show the firing of the gun, and the green lines immediately to the right of them are the 100ms limit for a false start.  The vertical red line is the point where the actual start of each athlete is registered.  As I wrote yesterday, a start that happens BEFORE this cut-off line shown in green is deemed a false start.

So, each of the sensors in the start blocks is sensitive to the pressure being applied by the athlete.  At some point, as the pressure increases as the athlete pushes off, and the blocks will register enough pressure to signal a start.  I have shown that as a start pressure threshold with the red arrows for all three athletes.  You'll see, for example, that Walter Dix in Lane 4 reaches the threshold soon after the green line, and the start is triggered 139 ms after the firing of the gun (grey line).  

Now look at Blake's graph, in Lane 6.  You'll see a small bump there BEFORE the gun, which I have circled in blue.  This is the twitch that was picked up in the slow motion replays, and which you can see in the video to my previous post on this subject.

If you look over to the right hand side in Blake's pressure graph, you'll see that when he did eventually start (153 ms after the gun), the pressure it took was slightly higher than the pressure registered during his twitch.  I have drawn a dashed green line across from the pressure threshold, and you can see that while the twitch came close to the required level, it was NOT sufficient to trigger the sensors.  Had that twitch been any larger, then Blake would have exceeded the limit, and it would have constituted either a false or faulty start.

This says to me that it would be a pretty tough call to say that Yohan Blake is guilty of a false start, given that the sensitive equipment could not detect it.  It would have been up to the recallers watching the athletes, and it was really a very small movement, only detected later in HD slow motion replays.  Of course, technically, he twitched, and that is, by definition, grounds for at least an aborted start.  But the data say the twitch was tiny, and let's be honest - if Blake was DQd for that, he might have been justifiably upset with the call himself!  So I would conclude that in the end, the right decision was made, even if the technically correct conclusion is that this twitch should have been picked up.  So I'll go with option three in that list above!

Just to add one last though - you can see Bolt's start on the graph above - it comes 104 ms BEFORE the gun even goes off (so it's 204ms before the legal limit), but then you didn't need data to tell you that!  What this graph doesn't say is whether it was Blake's twitch (however small) that caused Bolt to jump, or whether Bolt would have gone anyway.  That remains a point of discussion I guess.  Regardless, it's all just conjecture now, the race is in the books!  

Ross

P.S.  Let me take this chance to also correct an error in the post I did earlier today - I said that the bronze medal in the men's 400m was won by Jonathan Borlee.  It was in fact KEVIN Borlee who claimed third, while Jonathan was fifth!  The danger of identical twins!

Enjoy the rest day tomorrow!

IAAF World Champs - Rudisha delivers and Kirani James "arrives"

IAAF World Champs: Rudisha, James and Zaripova get gold

Day 3 of the IAAF World Championships brought more success for Kenya, in the form of David Rudisha's anticipated gold in the men's 800m.  It was their third gold of these championships, but may be tempered slightly by the result of the Women's steeple where they would have been hoping for another gold, but left instead with one bronze courtesy Milcah Cheywa, who was denied by Yuliya Zaripova of Russia.  Russia had a great day with two golds - Zaripova's and Chernova's in the heptathlon, where she denied Jessica Ennis a much anticipated gold medal.

Other golds on the day went to Germany (men's discus), Brazil (women's pole vault) and Grenada, with perhaps the race of the day coming in the men's 400m, where Kirani James, the exceptional 19 year old (or he will be on Thursday) beat LaShawn Merrit in a great final 100m to claim gold.  Having been identified as one for the future, James ushered the future in immediately by delivering on his promise, and setting up a great rivalry with Merritt ahead of London next year.

Short event summaries below.

Men's 800m - Rudisha delivers

The 800m event has traditionally been regarded as one of the most open and unpredictable in the World Championships.  As recently as 2009, there were probably a dozen men all capable of winning gold and if you ran the final five different times, there was a chance that you'd get five different winners!

That was then, this is now - David Rudisha, so disappointed to fail in 2009 when much was expected of him, has since matured into a world record holder and dominant world beater.  As a result,when he stands on the start line in any race on the global circuit, the thinking is usually how fast will he run, and competitively speaking, by what margin will he win?

The World Champs are a little different - the lack of pace-makers means that the race has to be won either tactically (which can see normally unheralded runners emerge in frantic final 200m sprints - watch the 1500m races to see this happen!), or it must be run from the front.  So the question ahead of today's 800m final was not only whether Rudisha would come through the test (most expected it), but how would he run in order to avoid the numerous tactical pitfalls of the event?

Those who "guaranteed" victory on the basis of Rudisha's superior times alone perhaps overlook the difficulty of running sub-1:43 as a solo effort from the front, and even with Rudisha's dominance in terms of his PB compared to other athlete's, the field is competitive enough that a race finishing in 1:43 would be close until at least the final 50m - tension or tightness would be punished.   So this was going to be an "anxious" race for the world record holder.  The general expectation was that he'd avoid the bunching and boxing of a slow race and lead from the front.

In the end, that's exactly what he did, and he ran the 800m final a lot like a middle distance race.  That is, he started fast (23.81s for the first 200m), got into the lead, then controlled the pace in the middle of the race (27.52s and 26.66s for the next two quarters) and then picked it up again with 25.92s over the final 200m (see figure right) to win gold going away from the chasing field.  This kind of pattern is what you usually see in 1500m and mile races, and that he did it so strongly in an 800m race (under pressure from behind) is testament to Rudisha's quality, and his obvious capacity to run faster when needed.

It was enough for a gun-to-tape victory, in a controlled manner that is possible only when you are completely in command of the event and the competition.  The time of 1:43.91 was made to look comfortable, and the way the race was constructed suggested that it was.  In second, a late charge by Abubaker Kaki (1:44.41) made good on the expectation that he would be Rudisha's biggest challenger, though in truth, he was never truly challenging.  Yuriy Borzakovskiy claimed bronze for Russia.

Rudisha delivered on the expectation and if he stays healthy, it's difficult to see an 800m gold medal going anywhere other than Kenya for the next few World Championship cycles.  The once-unpredictable event has become "routine" (but not quite a forgone conclusion), and that's a measure of the quality of David Rudisha.

Women's 3000m steeplechase - front-running championship record to Zaripova

Speaking of dominant front-running performances, gold in the women's steeplechase went to Yuliya Zaripova of Russia, in another gun to tape victory.  She hit the first hurdle in the lead and never surrendered it, reeling off a 3:00, then 3:04 and a final kilometer in 3:03 for a world-leading time and personal best.  In doing so, she went one better than in 2009, where she had been outkicked by Marta Dominguez of Spain (as Yuliya Zarudneva back then).

The challenge came initially from Kenya, but one by one they dropped off, and it would be Tunisia's  Habiba Ghribi who claimed silver with a strong final 800m.  The dominant athlete of the year so far, Milcah Cheywa on Kenya, who has basically wrapped up the Diamond League title for the event, would come third to claim consecutive bronze medals in World Championships.

It was, in one sense, a surprise, because Cheywa has dominated in 2011, going unbeaten until today.  In  another sense, perhaps it was not.  The Kenyans, for all their depth and complete dominance in the men's steeple, haven't quite managed to dominate the women's discipline.  Yet.  Rather, Russia have been the championship performers, and currently hold the championship record from 2007, the Olympic gold, and the world record (in the Beijing Olympics).  The steeple is clearly an event they have identified as a gold medal prospect.

Having watched Kenya's women in the 10,000m, and knowing the caliber of athlete they have over 5,000m, I suspect that it is only a matter of time before the same is true in the steeple.  For now, the event is perhaps more "open" as a result of its relative newness in athletics, and I expect that to change soon, once athletes of the caliber of Vivian Cheruiyot, Linet Masai and Sally Kipyego start to run in it as well. Once athletes with 14:30 5,000 caliber begin to turn to the steeple, I'd expect the performances to leap ten seconds forward and sub-9 clockings will become common.  Cheywa then, is the first great steepler from Kenya, but those who follow, I expect will surpass that level.  It will be interesting to see if the rest of the world "follows" or whether we see the same situation to develop as for men's steeplechase.

But right now, Russia lead the way, and Zaripova leads the world.

Men's 400m - Kirani James delivers on his promise in the race of the day

Kirani James of Grenada became a name to watch when he ran a world-leader a few weeks before the World Champs.  His talent was undisputed, and only two days short of his 19th birthday, everyone was saying that no matter what happened in Daegu, he was a name to watch in the future.  Well, that wasn't enough for Kirani James - he was ready for success now.  And so he won the gold in the 400m in a time of 44.60s, with a late charge to catch and pass LaShawn Merritt (44.63s, only 0.03s behind).  It was a race reminiscent of the great finish between Amantle Montsho and Allyson Felix yesterday, but with one difference - this time, the charging athlete did overhaul the leader to win.

For Merritt, it would have been a disappointment in the sense that he was 10m from defending his title, but he may be satisfied nonetheless.  A 21-month ban for a drug infringement (Extenze - improve your manhood) meant he was in Daegu as a wildcard, his drug ban ending so recently that he didn't even have the opportunity to race in the USA trials.  He leaves Daegu knowing there's work to do, but in possession of silver and the world lead from his first round heat.  Third went to Kevin Borlee of Belgium, one half of the identical Borlee twins, in 44.90s (Note - the initial post said Jonathan - my apologies! That's the trouble with identical twins! My mistake!)

James has a combination of power and relaxation, and today he came under pressure from Merritt with 180m to go.  Despite looking a little more ragged than he has in previous races, he responded without losing his form, and becomes the third youngest world champion in history (Ismael Kirui and Eliud Kipchoge were younger).  If he continues to improve, he's the man to beat for a long time to come.  At the very least, his rivalry with Merritt over the next few weeks and into London will mean the 400m is an event to watch.

Other events

In other events, Robert Harting won the men's discus.  The only reason I mention this is that in Berlin, this provided one of the highlights of the Championships, because Harting's celebrations involved picking up Berlino and spinning him around.  Berlino, the greatest mascot ever seen in athletics (and who should have been imported to Daegu for a week).  Ok, that was a little tongue in cheek, but Berlino was a highlight and added a bit to the entertainment value of the Berlin Champs.  There's a video at the bottom of this post.

Jessica Ennis did NOT win the heptathlon, which was a bit of a surprise. It had gone mostly to plan for the British athletics icon until the javelin, when a large underperformance saw Russia's Tatyana Chernova leap ahead and then defend her points lead in the 800m to claim gold.  Sebastian Coe was the invited dignitary for the medal ceremony, and he was no doubt expecting to hand gold to Ennis, who is one of Great Britain's stars in the build-up to the London 2012 Olympics.  A disappointment for Ennis then, and one wonders whether this increases or decreases the pressure on her.  She'll take heart knowing that it was really just one very weak event that cost her the points, and she has the opportunity to bounce back in a home Olympics.  It certainly adds intrigue to the event for London, and perhaps reduces the pressure on Ennis (though not by much).

The women's pole vault was won by Fabiana Murer of Brazil, with a 4.85m clearance for a South American record.  Silver and bronze went to Martina Strutz of Germany (4.80m, a national record) and Sveltana Feofanova of Russia, respectively.  Completely out of the medals was Yelena Isinbayeva in sixth.  Her comeback hasn't gone quite according to plan, though London will surely be the goal.  This result, as it has done in many events, perhaps asks more questions than it answers ahead of the Olympics.

Tomorrow is a rest day (bizarrely - I don't recall a rest day in an IAAF Championships before, so beats me why).  It sees the 20km walk. The next big track action comes on Thursday, and I can't understand why this rest day has been introduced.  If anyone knows, please let us know in the comments!

Ross


And lastly, here is Berlino.  The Daegu mascot is trying, but these are big shoes to fill!  Enjoy the athletics on Thursday!

The Blake-Bolt false start dispute

Did Blake flinch, and was Bolt unfairly disqualified?

So it may be a new day, but perhaps not surprisingly, the debate about the men's 100m final has continued. But with one unexpected twist.  Rather than talking about the "what if Bolt had not false started?", this morning I woke to the question of "Should Blake, and not Bolt, have been given the false start?".

The question was raised on Letsrun.com, but came via all-athletics.com, and basically, it has been noticed in slow-motion replays that Yohan Blake, who starts in Lane 6 to the immediate right of Usain Bolt, twitches very slightly in the "get set" position.  Below is a video, which is courtesy of Letsrun.com, showing the start.  The moment in question is at around 13 seconds, so you may need to play it back and forth a few times



You'll see Blake's left leg move on the block, and then Bolt jumps out.  It was very clearly a false start by Bolt, make no mistake.  The question is whether the twitch by Blake, that tiny movement, should have constituted a false start or not?  And if "yes", then should he have been disqualified along with Bolt, or were they two independent events?

It's important to explain the rules on this one. In terms of the starting, the rules say the following:

1. From Rule 162.5. "On the command 'On your marks' or 'Set,' as the case may be, all athletes shall at once and without delay assume their full and final set position."
2. From Rule 162.5. "After the command 'On your marks' or 'Set,' if an athlete disturbs other athletes in the race through sound or otherwise, the Starter shall abort the start."
3. From Rule 162.8. "The Starter should warn or disqualify only such athlete or athletes who, in his opinion, were responsible for the false start."

Technically speaking, there is an aspect of each of the above rules that was contravened by Blake with that tiny movement.  Realistically, however, it's a little more tricky than this.

If you read the IAAF Starting Guidelines (kindly sent by JC, thanks!), you'll see point 5.2 say that following:

There is no perfect holding time in the set position. In reality, there must be a discernible hold to ensure all athletes are steady and in the correct starting position. The Starter must stop a race if:

• An athlete, after assuming a full and final set position, commences his start before receiving the report of the gun (Rule 162.6).  

• He receives a signal from the false start equipment. 

• Any Recaller observes an irregularity with a start. 

In addition, not all movements in the “set” position are to be regarded as “commencing the start” and thereby potentially leading to a false start. Such instances should be dealt with either by standing the field up or in serious cases, invoking the disciplinary provisions.

So a couple of things about this clause:

First, the starter and a pair of Recallers are present to watch athletes and make what is basically a judgment call about any irregularities, such as those small movements.  They also have electronic timing equipment, in the form of pressure sensors in the blocks that pick up any movements prior to the gun.  In theory, if an athlete is found to have started (that is, applied pressure to blocks) while in the "set" position, or sooner than 0.100 s after the gun, it is deemed a false start because it is theoretically not possible to REACT this quickly. The equipment, combined with visual judgment, is supposed to detect unusual premature movement.

Importantly, note that it is not necessarily the case that all movements are deemed to lead to a false start - some instances can lead to an aborted start where the field stands up, and if serious, they can lead to disqualification, but it's not necessarily a given that it will be disqualification.

So, returning to the Blake/Bolt incident, that movement, as clear as it was in super slow-motion replays and HD, may not have been deemed sufficient to be called "irregular".  I suspect that such small movements are quite common, though the Blake movement is clear on the replay.  It's a judgment call as to whether it should have constituted, at best, an aborted start where the field stands up.  At worst, it was a false start of its own.  What we can almost certainly surmise that it didn't produce enough of a pressure change on the block to register on the equipment, and it clearly wasn't seen by the officials at the time.  The rest is likely subjective judgment, hence the controversy.

Next: Does this mean Bolt should NOT have been disqualified?

The next thing is that IF you assume that Blake did twitch, is it true that Bolt should not have been disqualified, or were the two false starts independent events?  This is important because again, if you read the rules, you see the following:

In theory, a Starter can award a false start to several athletes if it is indicated that their movement was more or less simultaneous. Otherwise, the false start must go to the athlete indicated as making the first movement (Point 5.3)  

In other words, if there are two false starts, then there is a call to be made about whether they are independent, or whether one influenced the other.  You may recall the case of Sally Pearson and Laura Turner in the Delhi Commonwealth Games last year - here, these two athletes false started 0.001 seconds apart.  Turner was first, and so she was disqualified, but raced under protest.  Pearson was initially not disqualified, but was later DQd on appeal, because it's clear that her false start was independent of Turner's - there's no way you react and produce a start 1/1000th of a second after the "instigator".  So in this case, both athletes were rightly disqualified for what are independent or simultaneous false starts.

So, back to Bolt and Blake...

• If you believe that Bolt was 'triggered' to jump by Blake's movement, then Bolt should NOT have been disqualified, but Blake should have been.  
• If you believe that Bolt was unaffected by that movement, then BOTH should have been disqualified.  
• And if you believe that Blake's movement was too small and not "irregular", then Bolt is the only athlete who should have been disqualified.

A range of scenarios, and ultimately, it comes down to a mix of technicality, but needs a judgment call.  The way I see it, Blake's movement was small and slight enough that it wasn't seen by the recallers and wasn't detected by the equipment.  Therefore, I'd say an aborted start, not a false start is the fairest sanction.  After the fact, that helps nothing, of course.  As for Bolt reacting, he himself hasn't mentioned it, but the argument is that it may be sub-conscious.  In theory, they are close enough that it is possible.  But ultimately, seems a judgment call.  What would yours be?

Ross

Day 2: False starts and flying finishes

False starts and flying finishes: Day 2 drama in Daegu

So if Day 1 produced dominance for Kenya, Day 2 produced drama.  It was, in the day's two track finals, a day full of drama.  It began with an incredible final lap sprint in the men's 10,000m final, and ended with the disqualification of Usain Bolt.

It was that disqualification that will hog the headlines tomorrow, and therein lies the first problem.  Bolt false started, there's no question.  His false start was so big that I would estimate that half the stadium realized it before the replay and before the official decision.  The air was let out of the stadium more dramatically than I can recall and the final went on to become one of the bigger anti-climaxes I can recall.  And that is in sport, let alone athletics.

And so spare a thought for Yohan Blake, who went on to win the title (at least keeping the medal and bragging rights in Jamaica) in 9.92s.  But the reality is that the media coverage will be split, and heavily in favour of Bolt's DQ.  And the thing is, there's no absolute guarantee that Bolt would have won the race anyway.  He was a massive favorite, yes, and he looked good in the heats and in his semi, but Blake also looked very strong and the 9.93s was into a 1.4m/s headwind.  That's probably worth a low 9.80s and that would certainly have extended Bolt.  I still would have made him an overwhelming favoirte, but at best, we were denied a really intriguing race, and Blake will be denied the coverage he perhaps deserves.  But, having said that, I can also appreciate where the focus will be placed!

The false start rule under the microscope

This zero-tolerance false start rule falls under the microscope (again) as a result.  Today we had some great posts on Twitter, and so I'd guess people are split roughly 50-50 on the issue.  Here's an article calling the rule either "cruel" or "inhumane", for example.

You may recall an era where every single athlete was given a warning.  The result was that you could have up to nine false starts in a race before you saw a disqualification.  For a few reasons, that rule was scrapped.  First, it means that races sometimes took 15 minutes to get underway!  Secondly, it enabled athletes to manipulate the race by deliberately false starting.

So it was a step forward in terms of time-management when the rule was changed to one false start for the field.  That happened in 2003, and meant that the first false start placed the entire field on a warning, the second would see an athlete disqualified.  That didn't deal with the gamesmanship aspect, and it probably didn't create a fair scenario because one athlete would get away with a jump, others would not.  If memory serves me, this happened to Bolt in Berlin in 2009, and as you'll know, he went on to run 9.58s as a result of the reprieve it provided.

Today, no such luck. The rule was changed in 2010, and suddenly, everyone was on a final warning, from the outset. Bolt made a massive false start - there was no controversy at least - and so he was gone.  The rule has been controversial, and it's not just today's race that has made it so.  There has been a growing sense that this kind of thing would happen soon, and may have a negative impact on the sport.  And Tyson Gay had raised his objections to it back in 2010 and he made a very pertinent points.  I think the key one is pointing out the inconsistencies between starters. He is quoted in the interview as saying:

"They need some sort of automatic sensor or automatic gun so that it goes off the same time every time. We have different blocks, we have different people holding the gun, it's ridiculous"

I can see how that would be an issue, though I can also see some of you reading this saying that's part of the sport, and the elite have to deal with it.  I think that given the severity of the punishment, a more 'secure' method at the start would be beneficial and even necessary, so I would agree with Gay.  I've seen some starters hold guys for an eternity, others not (though having said this, this is not what happened to Bolt).

Stepping back a little, there are a number of things to consider.  Swimming has a one false start rule, and it has been successful (that is, relatively uncontroversial) there.  I can't think of a big DQ in the last four or five major championships.  If I'm missing one, let me know.  However, I'd be cautious about making the direct comparison between the sports and saying that if it works there, it should work in athletics.  There are a few differences between the starts, and even the stadiums where the athletes race.  The starting position in running (in my personal opinion) places more of a premium on the start because it's a less steady position and you have a three-phase start (on your marks, get set, and bang) compared to two phases for swimming.

I can't think of any other sports that punish athletes as severely for making "errors" that are actually part of the purpose of the sport.  By that, I mean that in track, the entire objective is to get out of the blocks fast and get to the finish line as fast as possible.  The purpose thus encourages athletes to be at the limit for speed.  To me, the analogy is that in football (soccer, I mean), players have to win the ball, and are thus compelled to tackle.  Sometimes they mistime challenges.  We don't condone the mistake, but unless it's deliberate or very dangerous, they receive yellow cards - a warning, which is followed by dismissal for repeat offence.  Of course, the difference is that soccer unfolds over 90 minutes, come what may, whereas in track, the race would never start if every guy got a warning first!  As we can remember all too well...!  So I appreciate the implications of warnings.

But the downside of the rule was made clear today - the biggest name in the sport, its icon and probably one of the five most recognizable sportspeople in any sport was eliminated from the marquee event of his sport.  Again, the counter-point to this is that if we were on the warning rule, and say Kim Collins had jumped the gun, Bolt could well have done it second, and he'd also be DQ'd for his first offence - same situation as today, except it would have taken two minutes longer to happen!  So these scenarios can go any way you want them to, and so the more I think about it, the more I realise there's really no "right" way to do it!

For the IAAF, it's a sticky one because let's face it, athletics needs Bolt, and it needs to be able to leverage his success to expand the sport.  Athletics is a commodity, and so it competes with other sports, and other forms of entertainment, and so there's a big regret when something like a DQ happens on the biggest stage of all.

Think for a second of "moderate athletics fans", those who really only watch the massive events, and the massive athletes.  There is no more massive combination than Bolt in a World Championship 100m.  What are these moderates thinking tonight?  That they were denied a chance to see the greatest because of a rule they don't fully understand?  Are these people more or less likely to switch on to watch next week, when the Diamond League race is on in Zurich?  Not that this argues for a rule change, but it does hopefully make you realize the complexity of the problem.  This is not as simple as saying "rules are rules" or that the rule MUST be changed.

Also, I am not that I'm saying that certain people must be excused - if there is a rule, then it applies to all.  I just wonder though whether it might be worth accepting that in a race where hundredths of seconds matter, where so much hype and build-up goes into 10 seconds of running, a mistake should not be punished in the way that it currently is. Perhaps a possible sensible compromise comes from this really good piece by the Robert Johnson of Letsrun, where he makes the compelling point that in a major championship, the rule should stand, whereas if it were to happen in a Diamond League race, where organizers pay appearance fees to get athletes so that fans will spend their money specifically to see an athlete compete, it might be worth allowing the athlete to continue to race unofficially.  Let's not deny people "access" as easily as we are, in other words.

I think that may be the best compromise regarding disqualification and certainly for these events.  For the big championships, I'd still like to see a return to the one false start for the whole race rule, but that's my personal feeling.  And I realise it means that the second guy to jump the gun gets the red card, but at least this allows everyone that first "aggressive" attempt at getting away first.  After that, everyone has to sit back in the blocks, be a little more conservative.

But in all this, let's not get carried away and say that it's the IAAF or the rule's fault.  There have been a lot of people, including Bolt's manager saying things like "this false start rule, it's going to screw us all up", but that's kind of like blaming gravity for your death if you jumped off a high building.  It's clearly the fault of the athlete who false starts, not the rule - the issue is whether the fault is worthy of the severity of the sanction, at least the first time.

I don't have an answer, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.  Unfortunately, the result of all this is that from now on, Yohan Blake is world champion, but when people talk about it, most times they'll say "wasn't that the year that..."  A pity, but well done to Blake - he beat everyone.

Men's 10,000m - incredible final lap

OK, so honest answer, who picked Ibrahim Jeilan to win the gold?  Mo Farah was the big favourite for the gold, and the question was, would Kenenisa Bekele show up out of nowhere, for his first race in two years, and win a fifth title?  The answer was no, he actually stopped at about 6km, and the battle was then on between Farah and the Ethiopians (Kenya's men played second fiddle to the women big-time - they finished out of the medals, in contrast to the all conquering women last night, so a bit of a rebound for them!)

I think Tadese did much of the early work.  I say "think" because I have never sat through such dire coverage of a distance race before.  We saw the first two laps, and then cut to crowd shots.  A few long jump attempts were shown, with three replays on each one, and a healthy dose of more stadium and crowd shots between. Then it was about 15 seconds of the 10,000m race (the race was already at 4,000m) before we cut to the middle rounds of the discus final.  Middle rounds, not the medal deciding throws, mind you.  Again, crowd shots to keep us entertained between throws and more replays and eventually, with about 2km to go, we got uninterrupted coverage of the 10,000m.

I believe that in the UK, there was a better feed - count yourselves lucky, because the rest of the world saw probably 25% of the race, that's all.  It was, as one tweeter said, the equivalent of watching the first 5m and last 20m of the 100m final.  When you combine this kind of diabolical directorship with the general, non-athletics fraternity perception of the 100m final and Bolt's DQ, it wasn't a great day for athletics, all in all.  I honestly believe the IAAF should step in and control the broadcast because most athletics enthusiasts feel this way, some very strongly.  If you look at the "package" that is Formula 1, or NFL or basketball, it's slick, polished and adds to the value of the sport.  Athletics is lagging behind in a big way.  If you want to read a great insight into this, read this article, focused on the Women's Marathon, but it could just as well have been written about the shambolic coverage of the men's 10,000m final.

The end was spectacular though, when it came.  As mentioned, Mo Farah has dominated every race this year, and always with the same approach.  His finishing kick had seen off most runners in the race before this one, over 5,000m and 10,000m, and with the pace being relatively slow, it was looking more and more like his kind of race.  I made the error, with 1km to go, of saying that he really should win it from there, with the kick over the last 300m.

Then Farah went earlier than usual.  He hit the front with 600m to go and wound the pace up, the big surge coming in the home straight, approaching the bell.  The penultimate lap was done in about 60 seconds, and Farah charged through the bell, opening up five meters of Merga and Jeilan behind him.  Down the back straight, that lead grew and then held at about 8 to 10m.  It looked typical of Bekele and Gebrselassie, actually, in the days when they kicked early and then held, before kicking again.

But this time, Jeilan clawed it back, very slightly.  Farah covered the 200m from the bell in about 26.4 seconds, but Jeilan hung on.  With 200m to go, he was still in touch (just), edged back around the bend, and with 120m to go, it was clear that Farah would have to kick again to hold him off.  The final straight was a magnificent race, Jeilan having the speed to close it out.  A high 52 second lap compared to Farah's low 53 seconds was enough to give Ethiopia its fifth consecutive gold over 10,000m.

Did Farah go too early?  I don't know.  I do wonder whether a final 300m kick might have been better, but that's hindsight for you!  He certainly went earlier than most might have expected, but that's not the same thing as saying "too early".  He ran the final lap in a shade over 53 seconds, and that's normally good enough.  That he went from 450m doesn't change what Jeilan did, and to hang on, then claw back the deficit was a magnificent run.  I think the best conclusion is that Farah raced well, he did everything he could, but found Jeilan just that little bit faster in the end.  Farah will have another chance over 5,000m and I still wouldn't bet against him.

Jeilan for his part, was an unknown before this.  The Letsrun analysis of the race (which is worth a read) has some information on him - a 27:02 at the age of 17 says he had enormous talent, and he's spent the last few years honing that in Japan, and he's clearly a class act.  It will be interesting to see if he builds on this, and becomes a dominant distance runner like some of his illustrious predecessors.  He certainly entertained in the victory lap, a much more expressive champion, dancing, posturing, and he speaks good english, which I do think is a "value-add" for the media side of the sport.  His is a name most won't be unaware of ever again!

Other events

Speaking of talented 17-year olds from Ethiopia, Mohamed Aman sprung the surprise of the 800m semi-finals, when he beat Abubaker Kaki in heat one.  Kaki in fact finished third and with only the top 2 guaranteed a final spot, the Sudanese had a nervous wait during semi finals 2 and 3.  In the end, he was the fastest "loser", and in fact, his 1:44 time gave him the fourth fastest time, but his semi-final wouldn't have given him too much confidence.  He was super aggressive, running the first 200m in 23.8s, and hitting the bell in 50.19.  He continued to slow after that and with 120m to go, it was clear he was in for a real battle, with the field, some 10 m behind at the bell, now on his shoulder.

In the end, Aman won the race, Marcin Lewandowski was second and Kaki third.  The other semis were won by Nick Symmonds and the incomparable David Rudisha, who seemed to coast to a 1:44.20 in his. It means the "dream final" of Rudisha vs Kaki is on, and happens on Tuesday.  Rudisha is a huge favourite, but the slightest tightness or messed up pacing, and the field will be close enough to pounce.  Rudisha seems capable of a 1:43-low, and I'm not sure others are, so it will probably take a Rudisha "off day" to produce the surprise, but that can happen - this is the 800m after all!

The men's decathlon gold was also awarded tonight - it was solidly defended by Trey Hardee of the USA, but the excitement came in the form of Ashton Eaton, who entered the final event, the 1500m, in third place and needing about four seconds to overhaul Leonel Suarez of Cuba.  He did just that, running aggressively, but storing up for a huge kick on the final lap, that the Cuban was unable to match.  In the end, Eaton got just over 5 seconds, and the silver changed hands in the final 100m of the two-day event. Hardee was solid, helped by a PB in the javelin, but Eaton's "breakthrough" continued and the two should resume their battle with Suarez in London.

In other events, the men's 110m hurdles heads towards what may be the most closely contested race of the championships.  The big three - Robles, Liu Xiang and David Oliver - are all healthy and have PBs within 0.01 seconds of one another.  The race the semi and final tomorrow.  And LaShawn Merrit laid down a great marker for the 400m with a 44.35 in qualifying.  It's the fastest in the world this year, and given the state of men's 400m running, it's wide open enough that this kind of performance, if carried through, makes Merritt the one to watch.  The semis are tomorrow night.

Also tomorrow are the women's 400m and 100m finals.  Will the 400m give Botswana its first gold from Amantle Montsho. or will Allyson Felix take the first step towards a double gold?  It's a super deep race, and can realistically be won from Lanes 1 and 8 as well, but Montsho starts as slight favorite.  And can Carmelita Jeter be beaten by the Jamaicans?  After today's action, don't bet on anything!

Enjoy the morning heats (if you watch them) and the racing tomorrow!

Ross

IAAF World Champs - Kenya's day

Day 1 belongs to Kenya...entirely.  As in all 100%, 6 out of 6

The day 1 medal table at the IAAF World Championships makes for extra-ordinary reading.  There's only one team on it - Kenya.  It a display of unparalleled dominance, Kenya took every single medal on offer.  It helps that the medals were available in the longest distance running events, the marathon and the 10,000m events for women.

But it was dominance like we haven't seen on a given day - first, second and third to kick off the day in the marathon, and then first, second, third and fourth to end it in the 10,000m.

Both races were testament to team dominance, but were punctuated by individual superstars, as first Edna Kiplagat re-inforced her emergence as a marathon star, and then Vivian Cheruiyot underlined her status as an all-time great in the making.  Both where also characterized by a battle between Kenya and Ethiopia.  In the end, it was no contest.  Kenya has always been a distance powerhouse, and in recent years, their women have begun to achieve the dominance we used to see from their men.

Today, they exceeded it, with arguably the most dominant day for any nation in the history of the sport.  Only six medals were on offer, of course, and there have been days where a nation has won more golds or more medals.  But six out of six, 100% success, is the kind of start to the championships that mean that even if they win nothing else (and with Rudisha in the 800, Chemos in the Steeplechase, the men's steeplechase, the men's 1500 and Vivian Cheruiyot in the 5,000 to come, this seems impossible), Kenya have already had a successful 2011.

Women's marathon - the biggest threat to Kenya was a Kenyan heel-clip!

The women's marathon was won by Edna Kiplagat in 2:28.43.  Priscah Jeptoo took second, while Sharon Cherop took bronze.

Cherop also nearly took her team-mate out of the race.  With about 15 minutes left to run, Cherop and Kiplagat cut across one another and they clipped legs.  In truth, it was nobody's fault, but Kiplagat went down fairly hard.  Cherop sportingly waited, and they helped Kiplagat back into a rhythm and she went on to win the day.

It was that kind of day for Kenya - the rest of the world was unable to keep up, and the biggest threat they faced turned out to be from within!  For a more detailed analysis of the race as well as press conference footage (and this will be the source of the best insight you get on all the events in these Championships), check out the Letsrun.com analysis of the marathon.

Women's 10,000m - another sweep, led by Cheruiyot

Then came the women's 10,000m.  This was a race billed as a clash between Vivian Cheruiyot and Mesert Defar, but it never materialized.  It was also expected to produce much drama, as track 10,000m races often do, particularly the 2009 title, where Meseret Defar tied up with 50m to go, then Melkamu looked to have won it and even began celebrating before Linet Masai pipped her for gold.

The drama was absent this time, but there was another "d" - Dominance.  Kenya utterly dominated this race, and would claim the top four places.  After the early pace was set by Shalane Flanagan, the Kenyans took over just before 4,000m in the form of defending champion Linet Masai who just maintained a steady pace of around 3:05/km.  The field was progressively cut down, and eventually, Defar was dropped with 2km to go.

That was a big surprise - her 5km season's best of 14:29 earlier this year would have suggested a better display than she produced, especially given that the first 5km of this final was run in 15:47.  Things must have turned for the worse since that performance, because with 8km to go, she was gapped and she would eventually not even finish the race.

At the front, only Meselech Melkamu resisted, the lone presence among four Kenyans.  Five reached the bell together, and then Cheruiyot went ahead and wound the pace up.  Only Sally Kipyego stayed in contact (not Masai as the commentary said until about 10 min after the race!), and Melkamu was in third, seemingly poised to break the Kenyan sweep.

But with 100m to go, Melkamu was reeled in and passed, first by Masai (who deserved a medal for her efforts - she led for almost the entire final 6,000m) and then by Priscah Cherono.  It meant Kenya went 1, 2, 3 and 4.

The pace in the end wasn't all that spectacular - Cheruiyot ran the final 400m in about 61 seconds, to clock 30:48.98 (second half is 15:01, which is quick).  Cheruiyot picked up a personal best, and her first gold of these championships.  Based on the form of the Ethiopians, few would bet against her winning the 5,000 later in the week.  We've seen faster races, and we've seen faster final laps, but we've rarely seen such complete dominance of a day and two events.

Kenya must be a happy place to be in the village tonight!

Other action - big guns on course, so far

In other action, the men's 800m went more or less to plan.  David Rudisha and Abubaker Kaki both completed comfortable front-running victories in their heats.  Their next stop is the semi-final, where it should be a lot tighter, but they look good bets to reach the anticipated head-to-head in Tuesday's final.

Usain Bolt rocketed out of the blocks in his 100m heat, and then "jogged" to a victory in 10.10s.  With Powell, Rodgers, Gay and Mullings all out (that's the four fastest men by time), Bolt was already the favourite, but as far as "routine" 10.10s performances go, Bolt made his look pretty spectacular.  The semi-final and final are tomorrow night.  Don't bet on a record, but don't bet against Bolt winning either.

Other events to look out for tomorrow are the men's 10,000m final, where there's a chance that the gold will NOT be going to Kenya or Ethiopia.  Mo Farah is a big favourite, but the big danger will be Kenenisa Bekele.  He hasn't raced in more than a year, and so no one really knows what to expect from him.  In one sense, you'd think it foolish to bet against a man who has actually never lost a competitive 10,000m.  But on the other, you'd be foolish to bet on a man who hasn't raced in so long!  Bekele is a big unknown, and that should be a fascinating race!

Follow us on Twitter for quick thoughts and updates

That's it for Day 1.  Please join us for coverage throughout - the action in Korea takes place at a really inconvenient time here in South Africa, as it happens right in the middle of the work day.  I'd wake up early to watch, but missing work might be a bit challenging...on some days, anyway!  So I may miss a few things live, but will try to bring you as much analysis and reporting as possible, even if it is delayed.

The twitter account will be active though, with regular thoughts and updates, and so if you want to stay abreast of the super-condensed Science of Sport analysis, follow us on Twitter!  It's already produced the debate that inspired the last post on Oscar Pistorius' performances!

For the rest, Letsrun.com are in Daegu, and their great post-race analysis and pre-race previews are highly recommended, so keep that page as a favorite for the next week!

Join us tomorrow!
Ross

Exercise in the heat - Craig Mottram undone in Osaka?

Craig Mottram was one of the "hot" (excuse the pun) favourites for the Men's 5000m final at the recent IAAF World Championships in Athletics. As we all know by now, he finished 13th out of a field of 14, who ran the race in the slowest time in Championship history! Hardly the performance of a pre-race favourite.

In the immediate aftermath of that race, Mottram was reported as "struggling to find the reasons", saying only that he was "gutted". A week has now passed, and Mottram's coach is suggesting that it was Mottram's failure to adapt to the heat that was responsible for the disastrous performance.

Nic Bideau, who has coached Mottram for eight years, was of the opinion that Mottram should have finished second at worst in that race. In an interview with the Sydney Morning Herald, he stated that "He just couldn't run. He didn't deal with the conditions well."

Apparently, Mottram did not travel to Osaka in the weeks leading up to the race to adapt to the hotter conditions. In a previous post, we described how the two factors that determined one's ability to run in the heat were body size (larger runners struggle more) and adaptation to the heat. Mottram had neither in his favour. Obviously, his larger body size is something outside of his control, but the choice to spend his preparation time in the cooler city of Chiba is a somewhat strange one.

Admittedly, he was not the only one to do so - apparently (according to his coach), many other athletes prepared from London and were able to cope with the high temperatures. I wonder who they were and whether they were perhaps much smaller runners than Mottram. That would certainly account for their ability to cope.

Also, it's interesting to speculate what training he might have done. From the report, it seems that Mottram was based in Chiba for four days, and then travelled to Osaka on the Tuesday before his Thursday qualifier. As we described in the previous post, it would take 6 days to adapt to the heat, but when the athlete has only two days before racing, followed by only two days before another race, that adaptation may never happen, which could well explain his poor performance.

Regardless, it seems that a lesson was learned, especially ahead of the Beijing Olympics, where conditions should be equally challenging. It's just curious that they needed to learn this lesson as "self-experiment" when the evidence and basis for what they should have done is everywhere to be found and freely available. So a failure of intel and planning is more to blame than the heat...

The IAAF World Championships - a recap and the Best and Worst of...

So the IAAF World Championships in athletics concluded on the weekend, and we’ve tried to bring you as much analysis and insight as possible here at The Science of Sport. So in our final post on the World Champs, now that the dust has settled, we bring you a wrap up of our “best” and “worst” for the week of athletics. Obviously, we’re biased in favour of the track events, and especially the longer distance running, but we’ll be as objective as possible. Feel free to throw your hat in the ring…

Best male athlete

In terms of medals, our vote goes to Tyson Gay, who claimed three golds, winning a sprint (100m-200m) double and gold in the 4 x 100m relays. This particular double has been pretty common in recent years, with Maurice Greene and Justin Gatlin both achieving it. Hopefully, Gay will not go the same was as Gatlin! Gay is a big-race runner, his greatest strength seems to be his ability to put all other athletes out of his mind and withstand the pressure of a head to head race. Asafa Powell, with whom he shares one of the great rivalries in the sport, does not possess this gift, and Gay’s edge over him may grow in the future.

On the other end of the spectrum, an honourable mention for Bernard Lagat of the USA repeated a double that only Hicham el Guerrouj has achieved in World Champs history, winning the 1500m and 5000m titles. His victories, both of which we analysed in a bit more detail (click for 1500m and 5000m) were achieved after a reasonably bad season, but he was the dominant man. Admittedly, his rivals gifted him the 5000m title, but few will remember that.

Finally, perhaps the best individual performance goes to Jeremy Wariner, who became the third fastest 400m runner in history, winning the title in 43.46secs. He also anchored the USA to a gold in the 4 x 400m relay, running close to 43-flat, and is one of the superstars of the sport.

Best female athlete

Speaking of superstars, you’d have to look hard to beat Allyson Felix, who, at just 21 years, appears to be destined for greatness. The biggest winning margin in the history of the World Champs in the 200m, the fastest leg in the 4 x 400m (by a long way), and a gold in the 4 x 100m were the performances that earned this athlete our vote. She is a majestic runner, looking almost out of place against the much bigger, more muscular women she runs against. And she now has four golds, at the age of 21. Whether she’ll run the 400m individual event in Beijing remains to be seen. If she does, it would be difficult to bet against her winning four golds on the track. The only thing preventing that may be the tough schedule. The other regrettable fact is that she will likely never be a world record holder. In fact, she’s unlikely to even challenge a record – the women’s sprint events are so tainted with drug use they could just as well begin classifying records by the era they were set. The problem is, no one knows where it starts and ends – asks Marion Jones.

But regardless, Allyson Felix is a superstar, and will be the light of women’s athletics for many years to come.

An honourable mention goes to what we believe is the best performance of the Champs, by Janeth Jepkosgei in the 800m final. You can read about this here. The first Kenyan woman to win a middle distance title, she ran a race that others described as suicidal, winning with dominance that is rarely seen at this level.

Men’s most disappointing performance

A very subjective category this one, and our bias is difficult to eliminate. But Craig Mottram, the Australian who everyone fancied to mix it with the Kenyans and Ethiopians in the 5000m final was a huge disappointment. He was not even to make an impression in a race that was the slowest in the history of the Championships.

Another candidate is Bershawn Jackson, who was heading for a comfortable qualifier in the 400m Hurdles semi-final, before he got himself horribly out of step and bunny hopped straight into the final hurdle. He stumbled, slowed and jogged home, his world title to be surrendered in his absence in the final.

But our vote goes to the entire field in the Men’s 5000m final, Mottram included. Only Bernard Lagat escapes mention. How a group of elite athletes could set out at 3min/km pace when the world’s best 1500m runner was in the field is beyond belief. Of course, taking the pace out harder may have done nothing to the result, but at least they’d have had a chance. The way the race developed, it was a meek surrender and a lesson in poor tactical awareness.

Women’s most disappointing performance

A few candidates here too. On the track, Sanya Richards came into the 200m race with hopes of retribution after failing to make the USA 400m team. Everyone (ourselves included) felt she’d have to beat Allyson Felix to win that race, and it was lining up as a great race. In the end, it was a great mismatch, and Richards managed only fifth, another three athletes separating her from the dominant Felix. It’s difficult to know what happened, perhaps she was overdone and tired, and unable to find the speed that she showed leading up to the Championships. She gets our vote for most disappointing performance – but she’ll be back, in the 400m, hopefully stronger than ever. She’d better be, because Felix is ahead of her on current form.

An honourable mention for Torri Edwards, though this may be somewhat harsh, considering that she made finals in both the 100m and 200m races. But disappointing, because a pre-event favourite didn’t medal in either. And mostly because she’ll be disappointed at finishing only one place out of the medals in both races. So a frustrating performance is perhaps a better term.

Best nation

The obvious choice would be USA, who topped the medal table comfortably and had one of their greatest Championships in history. Apart from the usual plethora of sprinting medals (they won 4 of the 6 titles from 100 to 400m), and clean sweeps (the men’s 400m), they found medals in unusual sources. There was Kara Goucher winning bronze in the women’s 10000m final, and of course Lagat, with two golds in middle distance events (it had been 99 years since the last gold in those events for the USA).

But our vote actually goes to Kenya, mostly because of how they’ve turned their fortunes around. A few years ago, Kenyan coaches were being fired with regularity. This year, they won both 800m events, two marathons, steeplechase for men, and featured strongly in all the distance races. They’ll still be concerned over their inability to challenge the Ethiopian dominance at 10000m (though their men nearly got it right this year), and that they didn’t win gold in the 5000m final (when perhaps Kipchoge had the best chance of beating Lagat), but all in all, a hugely successful Championships. Best of all, two victories in the 800m event, and the breakthrough of some highly promising young athletes. It seems that Kenyan athletics is recovering – let’s hope it keeps happening.

Worst nation

OK, so we’re really biased here. But South Africa, a nation that has some history of winning medals, providing great athletes and featuring in these Championships, could not win a single medal. All but one athlete failed to even achieve personal bests (that one athlete was in the men’s javelin). In a week where personal bests, season’s bests and world leading times were being set left, right and centre, South Africa somehow contrived to achieve only one. Athletes who should have reached finals were eliminated in the first round, men who should have challenged for medals finished with the also-rans, often not even in the top 40 of the event. Worst of all, SA’s athletics president, Leonard Chuene, said in the media that he “does not understand the disappointment of people”, claiming that the Champs were a success! When one begins to celebrate mediocrity, then the path to the basement is a rapid one.

Finally, it is worth noting that Athletics South Africa recently employed a German coach, Eckhard Arbeit, who was notorious in the old East German system for his role in drug use and doping programmes. That didn’t stop ASA, who felt he could add to our athletic performance. I have it on authority that he has been taking hair samples from our athletes to test them and adjust their training! Needless to say, this is called “hocus pocus” in some circles. The SA team had a training camp in Germany leading up to the World Champs, and Arbeidt said in media interviews that the team took a lot out of this camp – they sure did. Injuries, burnout and poor performances. Bring on Beijing, where ‘mighty’ SA will be lucky to win two medals, and none in athletics.

Biggest disappointment of the World Champs

Two stand out – first, no world record. Of course, that’s only possible in sprint events (for tactical reasons) and field events. And then here, it’s only really the men, because the women’s events are about 50 years ahead of their time! But much was expected in the men’s sprints, and though performances were awesome, no world record. Perhaps Beijing will make up for it.

And then second, a huge disappointment that Turinesh Dibaba pulled out of the 5000m race, after winning the 10000m. It robbed us of maybe the best rivalry in the sport, Dibaba vs. Defar, for which we will now have to wait a little longer. Hopefully not all the way to Beijing though.

So that’s it for the IAAF World Champs. Athletics continues though, with the Golden League resuming for the Zurich Weltklasse this Friday. That’s one of the showpieces of athletics, and should throw up some great performances, which we’ll analyze in detail right here.

IAAF World Champs - Day 9 analysis and insights

The final day of the IAAF World Champs brought with it some memorable performances, some bizarre racing tactics and many multiple medal winners. Below is our analysis of the racing action

Men's 5000m - A double for Bernard Lagat on what the field must have thought was his birthday

Bernard Lagat came into these World Championships having never won a world title. Four days ago, he took the 1500m gold medal in an intriguing race (see our analysis of that race here). And tonight, he won a second gold medal by taking out a 5000m race that can be described as somewhat bizarre.

Lagat must have felt that all his birthdays and Christmases had come at once. From now on, he will surely celebrate the 2nd of September as a day for gifts, because the field basically handed him the race. Of course, he may have won regardless of the early pace, as he is a quality runner with a 5000m PB of 12:59. But had you said to him that the pace for the first 4000m would be 11:22, he probably would have asked you if were not perhaps referring to the women's race instead! The winning time was 13:45.87, easily the slowest time in the history of the World Champs!

The starting pace was astonishingly slow - 3:00 through the first kilometer, which is in fact even slower than the women ran their first kilometer in the corresponding event the other day. And this happened with one of the world's fastest 1500m men in the field. In effect, what we saw in this final was a 4200m warmup with an 800m sprint. Considering the fact that a 1500m specialist was in the race, this was a race for second place, with the field apparently deciding that Lagat was welcome to outsprint them in the end and win gold!

Behind these statements lies the fact that when you are racing a man who can run 1500m at close to 56 seconds per lap, running the final 800m in 55 seconds per lap is no big deal, if the initial pace is so slow. And what happened in this race, once the pace was stepped up in the final two laps, was that they ran the final 800m in 1:49 (my timing). Everyone else in the field is running pretty close to flat out at this pace - I doubt very much whether most of these guys could run 1:47 for an 800m if they had to. But Lagat, by virtue of the fact that he is trained to run 1500m, where the pace is regularly close to 1:52/800m for double this distance, is relatively untroubled, even at this pace. Watching the final 2 laps was clear evidence of this. When everyone else seemed to be pumping arms and driving knees, Lagat looked almost lazy, biding his time at the back of the group until he had to come through.

It was a remarkable choice of tactics, not least of all because 3 years ago, Hicham el Guerrouj had been gifted the Olympic 5000m title in the same way. In that race, the final kilometer was run in about 2:21. Tonight, it was 2:23, the race a near mirror image. I wrote the other day that someone, who I thought would be Craig Mottram, would have to take the pace out and keep them at below 13:10 pace. That was, to me, the only way to keep a 1500m runner at bay. But clearly, no one felt the same, or they were incapable of it.

It all added up to the slowest winning time in the history of the championships and a second gold medal for Lagat. Make no mistake, Lagat deserved this victory, he is a great runner and is building up a pedigree for himself that will see him retire as a great runner. But the way the victory was achieved would have surprised even him.

Or perhaps everyone else in Osaka had something in their water before the race that affected their tactical brains...

The men's 800m Final - did they drink the same water? A peculiar race

It seems as though the men in the 800m Final may have drunk from the same water cooler, because this final was also the slowest in Champsionship history. IN fact, you would have to go back to 1956 to find a slower winning time in an 800m final!

The victor was even more unexpected - Alfred Kirwa Yego, of Kenya, won his first race of the season, and made sure it was a big one! In fact, if you look down the names making up the top four, the only name you'd really recognize would be that of Yuriy Borzakovskiy, the Olympic Champion, who finished third. Second was taken by Gary Reed of Canada and fourth by Abraham Chepkirwok of Uganda. All good athletes, but none would be expected to win medals at the biggest and most competitive 800m race of the year.

The race began normally enough, about 25.5 seconds through the first 200m. But then EVERYONE switched off their engines and they went through the bell in 55 seconds. I wrote in a post yesterday that I expected a first lap around 52 to 53 seconds. This was 3 seconds slower and it was quite clear that the second lap would be very quick. 52 seconds was that second lap time, the whole field coming off the final bend bunched up by virtue of the relatively slow pace. The pre-race favourites, Bungei of Kenya and Mulaudzi were in touch, but the expected surge never came. Mulaudzi, in particular, was disappointing, because he was so well placed, having run a good race up there. He was not boxed in, he had a clear track in front and was right on the shoulder of the leaders. But he just went backwards, eventually finishing a very very disappointing 7th.

But, we did say it would be one of the most open races of the Champs, and it certainly lived up to that billing! So Yego is world champion, the smallest man in the race, and another gold for Kenya, who had a fantastic championships, considering their previous disappointments.

Of interest in this race was the time on the second lap - 52 seconds, which is consistent with the second lap time of 800m races, regardless of first lap paces, as described in yesterday's post. It would be faster, given the pedestrian first lap, but interesting to note that most of these runners are probably capable of running a 52second lap at the end of a race run in 1:44. In otherwords, they could probably run about the same time for the second lap, regardless of the pace on the first lap (within reason, of course). And perhaps guys like Bungei and Mulaudzi are conditioned and trained to run a fast second lap despite a fast first lap. The result during a slow race is that they don't have the speed necessary to find that extra half second that is the difference between first and 7th.

One thing for sure, is that come the Zurich Golden League meet on Friday, a guy like Bungei will probably run 1:43 or 1:44, with a second lap of 52.5 seconds, and so will Mulaudzi. So exactly the same on the second lap, but it's the first lap that may have cost them. Interesting physiology behind that one.

That's all for this post - it's a lengthy one already. There was some other action worth commenting on, particularly the 4 x 400m relays, which included one Allyson Felix, who is without doubt THE star of the present and future. Her 400m leg was something to behold, and she has destiny in her own hands. This was her coming of age, and that's from someone who was already a world champion before Osaka!

But that will be covered in tomorrow's post, where I'll wrap up the Championships, give you my "Best of" and "Worst of" moments, the best atheltes and the biggest disappointments.