:.
Wimbledon preview: Federer vs. Nadal is still on...
I'll be praying fervently that both overcome their semi-final opponents and deliver us with the final we've all been waiting for. If they do, then the incredible statistic is that Federer and Nadal will have played in BOTH the French Open and Wimbledon Finals for the last three years in a row! It was back in 2006 that they first met on the grass, a month after Federer had lost to Nadal in Paris, and we've seen the same two finalists for the next two years. It's a remarkable run of dominance on two completely different surfaces, and is testimony to the quality of the game's two best players (or the relative weakness of the players behind them, take your pick!)
Federer knew two weeks ago that he'd be facing a tricky semi-final, but he would have thought it would be Novak Djokovic. Instead, he gets Marat Safin, who dumped Djokovic out in three sets in Round 2. Safin is perhaps one of four players Federer would genuinely fear (the others are Djokovic, Nalbandian and of course, Nadal), because on his day, Safin has weapons to beat him. A few years ago, in the Australian Open Semi-final, Safin made Federer look ordinary at times. Friday will be a tall order, however, because Federer is playing brilliant tennis at the moment.
His movement is exceptional, and the grass seems to highlight just how beautifully he moves. On the clay, ironically, movement seems to be one of the problems, whereas on grass, it's his biggest strength. So I'll pick Federer to win that semi-final, probably in four sets, but only if Safin serves really well. Otherwise it will be three relatively easy sets.
The other semi sees Nadal take on either Schuettler or Clement, who have yet to finish their quarter final (it's one set all). That should present few problems, and I'd expect a straight sets victory, setting up the big final (at least, I'm hoping for it!).
Nadal's quarterfinal victory over Andy Murray was a huge relief because he disposed of one of the game's biggest "Freudian-fascination" players, which is a pet hate of mine in the game. I wrote about these players a few weeks ago, who stare up at their psychological crutch...I mean support group, after pretty much every single point, win or lose. A winning point is usually accompanied by a fist-pump and a "Come on" shout, with an apparently longing look at their mother, girlfriend and coach for some divine intervention or affirmation - "Well done, son! You're the best, you can do it, etc.". Jelena Jankovic asks her coach whether she should challenge line calls, such is the apparent inability to think for herself on the court. Murray took the "Freudian tennis concept" to new levels when he beat Richard Gasquet in the previous round, after coming back from 2 sets down.
I've not seen that level of "dependency" in professional sports before. Little surprise then that Nadal, once he got on top, finished Murray off easily - there is no "family showboating" to be done when you're running back and forth chasing tennis balls for two hours. Of course, the British press believed they'd found the new world number 1. The morning after his win against Gasquet, the papers called him "Miracle Man". They should have run a picture of Gasquet and called him "Meltdown Man", because he blew the match more than Murray won it.
Murray himself spoke of his ambition to win Wimbledon THIS YEAR - bear in mind that he'd never even reached a quarter final and you see no lack of confidence there. That's not a bad thing of course, but he's so far behind the top 3 (and especially the top 2) that if his eyes are the title, he's looking the wrong way. So I was particularly pleased with Nadal's win last night.
As for the final, that's anyone's guess. I'd say Federer is still the favourite, only because it's grass and he's looking unchallenged. So too is Nadal, however, and if they perform at their best, it should be a great final. Perhaps the winner will be the player who performs closest to their true ability, thanks to the pressure of the match, and the expectation on both. Federer of course has a 6-0 hiding in Paris he'd no doubt like to forget, which might affect him. Nadal has the expectation and desire that might choke his own shot-making ability. Time will tell. I'm not calling the winner on this one (but let's just hope they do make the final!)
Ross
Tampilkan postingan dengan label tennis. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label tennis. Tampilkan semua postingan
Kamis, 03 Juli 2008
Minggu, 08 Juni 2008
French Open 2008 - Finals recap
Four games: What is the Swiss word for "annihilation"?
Four games is all it took, and Rafael Nadal rubber-stamped, underlined, and highlighted his complete dominance on the red clay by winning the 2008 French Open. That is how many games the world number ONE player, Roger Federer of Switzerland, was able to take off the now four-time French Open Champion.
On Thursday last week, I did a post looking forward to the Men's Final, which at that stage was undecided. I'd hoped for a Federer-Nadal rematch of the last two Finals, and so it turned out. But what did not materialize was an epic battle between number 1 and 2. Instead, it was a rout, a brutal dismembering of Federer, who is called the greatest ever, by Rafael Nadal, who must without doubt be the greatest ever, on this particular surface.
The statistics - telling the story of the carnage in Paris
The stats from the match are remarkable, even if taken in isolation. Consider the following:
Once Nadal broke to go 5-3 clear in the second, he never looked back, winning the final eight games, handing Federer his worst defeat since his arrival as tennis' number one, and so the truth is that Federer is probably not in the same place he usually is in June - he's much further back.
As for Nadal, he now heads into the grass court season having built his legacy yet again. He suffered only 1 defeat all season on the clay, and that was largely due to blisters that prevented him from walking, let alone running. For the rest of the year, he was challenged, but always responded, and then on the biggest stage, he simply blasted everyone away.
Consider that in all his matches in this tournament, he made only 98 unforced errors! In 21 sets of play, that's fewer than 5 mistakes a set (I am a little sceptical of those numbers, to be honest, but the point is, Federer made 35 in three sets today). He doesn't miss, chases everything down, hits with power, accuracy and aggression, and the opponent has little choice but to become increasingly desperate in trying to win points, let alone games.
Consider also that he lost only 22 games in his last four rounds - 3 to Verdasco, 3 to Almagro, 12 to Djokovic (he must have played poorly that match!), and now 4 to Federer - and you get an idea of how utterly superior he has been.
He goes into the Wimbledon campaign on a serious high then. Last year, he pushed Federer to five sets in the final, and that will give him heart. Add today's whitewash third set to that, and you have the makings of a real challenge to Federer's crown on grass. What may ultimately determine the outcome at Wimbledon is the draw, because Djokovic will be the "floating" seed in third, and he will either play Federer or Nadal in a big semi-final. Whoever avoids Djokovic therefore has to win only really one BIG game, and if that is Nadal, then I'd say the odds are pretty close to 50-50.
Then again, Federer may have given himself a close to 50% chance of winning this final. He never knew what hit him.
Last word on the ladies: Ivanovic claims number 1 and maiden Slam
On the ladies' side, it was Serbia's Ana Ivanovic who triumphed in a nervy final against first time finallist Dinara Safina of Russia. The game was not particularly memorable, as both ladies seemed very hesitant and there were numerous errors. In the end, it was experience and slightly superior athleticism that won out, and Ivanovic crowned her new number 1 ranking with her first Grand Slam title.
Please stop the reliance/dependence relationships - you're all big girls and boys...
Just a note on the game in general here, and it's particularly relevant to Ivanovic. Am I the only one who finds it increasingly annoying how reliant the players seem to be on their coaching staff and support teams DURING matches? I remember seeing it at the Australian Open earlier this year, and now again in France, but every time the player wins a point, they pump the fist, and look up at their box and family and coaches for some kind of telepathic support. When things go badly, the same happens - look up to the coach and support team.
Now, to me, this seems like some kind of dysfunctional "Freudian" need, when a professional player has to look for invisible help that often. Ivanovic, in all her matches, must look at her box about 150 times in the match. For everything - line calls, points won, points lost, first serves missed, crowd noise. You name it, she's looking. It was similar for Djokovic in the Australian Open.
And it was Dinara Safina who actually put it best, when in her speech at the prize-giving, congratulated Ivanovic and her team, and then said "even though the team was really annoying sometimes". I second that!
Tennis has always had this tendency to produce somewhat dodgy parent/coach-player relationships, but it seems to have gotten worse of late - I don't recall the likes of Steffi and Monica Seles being quite so dependent on people in the crowd! But watching Ivanovic's completely dependent demeanour towards her team made me pretty annoyed as a spectator too. Federer and Nadal showed the way - play the game, play the opponent, and be a big girl/boy, and look after yourself.
Bring on Wimbledon!
Ross
Four games is all it took, and Rafael Nadal rubber-stamped, underlined, and highlighted his complete dominance on the red clay by winning the 2008 French Open. That is how many games the world number ONE player, Roger Federer of Switzerland, was able to take off the now four-time French Open Champion.
On Thursday last week, I did a post looking forward to the Men's Final, which at that stage was undecided. I'd hoped for a Federer-Nadal rematch of the last two Finals, and so it turned out. But what did not materialize was an epic battle between number 1 and 2. Instead, it was a rout, a brutal dismembering of Federer, who is called the greatest ever, by Rafael Nadal, who must without doubt be the greatest ever, on this particular surface.
The statistics - telling the story of the carnage in Paris
The stats from the match are remarkable, even if taken in isolation. Consider the following:
- 35 Unforced errors compared to SEVEN
- Only five points won on the second serve in the WHOLE MATCH
- 31% of points won when receiving serve, compared to 60% by opponent
- 52 points won in the match, compared to 92
- Only managed to see FOUR break points, compared to 17
Those stats would be remarkable enough in any game, but when you consider that it's Roger Federer whose numbers are shown first in the above list, compared to Nadal's, then you get an idea of the total domination enjoyed by the Spaniard. Federer only won 5 points on his second serve in the whole match, and won almost half the number of points won by Nadal.
If those numbers don't tell the story, then these do:
6-1, 6-3, 6-0
because that was the final score. When was the last time the world number ONE managed to win only four games in any match, let alone a big final? And when last did a world number one get bumped to love in any set of a competitve match? It was a truly remarkable match, for reasons I really did not expect last week. I expected a Nadal victory, sure, but the manner of the win was quite eye-opening.
Implications of the result: Doubt and confidence
It leaves Federer in pretty much the same place he's been every June for the last four years - contemplating the only Grand Slam to elude him, and wondering how on earth he is going to even compete with, let alone beat, Nadal. The last two finals have been much closer - four sets last year, and he was competitive for most of the match, bar one set. This year, six games in the second set gave the neutral and Swiss fans hope, because Federer fought back from a break down, and then threatened to break again. But that was the sum of his resistance and pretty soon, the heavy hitting and precision by Nadal, combined with a wild forehand by Federer, counted for too much.Once Nadal broke to go 5-3 clear in the second, he never looked back, winning the final eight games, handing Federer his worst defeat since his arrival as tennis' number one, and so the truth is that Federer is probably not in the same place he usually is in June - he's much further back.
As for Nadal, he now heads into the grass court season having built his legacy yet again. He suffered only 1 defeat all season on the clay, and that was largely due to blisters that prevented him from walking, let alone running. For the rest of the year, he was challenged, but always responded, and then on the biggest stage, he simply blasted everyone away.
Consider that in all his matches in this tournament, he made only 98 unforced errors! In 21 sets of play, that's fewer than 5 mistakes a set (I am a little sceptical of those numbers, to be honest, but the point is, Federer made 35 in three sets today). He doesn't miss, chases everything down, hits with power, accuracy and aggression, and the opponent has little choice but to become increasingly desperate in trying to win points, let alone games.
Consider also that he lost only 22 games in his last four rounds - 3 to Verdasco, 3 to Almagro, 12 to Djokovic (he must have played poorly that match!), and now 4 to Federer - and you get an idea of how utterly superior he has been.
He goes into the Wimbledon campaign on a serious high then. Last year, he pushed Federer to five sets in the final, and that will give him heart. Add today's whitewash third set to that, and you have the makings of a real challenge to Federer's crown on grass. What may ultimately determine the outcome at Wimbledon is the draw, because Djokovic will be the "floating" seed in third, and he will either play Federer or Nadal in a big semi-final. Whoever avoids Djokovic therefore has to win only really one BIG game, and if that is Nadal, then I'd say the odds are pretty close to 50-50.
Then again, Federer may have given himself a close to 50% chance of winning this final. He never knew what hit him.
Last word on the ladies: Ivanovic claims number 1 and maiden Slam
On the ladies' side, it was Serbia's Ana Ivanovic who triumphed in a nervy final against first time finallist Dinara Safina of Russia. The game was not particularly memorable, as both ladies seemed very hesitant and there were numerous errors. In the end, it was experience and slightly superior athleticism that won out, and Ivanovic crowned her new number 1 ranking with her first Grand Slam title.
Please stop the reliance/dependence relationships - you're all big girls and boys...
Just a note on the game in general here, and it's particularly relevant to Ivanovic. Am I the only one who finds it increasingly annoying how reliant the players seem to be on their coaching staff and support teams DURING matches? I remember seeing it at the Australian Open earlier this year, and now again in France, but every time the player wins a point, they pump the fist, and look up at their box and family and coaches for some kind of telepathic support. When things go badly, the same happens - look up to the coach and support team.
Now, to me, this seems like some kind of dysfunctional "Freudian" need, when a professional player has to look for invisible help that often. Ivanovic, in all her matches, must look at her box about 150 times in the match. For everything - line calls, points won, points lost, first serves missed, crowd noise. You name it, she's looking. It was similar for Djokovic in the Australian Open.
And it was Dinara Safina who actually put it best, when in her speech at the prize-giving, congratulated Ivanovic and her team, and then said "even though the team was really annoying sometimes". I second that!
Tennis has always had this tendency to produce somewhat dodgy parent/coach-player relationships, but it seems to have gotten worse of late - I don't recall the likes of Steffi and Monica Seles being quite so dependent on people in the crowd! But watching Ivanovic's completely dependent demeanour towards her team made me pretty annoyed as a spectator too. Federer and Nadal showed the way - play the game, play the opponent, and be a big girl/boy, and look after yourself.
Bring on Wimbledon!
Ross
Kamis, 05 Juni 2008
French Open Tennis
Roger vs Rafa: Tennis' great rivarly may come to a head
June and July are without doubt the peak of the sporting year (well, if you don't count three weeks in August that promise to be pretty spectacular!), because they bring the start of the European track and field season, the major soccer championships (Euro 2008 in this particular year), a great deal of top cycling in the build-up to the Tour de France, and of course, the French Open and Wimbledon.
And it's the French Open that I thought I'd look at briefly today. Over the past few months, The Science of Sport has become much more like the Science of Running! Apologies for that (to all those interested in the other sports, anyway), I guess it just evolves that way out of our interests, time, and readership! But today, a change of tactic, as we switch the running shoes and roads for the racquets and red clay of Roland Garros, for the year's second Grand Slam.
Roger vs Rafa: The great rivalry to continue?
OK, I'm counting my chickens here, because Roger Federer has to overcome the challenge of Gael Monfils (which I don't see posing too many problems), while Raphael Nadal has the slightly trickier prospect of getting past Novak Djokovic.
But if they do (I hope they do), then the final on Sunday should deliver (again) one of the great match-ups of tennis. Last year, Nadal beat Federer in a 4-set final, denying Federer the chance to win the Grand Slam at only the second hurdle. That possibility is already gone this year, for it was Novak Djokovic who took out the Aussie Open in January this year, and so Federer's quest for the French Open takes on a slightly different meaning. It's still the title he desperately needs to win - the "most difficult" one of all to claim, they say. And certainly, if you look at the typical line-up of entrants in the French Open, there are probably about 10 guys who could, in their year, win the French Open, versus perhaps 3 or 4 in all the other Grand Slams.
Until, that is, Raphael Nadal came on the scene. The greatest claycourt player, by a long way, of the current era, and probably the greatest ever, Nadal is the gladiator on the clay courts. His record at Roland Garros is incredible - never been beaten, some 26 games later. On the clay, even better - he was on a record winning streak of 81 matches before it was Federer who beat him in 2007. Since then, he's lost 1 more match in perhaps the last 30. Remarkable dominance, and which Federer will likely have to overcome (again, if they both overcome their semifinal opponents).
Last year's final: Strategic blowouts and ?
Last year's French Open Final between the two delivered one of the more bizarre matches of the year. The hype was certainly not over the top, it was by no means an anticlimax, but it was a peculiar match, for a number of reasons. It seemed at the time (as I wrote in a post the day after, all of one year ago), that Federer had been sucked into playing the Nadal claycourt game.
His tactical strategy was perhaps the most amazing aspect. The absolutely magnificent commentators we have been getting on the SA Supersport feed (take note Supersport - that's what commentary is supposed to be like) noted that it seemed that Federer was hell-bent on proving to the world that he could outhit Nadal from the baseline. In that 4-set match, Federer made 60 unforced errors (to Nadal's 20), and his first serve percentage was down to 30%. He had 20 break-points in the match, converted only one! Raphael Nadal at one point looked as though he might be injured, because he simply stopped chasing down balls, and he didn't play his best game, but Federer kept spraying his forehand long, wide and into the net.
Perhaps that is symptomatic of the pressure playing Nadal creates. The onus to pull of shots that are just that little bit deeper, wider and harder is bound to exact a toll on performance. But Federer, who is the most beautifully elegant player, in terms of his movement, in the game, failed last year to rise to the challenge. Perhaps this time around, it will be different?
The dark horse Djokovic
Of course, the dark horse in all this is Djokovic, a man who, in theory anyway, could win the Grand Slam before Federer (barring that tournament at Wimbledon, which will be a little tricky to win!) He's the "floating" seed in the draw, and the way the French Open draw worked out this year, he actually helps Federer, by virtue of the fact that he takes Nadal in the semi-final. That means not only that Federer's passage to the final is easier, but that Nadal and Djokovic get to slug it out with each other before moving onto the inevitable meeting with Federer. Fortunately, a two day break in the Slams means fatigue is not a major concern, but still, the mental and physical effort of playing two huge matches to win must count against one of these two.
I know I'm hoping for a Nadal-Federer final, just to see a repeat of last year's match, and maybe, a change of strategy that challenges the Spaniard's dominance.
Of course, now that I've written all this, any bets that Monfils beats Federer, and Djokovic beats Nadal, and neither of the big two are even playing Sunday! Regardless, I'll give my two cents' worth on Monday!
Ross
June and July are without doubt the peak of the sporting year (well, if you don't count three weeks in August that promise to be pretty spectacular!), because they bring the start of the European track and field season, the major soccer championships (Euro 2008 in this particular year), a great deal of top cycling in the build-up to the Tour de France, and of course, the French Open and Wimbledon.
And it's the French Open that I thought I'd look at briefly today. Over the past few months, The Science of Sport has become much more like the Science of Running! Apologies for that (to all those interested in the other sports, anyway), I guess it just evolves that way out of our interests, time, and readership! But today, a change of tactic, as we switch the running shoes and roads for the racquets and red clay of Roland Garros, for the year's second Grand Slam.Roger vs Rafa: The great rivalry to continue?
OK, I'm counting my chickens here, because Roger Federer has to overcome the challenge of Gael Monfils (which I don't see posing too many problems), while Raphael Nadal has the slightly trickier prospect of getting past Novak Djokovic.
But if they do (I hope they do), then the final on Sunday should deliver (again) one of the great match-ups of tennis. Last year, Nadal beat Federer in a 4-set final, denying Federer the chance to win the Grand Slam at only the second hurdle. That possibility is already gone this year, for it was Novak Djokovic who took out the Aussie Open in January this year, and so Federer's quest for the French Open takes on a slightly different meaning. It's still the title he desperately needs to win - the "most difficult" one of all to claim, they say. And certainly, if you look at the typical line-up of entrants in the French Open, there are probably about 10 guys who could, in their year, win the French Open, versus perhaps 3 or 4 in all the other Grand Slams.
Until, that is, Raphael Nadal came on the scene. The greatest claycourt player, by a long way, of the current era, and probably the greatest ever, Nadal is the gladiator on the clay courts. His record at Roland Garros is incredible - never been beaten, some 26 games later. On the clay, even better - he was on a record winning streak of 81 matches before it was Federer who beat him in 2007. Since then, he's lost 1 more match in perhaps the last 30. Remarkable dominance, and which Federer will likely have to overcome (again, if they both overcome their semifinal opponents).
Last year's final: Strategic blowouts and ?
Last year's French Open Final between the two delivered one of the more bizarre matches of the year. The hype was certainly not over the top, it was by no means an anticlimax, but it was a peculiar match, for a number of reasons. It seemed at the time (as I wrote in a post the day after, all of one year ago), that Federer had been sucked into playing the Nadal claycourt game.
His tactical strategy was perhaps the most amazing aspect. The absolutely magnificent commentators we have been getting on the SA Supersport feed (take note Supersport - that's what commentary is supposed to be like) noted that it seemed that Federer was hell-bent on proving to the world that he could outhit Nadal from the baseline. In that 4-set match, Federer made 60 unforced errors (to Nadal's 20), and his first serve percentage was down to 30%. He had 20 break-points in the match, converted only one! Raphael Nadal at one point looked as though he might be injured, because he simply stopped chasing down balls, and he didn't play his best game, but Federer kept spraying his forehand long, wide and into the net.
Perhaps that is symptomatic of the pressure playing Nadal creates. The onus to pull of shots that are just that little bit deeper, wider and harder is bound to exact a toll on performance. But Federer, who is the most beautifully elegant player, in terms of his movement, in the game, failed last year to rise to the challenge. Perhaps this time around, it will be different?
The dark horse Djokovic
Of course, the dark horse in all this is Djokovic, a man who, in theory anyway, could win the Grand Slam before Federer (barring that tournament at Wimbledon, which will be a little tricky to win!) He's the "floating" seed in the draw, and the way the French Open draw worked out this year, he actually helps Federer, by virtue of the fact that he takes Nadal in the semi-final. That means not only that Federer's passage to the final is easier, but that Nadal and Djokovic get to slug it out with each other before moving onto the inevitable meeting with Federer. Fortunately, a two day break in the Slams means fatigue is not a major concern, but still, the mental and physical effort of playing two huge matches to win must count against one of these two.
I know I'm hoping for a Nadal-Federer final, just to see a repeat of last year's match, and maybe, a change of strategy that challenges the Spaniard's dominance.
Of course, now that I've written all this, any bets that Monfils beats Federer, and Djokovic beats Nadal, and neither of the big two are even playing Sunday! Regardless, I'll give my two cents' worth on Monday!
Ross
Minggu, 27 Januari 2008
Sports news - athletics and tennis
Signals of intent for the athletics season and a Grand Slam without Federer down under
Just a quick filler news article today, to comment on some very interesting sports performances from the past weekend. First, we look at some results from the distance races at the Reebok Indoor Athletics meeting from Boston - Ethiopian women in fine form and Craig Mottram signalling his intent for 2008.
Then we look briefly at the Men's final of the first Grand Slam of 2008, the Australian Open. As from tomorrow, we'll resume our series on Exercise in the cold.
Craig Mottram - sign of things to come?
Last year, heading into Osaka, we (and others) picked Craig Mottram's battle with the East Africans in the 5000m final as one of the possible highlights of the Championships. How wrong we were! Mottram never featured, eventually finishing 13th out of 14 runners, in what was the slowest 5000m race in the history of the IAAF World Champs. So having begun the season with great promise, Mottram failed on the biggest occasion. In the aftermath, it emerged that Mottram had been struggling with a hamstring injury, which curtailed his training leading up to the race.
Well, 2008 has begun much the same was as 2007 did - Mottram looking mighty impressive. In Boston, he ran the fastest time ever on American soil for an indoor 3000m - 7:34.50. He won the race going away, with a final 400m of 59 seconds. The time is only 2 seconds slower than Mottram's best ever OUTDOOR 3000m performance, and given that indoors, the time is expected to be 3 or more seconds slower, Mottram is clearly in great shape.
So what will be interesting to see in the next few months is whether he is able to remain injury free and whether he can sustain the level of performance all the way through to August. In terms of the injury, Mottram has said that he's not travelling full-time with a physio, specifically to work on the risk of injury.
In terms of performance, things might be a little trickier. With six months to go until Beijing, Mottram will need to maintain his current form through the indoor season, and then on the tracks of Europe, which will be a tough task. He's clearly got great speed right now - to have speed sufficient for a PB at a shorter distance like 3000m indicates that at some stage in the next six months, he'll have to pull back and reassess before sharpening again for Beijing - a tricky task. It might require very frugal racing in Europe, perhaps even none until about July. Mottram enjoys racing though, and so to maintain good speed all the way to August will be very tough. But hopefully he's got the timing right and will be in his best shape to mix it with the Africans come Beijing.
The Ethiopian women - dominant distance running performances
Meseret Defar and Turinesh Dibaba are only 24 and 22 years old, respectively. But they are well on the way to being the best middle and long distance athletes in history. Dibaba has four world track and four World Cross Country titles, and Defar was the Women's World Athlete of the Year in 2007, is an Olympic and World Champion, and makes a habit of breaking world records by seconds.
And this past weekend, Defar added another to her collection. Admittedly, it was a soft record - the women's 2 mile record. The old time was held by Regina Jacobs, at 9:23. Defar cleaved 13 seconds off it with her winning time of 9:10.50 - that's how soft it was! But the performance was still remarkable. The halfway point was reached in 4:38.4, which means the second mile was covered in 4:32! This suggests there is more to come, for a negative split this large is not optimal in this length of event. Not that Defar will get the opportunity soon - the 2 mile is too rarely run. But that kind of sustained speed over the second half suggests that a 3000m time very close to 8:20 later on this year, and her 5000m PB of 14:16 (the World Record) may also be under threat this year.
Unfortunately for us, it does not look as though the race with Turinesh Dibaba will happen any time soon. In Boston, we had the bizarre scenario where Defar ran 2-Miles and Dibaba ran the 3000m - basically, the same race. So it does provide a nice comparison, but would have been far more exciting to see them race head to head. That was denied to us last year in Osaka, after Dibaba withdrew from the 5000m after winning the 10000m title. And it seems unlikely that they will race again in Beijing, since Dibaba will surely focus on the 10000m event, and with the heat, it's unlikely she'll have the appetite for two 5000m races after.
In any event, Dibaba was an impressive, not spectacular winner of the 3000m race. Her time was 8:33.37. Quite a nice comparison is possible by looking at the time taken to cover the second half of the race - Dibaba reached 1 mile in 4:36.1, which means the final 1400m was covered in 3:57.2 (give or take a few meters). Defar's final mile of 4:32 equates to a 1400m pace of 3:56.7. So they are seemingly as inseparable as ever.
Of course, this comparison is somewhat shaky, and that's why the best solution would be to have them race one another. Unfortunately for the sport, this kind of situation often develops, where two high-profile athletes avoid one another for all but one or two races per year, if that. We had Powell vs. Gay (on, off, on and off again), and numerous others in the past. One can't blame the athletes for not wanting to race unless the right "carrot" is offered, but it certainly would give the sport a boost to have a great head-to-head contest for meeting promoters to hype up and promote.
Tennis action - new faces and new prospects
Moving onto tennis, and exciting times for the men's game. For the last four years, Roger Federer has so dominated the tennis world that everyone else in the Grand Slams was vying for the title of runner-up. With the exception, that is, of the French Open, where they were all hoping for a semi-final, right before Rafael Nadal disposed of them on the red clay!
And a month ago, we looked into our crystal ball and predicted more great Federer-Nadal contests. Well, the year's first Grand Slam is over, and amazingly, neither of these two even made the final, let alone against one another!
Instead, it was Novak Djokovic and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga who fought out an absorbing, if error ridden contest. In the end, Djokovic won in four sets, and claimed his first Grand Slam title. That after disposing of Federer in the semi-final. Tsonga, for his part, destroyed Nadal and if he can keep up his level of play, then 2008 promises at least four awesome performers, and that does not include a number of other prospects.
On the note of Djokovic, I was a big fan of his before this tournament, but what I have seen in the final week has only undermined that opinion. Djokovic comes across as petulant, supported by his family of four cheering him on with T-shirts emblazaned with letters spelling out N-O-L-E, which I'm told is his nickname.
But in yesterday's final, and in the match against Federer as well at times during previous games, Djokovic displays a petulant arrogance, even going so far as to shout and gesture aggressively towards fans. At one point during the final, someone in the crowd shouted "Stop" when Djokovic bounced the ball about 15 times before serving (Djokovic has this very annoying ball bounce routine, which has seen opponents complain to umpires, including in the final). In response, Djokovic angrily told the umpire to ask for quite (still acceptable). And then on winning the subsequent point, Djokovic first gestured aggressively to his family, and then turned specifically in the direction of the unruly fan and gave a very angry fist-pump, shouting something at him. It was a taunt more worthy of a drunken soccer fan, not a soon-to-be Grand Slam champion.
This kind of behaviour leaves a bad taste in the mouth, and it was not the first time. On many occasions, on winning a competitive point, Djokovic pumps his fist for the fans' benefit, posturing and preening, almost expecting their adulation. Unfortunately, in this final, he didn't get it - instead, Tsonga, who is all heart and spirit, was the fans' favourite. And whether this unsettled Djokovic, I don't know. But it seems quite clear that he has an attitude of disrespect towards the fan - yes, they are wrong to shout out as he's about to serve, but a great champion recognizes that the bad must be taken along with the good, and is gracious and humble enough to roll with these 'blows'. Instead, Djokovic shouts at fans to 'shut up', gestures angrily towards those who don't support him, and postures like a prize-fighter or WWE wrestler waiting for the respect and admiration.
Perhaps he can take a lesson from the man he beat in the semi-final, for Roger Federer has dominated with humility. Djokovic, on the other hand, is a new kid on the block, and has displayed little of the respect that Federer clearly has.
And sadly, it would be wishful thinking to suggest that Djokovic's support group and family will advise him in this regard, for it would seem that they encourage it. I have often seen people wearing T-shirts with slogans or letters that spell out the name of their favourite player. Usually it's the fans. But when the family of the player resort to that, I have to wonder. At one point early in the tournament, one of the four family members (it's him father, mother and two brothers) failed to stand up and cheer - the result was that their shirts spelled N-O- -E, rather than the intended N-O-L-E. In response, his mother turned and gestured rather angrily to her son to stand up, as he clearly wasn't doing his bit. Well, that seems somewhat unhealthy to me.
And in a world of tennis, where the parents of the players often court controversy and negative press more than the players (think of Pierce, Sharapov and Dokic), I'd prefer to see Djokovic just play tennis, rather than perpetuate this rather perverse affinity to a family that is only spurring on a WWE wrestling attitude on court. If any sports psychologists are reading this, please do weigh in and give your take on this behaviour that seems especially typical of tennis players...
Nevertheless, it's great for the game that Djokovic, and hopefully Tsonga, are so competitive, beating Federer and Nadal. It makes for a fascinating 2008, and a mockery of our crystal ball!
The week ahead
So that's it for the Weekend Sports wrap. This coming week, we'll get the series on Exercise in the cold moving. So do join us then!
Ross
Just a quick filler news article today, to comment on some very interesting sports performances from the past weekend. First, we look at some results from the distance races at the Reebok Indoor Athletics meeting from Boston - Ethiopian women in fine form and Craig Mottram signalling his intent for 2008.
Then we look briefly at the Men's final of the first Grand Slam of 2008, the Australian Open. As from tomorrow, we'll resume our series on Exercise in the cold.
Craig Mottram - sign of things to come?
Last year, heading into Osaka, we (and others) picked Craig Mottram's battle with the East Africans in the 5000m final as one of the possible highlights of the Championships. How wrong we were! Mottram never featured, eventually finishing 13th out of 14 runners, in what was the slowest 5000m race in the history of the IAAF World Champs. So having begun the season with great promise, Mottram failed on the biggest occasion. In the aftermath, it emerged that Mottram had been struggling with a hamstring injury, which curtailed his training leading up to the race.
Well, 2008 has begun much the same was as 2007 did - Mottram looking mighty impressive. In Boston, he ran the fastest time ever on American soil for an indoor 3000m - 7:34.50. He won the race going away, with a final 400m of 59 seconds. The time is only 2 seconds slower than Mottram's best ever OUTDOOR 3000m performance, and given that indoors, the time is expected to be 3 or more seconds slower, Mottram is clearly in great shape.
So what will be interesting to see in the next few months is whether he is able to remain injury free and whether he can sustain the level of performance all the way through to August. In terms of the injury, Mottram has said that he's not travelling full-time with a physio, specifically to work on the risk of injury.
In terms of performance, things might be a little trickier. With six months to go until Beijing, Mottram will need to maintain his current form through the indoor season, and then on the tracks of Europe, which will be a tough task. He's clearly got great speed right now - to have speed sufficient for a PB at a shorter distance like 3000m indicates that at some stage in the next six months, he'll have to pull back and reassess before sharpening again for Beijing - a tricky task. It might require very frugal racing in Europe, perhaps even none until about July. Mottram enjoys racing though, and so to maintain good speed all the way to August will be very tough. But hopefully he's got the timing right and will be in his best shape to mix it with the Africans come Beijing.
The Ethiopian women - dominant distance running performances
Meseret Defar and Turinesh Dibaba are only 24 and 22 years old, respectively. But they are well on the way to being the best middle and long distance athletes in history. Dibaba has four world track and four World Cross Country titles, and Defar was the Women's World Athlete of the Year in 2007, is an Olympic and World Champion, and makes a habit of breaking world records by seconds.
And this past weekend, Defar added another to her collection. Admittedly, it was a soft record - the women's 2 mile record. The old time was held by Regina Jacobs, at 9:23. Defar cleaved 13 seconds off it with her winning time of 9:10.50 - that's how soft it was! But the performance was still remarkable. The halfway point was reached in 4:38.4, which means the second mile was covered in 4:32! This suggests there is more to come, for a negative split this large is not optimal in this length of event. Not that Defar will get the opportunity soon - the 2 mile is too rarely run. But that kind of sustained speed over the second half suggests that a 3000m time very close to 8:20 later on this year, and her 5000m PB of 14:16 (the World Record) may also be under threat this year.
Unfortunately for us, it does not look as though the race with Turinesh Dibaba will happen any time soon. In Boston, we had the bizarre scenario where Defar ran 2-Miles and Dibaba ran the 3000m - basically, the same race. So it does provide a nice comparison, but would have been far more exciting to see them race head to head. That was denied to us last year in Osaka, after Dibaba withdrew from the 5000m after winning the 10000m title. And it seems unlikely that they will race again in Beijing, since Dibaba will surely focus on the 10000m event, and with the heat, it's unlikely she'll have the appetite for two 5000m races after.
In any event, Dibaba was an impressive, not spectacular winner of the 3000m race. Her time was 8:33.37. Quite a nice comparison is possible by looking at the time taken to cover the second half of the race - Dibaba reached 1 mile in 4:36.1, which means the final 1400m was covered in 3:57.2 (give or take a few meters). Defar's final mile of 4:32 equates to a 1400m pace of 3:56.7. So they are seemingly as inseparable as ever.
Of course, this comparison is somewhat shaky, and that's why the best solution would be to have them race one another. Unfortunately for the sport, this kind of situation often develops, where two high-profile athletes avoid one another for all but one or two races per year, if that. We had Powell vs. Gay (on, off, on and off again), and numerous others in the past. One can't blame the athletes for not wanting to race unless the right "carrot" is offered, but it certainly would give the sport a boost to have a great head-to-head contest for meeting promoters to hype up and promote.
Tennis action - new faces and new prospects
Moving onto tennis, and exciting times for the men's game. For the last four years, Roger Federer has so dominated the tennis world that everyone else in the Grand Slams was vying for the title of runner-up. With the exception, that is, of the French Open, where they were all hoping for a semi-final, right before Rafael Nadal disposed of them on the red clay!
And a month ago, we looked into our crystal ball and predicted more great Federer-Nadal contests. Well, the year's first Grand Slam is over, and amazingly, neither of these two even made the final, let alone against one another!
Instead, it was Novak Djokovic and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga who fought out an absorbing, if error ridden contest. In the end, Djokovic won in four sets, and claimed his first Grand Slam title. That after disposing of Federer in the semi-final. Tsonga, for his part, destroyed Nadal and if he can keep up his level of play, then 2008 promises at least four awesome performers, and that does not include a number of other prospects.
On the note of Djokovic, I was a big fan of his before this tournament, but what I have seen in the final week has only undermined that opinion. Djokovic comes across as petulant, supported by his family of four cheering him on with T-shirts emblazaned with letters spelling out N-O-L-E, which I'm told is his nickname.
But in yesterday's final, and in the match against Federer as well at times during previous games, Djokovic displays a petulant arrogance, even going so far as to shout and gesture aggressively towards fans. At one point during the final, someone in the crowd shouted "Stop" when Djokovic bounced the ball about 15 times before serving (Djokovic has this very annoying ball bounce routine, which has seen opponents complain to umpires, including in the final). In response, Djokovic angrily told the umpire to ask for quite (still acceptable). And then on winning the subsequent point, Djokovic first gestured aggressively to his family, and then turned specifically in the direction of the unruly fan and gave a very angry fist-pump, shouting something at him. It was a taunt more worthy of a drunken soccer fan, not a soon-to-be Grand Slam champion.
This kind of behaviour leaves a bad taste in the mouth, and it was not the first time. On many occasions, on winning a competitive point, Djokovic pumps his fist for the fans' benefit, posturing and preening, almost expecting their adulation. Unfortunately, in this final, he didn't get it - instead, Tsonga, who is all heart and spirit, was the fans' favourite. And whether this unsettled Djokovic, I don't know. But it seems quite clear that he has an attitude of disrespect towards the fan - yes, they are wrong to shout out as he's about to serve, but a great champion recognizes that the bad must be taken along with the good, and is gracious and humble enough to roll with these 'blows'. Instead, Djokovic shouts at fans to 'shut up', gestures angrily towards those who don't support him, and postures like a prize-fighter or WWE wrestler waiting for the respect and admiration.
Perhaps he can take a lesson from the man he beat in the semi-final, for Roger Federer has dominated with humility. Djokovic, on the other hand, is a new kid on the block, and has displayed little of the respect that Federer clearly has.
And sadly, it would be wishful thinking to suggest that Djokovic's support group and family will advise him in this regard, for it would seem that they encourage it. I have often seen people wearing T-shirts with slogans or letters that spell out the name of their favourite player. Usually it's the fans. But when the family of the player resort to that, I have to wonder. At one point early in the tournament, one of the four family members (it's him father, mother and two brothers) failed to stand up and cheer - the result was that their shirts spelled N-O- -E, rather than the intended N-O-L-E. In response, his mother turned and gestured rather angrily to her son to stand up, as he clearly wasn't doing his bit. Well, that seems somewhat unhealthy to me.
And in a world of tennis, where the parents of the players often court controversy and negative press more than the players (think of Pierce, Sharapov and Dokic), I'd prefer to see Djokovic just play tennis, rather than perpetuate this rather perverse affinity to a family that is only spurring on a WWE wrestling attitude on court. If any sports psychologists are reading this, please do weigh in and give your take on this behaviour that seems especially typical of tennis players...
Nevertheless, it's great for the game that Djokovic, and hopefully Tsonga, are so competitive, beating Federer and Nadal. It makes for a fascinating 2008, and a mockery of our crystal ball!
The week ahead
So that's it for the Weekend Sports wrap. This coming week, we'll get the series on Exercise in the cold moving. So do join us then!
Ross
Rabu, 02 Januari 2008
2008 Preview Part II
Preview of the Olympic track events: Some classic clashes in 2008
Yesterday, we ran through some of the highlights of the upcoming sporting year, including the Olympic Marathons in Beijing, cycling's Tour de France, and some of the other big city marathons in 2008. Today, we continue with some predictions for the Olympic Games track events, and one or two random sporting events that grab my fancy.
The Olympic Track events
There are so many fascinating races and match-ups on the cards for Beijing that it's difficult to know where to begin. I think that closer to the time, we'll have to devote entire posts to each event, but for today, we'll just throw out some of those match-ups, pick our winner (according to our unique Crystal ball) and touch on some of the interesting stories behind the "result". So here we go, men first:
Men's 100m: Tyson Gay vs. Asafa Powell. A familiar story here - Powell will be majestic the whole way through. He'll ease off the throttle in his second round and semi-final race, but still run comfortably under 10 seconds despite coasting the final 20m. But come the final, Tyson Gay will step into the spotlight and Powell will be found wanting. It won't be as easy as Osaka, but Gay will win. His time? 9.82 seconds, to Powell's 9.85 seconds, and Gay bags Olympic Gold. Powell will have to wait until 2009 for his first major title.
Men's 800m: Kenyans vs. Borzakovskiy vs. Mulaudzi. The crystal ball nearly broke when we looked at this event - the strain was just too great. Osaka showed just how unpredictable the event can be, with the big favourites all being upstaged by Alfred Kirwa Yego. Don't expect the same in Beijing. Instead, it's Yuri Borzakovskiy who shows up after a couple of 'anonymous' years to put his finishing kick on the event and defend his title. It should be a worrying sign for the other athletes when a runner with such credentials spends a whole year out of the limelight, because his focus is clearly on Beijing, just as it was before Athens. So back a slow first lap, with a fast finishing Russian to relegate the Kenyans to the minor medals. Quite which Kenyans that will be is anyone's guess (for that matter, they may be running in non-Kenyan vests, with middle Eastern names)
Men's 10000m: Kenenisa Bekele vs. Zersenay Tadese. OK, there are some Kenyans and an Ethiopian (Sileshi Sihine) who will have their say in this race, but I'm really looking forward to this battle. Tadese of Eritrea came of age in 2007 - World Cross Country and Half Marathon champion, and he's shown his credentials on the big stage. No one would question Bekele's credentials, he's a great athlete. But 2007 was a somewhat patchy year for him. Yes, he won the World 10000m title in Osaka (in what I believe was a shaky defence), and he ran some good personal bests in the shorter distances, but he didn't look the part to me. In addition to Mombasa, there were some less than convincing performances, though with nothing at stake in some of them, difficult to say.
And perhaps 2007 was an indication that Bekele has devoted his year to sharpening up his speed (which would be a great move), but if it's more than that, and he comes out in 2008 with anything less than his best form, Tadese will challenge him in Beijing. Tadese, for his part, had a disappointing time in Osaka, but he'll go to Beijing having fixed those problems. And the race between the two will be awesome - Tadese will force the pace early, relying on his Cross country and 21 km strengths, while Bekele will sit and wait for the final 400m. So quite how it will unfold is the most mouth-watering prospect of all. I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict Tadese to surprise and win, but that's more for the sake of controversy, and because I hope it happens! (I'm a big Tadese fan). Deep down, I'm sure Bekele will fix up whatever affected his patchy 2007 year. If he doesn't, money on Tadese will be rewarded!
Men's 5000m: Bekele vs Lagat. OK, so the the fact that we even have Bekele running the 5000m is probably a sign our crystal ball is not infallible. But I'm assuming that Bekele has a 2008 year along the same lines of his 2007, and the focus and strength is seen in the shorter events. Some PB's over 1500m and 3000m will encourage him to try the shorter event. That, and the fact that he won't win the 10000m (work with me on this one!), will see him line up in the 5000m final and beat Lagat in a last lap sprint, but the damage will have been done between 3600 and 4400m, where Bekele will run 58-something laps to break the speed of the 1500m runner. Or at least, that's how he'd need to do it!
Women's 200m: Allyson Felix vs everyone else. No contest here, Felix by a length. She won in Osaka by the biggest margin in Championship history and while the gap should narrow, it's difficult to see anyone bridging it. Felix is the most majestic, elegant runner around at the moment - a sprinter who looks almost fragile but is so smooth and rhythmical. She'll win comfortably. For Felix, though, it's the next event that holds the most interest...
Women's 400m: Sanya Richards vs Christine Ohuruogu vs Allyson Felix. OK, so I'm HOPING AGAINST HOPE that Felix will run the 400m event, ala Marie-Jose Perece in Atlanta and do the double. If she runs, I'm backing her, simply because her 200m speed, combined with her elegance and rhythm equals a fearsome 400m runner. Richards SHOULD be in Beijing - she missed Osaka after a blip in the US trials, but don't expect that to happen again. The world champ, Ohuruogu, has been cleared to run after a little doping scare, but the Olympic gold against the Americans will be too much to ask.
Women's 5000m: Meseret Defar vs. Turinesh Dibaba. Again, we're guessing blind here because there's no guarantee that Dibaba will run the 5000m event. She'll win the 10000m race, with another 60-second final lap, and hopefully (I'm holding my thumbs already), she'll recover enough to take on Defar in the 5000m race too. It's the race everyone wants to see, a race we missed out on in 2007, but remember back to the most epic clashes in track from 2006. So let's hope that both are in form, that both run this race, and that we see the race of the Olympics when they clash. Defar was magnificent in 2007, world records, world titles and untouchable performances. Dibaba can challenge her, but our prediction is that Defar edges it, and that's only because Dibaba has a 10 000m race in her legs (and a gold medal around her neck!)
Other sports: Some random musings from the crystal ball
We tend to neglect the other sports here, not because we're not interested in them, but more because the link between those sports and science is sometimes tenuous at best. However, here are some sports that offer interesting matchups and possibilities for analysis in 2008:
Tennis: Can Federer topple Nadal on the clay of Roland Garros?
The best months of the year for tennis fans are May through to July, when the world focuses first on the red clay of France, and then grass of Wimbledon for the two most interesting Grand Slam tournaments. In 2007, it was Nadal in France, Federer at Wimbledon, in the two most epic matches of the year. Federer is chasing the only Slam to avoid him, but must beat Nadal first. I don't think that 2008 will be the year for it, unless Nadal is injured...
From a sports science point of view, I think that tennis offers some fascinating opportunities for "Game analysis", because in 2007, we saw Federer come out and try to out-hit Nadal on the clay. It was a tactic that was doomed from the start, but Federer seemed determined to beat Nadal at his own game. I think the fascinating research will be to use game analysis to work out how best to construct a point to beat Nadal. It definitely wasn't what Federer tried last year, the clash between the elegant Federer and the brutal Nadal turning into a mismatch as Federer played the game Nadal must have wanted him to. For Federer, the challenge is to figure out what game Nadal DOESN'T want him to play and that's why this clash interests us.
Rubgy - a year of All Black dominance
Now that the World Cup is out the way, things will be back to normal and the All Blacks will dominate...Well, OK, that's a little tongue-in-cheek, but I do expect that the All Blacks will be the team to beat in 2008. Mostly, it's the rule changes that will feed their strengths, and South Africa's game of winning without the ball (subdue and penetrate) will be more difficult to implement successfully. That, and the fact that South Africa will have a new coach and have some internal politics to deal with, will mean the expected building from their RWC triumph will be nulllified. But mostly, from the science point of view, it will be fascinating to see how the rule changes affect the game - we'll hope for more running, more phases and less kicking, which will only be good for the game.
Conclusion
OK, so that is that from the crystal ball. As I said yesterday, I reserve the right to "forget" everything I've written in these last two posts! Just kidding, I do of course predict based on what I believe will happen, but hey, sport is unpredictable and there's no harm in going out on a limb and making wild predictions. The obvious disclaimer at this point is that most of these predictions are likely to be wrong! But it's an interesting means to introduce some of the more interesting stories of 2008 - stories we'll certainly be covering, analysing and dissecting. So do join us before, during and after these events, and we'll do our best to bring the HOW? and WHY? to the WHO? and WHAT?
Next up, incidentally, we'll start on our series-concept again. We're not entirely sure what series that will be. We've definitely lined up series on altitude, lactate and exercise in the cold, so they're on the horizon...
Ross
Yesterday, we ran through some of the highlights of the upcoming sporting year, including the Olympic Marathons in Beijing, cycling's Tour de France, and some of the other big city marathons in 2008. Today, we continue with some predictions for the Olympic Games track events, and one or two random sporting events that grab my fancy.
The Olympic Track events
There are so many fascinating races and match-ups on the cards for Beijing that it's difficult to know where to begin. I think that closer to the time, we'll have to devote entire posts to each event, but for today, we'll just throw out some of those match-ups, pick our winner (according to our unique Crystal ball) and touch on some of the interesting stories behind the "result". So here we go, men first:
Men's 100m: Tyson Gay vs. Asafa Powell. A familiar story here - Powell will be majestic the whole way through. He'll ease off the throttle in his second round and semi-final race, but still run comfortably under 10 seconds despite coasting the final 20m. But come the final, Tyson Gay will step into the spotlight and Powell will be found wanting. It won't be as easy as Osaka, but Gay will win. His time? 9.82 seconds, to Powell's 9.85 seconds, and Gay bags Olympic Gold. Powell will have to wait until 2009 for his first major title.
Men's 800m: Kenyans vs. Borzakovskiy vs. Mulaudzi. The crystal ball nearly broke when we looked at this event - the strain was just too great. Osaka showed just how unpredictable the event can be, with the big favourites all being upstaged by Alfred Kirwa Yego. Don't expect the same in Beijing. Instead, it's Yuri Borzakovskiy who shows up after a couple of 'anonymous' years to put his finishing kick on the event and defend his title. It should be a worrying sign for the other athletes when a runner with such credentials spends a whole year out of the limelight, because his focus is clearly on Beijing, just as it was before Athens. So back a slow first lap, with a fast finishing Russian to relegate the Kenyans to the minor medals. Quite which Kenyans that will be is anyone's guess (for that matter, they may be running in non-Kenyan vests, with middle Eastern names)
Men's 10000m: Kenenisa Bekele vs. Zersenay Tadese. OK, there are some Kenyans and an Ethiopian (Sileshi Sihine) who will have their say in this race, but I'm really looking forward to this battle. Tadese of Eritrea came of age in 2007 - World Cross Country and Half Marathon champion, and he's shown his credentials on the big stage. No one would question Bekele's credentials, he's a great athlete. But 2007 was a somewhat patchy year for him. Yes, he won the World 10000m title in Osaka (in what I believe was a shaky defence), and he ran some good personal bests in the shorter distances, but he didn't look the part to me. In addition to Mombasa, there were some less than convincing performances, though with nothing at stake in some of them, difficult to say.
And perhaps 2007 was an indication that Bekele has devoted his year to sharpening up his speed (which would be a great move), but if it's more than that, and he comes out in 2008 with anything less than his best form, Tadese will challenge him in Beijing. Tadese, for his part, had a disappointing time in Osaka, but he'll go to Beijing having fixed those problems. And the race between the two will be awesome - Tadese will force the pace early, relying on his Cross country and 21 km strengths, while Bekele will sit and wait for the final 400m. So quite how it will unfold is the most mouth-watering prospect of all. I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict Tadese to surprise and win, but that's more for the sake of controversy, and because I hope it happens! (I'm a big Tadese fan). Deep down, I'm sure Bekele will fix up whatever affected his patchy 2007 year. If he doesn't, money on Tadese will be rewarded!
Men's 5000m: Bekele vs Lagat. OK, so the the fact that we even have Bekele running the 5000m is probably a sign our crystal ball is not infallible. But I'm assuming that Bekele has a 2008 year along the same lines of his 2007, and the focus and strength is seen in the shorter events. Some PB's over 1500m and 3000m will encourage him to try the shorter event. That, and the fact that he won't win the 10000m (work with me on this one!), will see him line up in the 5000m final and beat Lagat in a last lap sprint, but the damage will have been done between 3600 and 4400m, where Bekele will run 58-something laps to break the speed of the 1500m runner. Or at least, that's how he'd need to do it!
Women's 200m: Allyson Felix vs everyone else. No contest here, Felix by a length. She won in Osaka by the biggest margin in Championship history and while the gap should narrow, it's difficult to see anyone bridging it. Felix is the most majestic, elegant runner around at the moment - a sprinter who looks almost fragile but is so smooth and rhythmical. She'll win comfortably. For Felix, though, it's the next event that holds the most interest...
Women's 400m: Sanya Richards vs Christine Ohuruogu vs Allyson Felix. OK, so I'm HOPING AGAINST HOPE that Felix will run the 400m event, ala Marie-Jose Perece in Atlanta and do the double. If she runs, I'm backing her, simply because her 200m speed, combined with her elegance and rhythm equals a fearsome 400m runner. Richards SHOULD be in Beijing - she missed Osaka after a blip in the US trials, but don't expect that to happen again. The world champ, Ohuruogu, has been cleared to run after a little doping scare, but the Olympic gold against the Americans will be too much to ask.
Women's 5000m: Meseret Defar vs. Turinesh Dibaba. Again, we're guessing blind here because there's no guarantee that Dibaba will run the 5000m event. She'll win the 10000m race, with another 60-second final lap, and hopefully (I'm holding my thumbs already), she'll recover enough to take on Defar in the 5000m race too. It's the race everyone wants to see, a race we missed out on in 2007, but remember back to the most epic clashes in track from 2006. So let's hope that both are in form, that both run this race, and that we see the race of the Olympics when they clash. Defar was magnificent in 2007, world records, world titles and untouchable performances. Dibaba can challenge her, but our prediction is that Defar edges it, and that's only because Dibaba has a 10 000m race in her legs (and a gold medal around her neck!)
Other sports: Some random musings from the crystal ball
We tend to neglect the other sports here, not because we're not interested in them, but more because the link between those sports and science is sometimes tenuous at best. However, here are some sports that offer interesting matchups and possibilities for analysis in 2008:
Tennis: Can Federer topple Nadal on the clay of Roland Garros?
The best months of the year for tennis fans are May through to July, when the world focuses first on the red clay of France, and then grass of Wimbledon for the two most interesting Grand Slam tournaments. In 2007, it was Nadal in France, Federer at Wimbledon, in the two most epic matches of the year. Federer is chasing the only Slam to avoid him, but must beat Nadal first. I don't think that 2008 will be the year for it, unless Nadal is injured...
From a sports science point of view, I think that tennis offers some fascinating opportunities for "Game analysis", because in 2007, we saw Federer come out and try to out-hit Nadal on the clay. It was a tactic that was doomed from the start, but Federer seemed determined to beat Nadal at his own game. I think the fascinating research will be to use game analysis to work out how best to construct a point to beat Nadal. It definitely wasn't what Federer tried last year, the clash between the elegant Federer and the brutal Nadal turning into a mismatch as Federer played the game Nadal must have wanted him to. For Federer, the challenge is to figure out what game Nadal DOESN'T want him to play and that's why this clash interests us.
Rubgy - a year of All Black dominance
Now that the World Cup is out the way, things will be back to normal and the All Blacks will dominate...Well, OK, that's a little tongue-in-cheek, but I do expect that the All Blacks will be the team to beat in 2008. Mostly, it's the rule changes that will feed their strengths, and South Africa's game of winning without the ball (subdue and penetrate) will be more difficult to implement successfully. That, and the fact that South Africa will have a new coach and have some internal politics to deal with, will mean the expected building from their RWC triumph will be nulllified. But mostly, from the science point of view, it will be fascinating to see how the rule changes affect the game - we'll hope for more running, more phases and less kicking, which will only be good for the game.
Conclusion
OK, so that is that from the crystal ball. As I said yesterday, I reserve the right to "forget" everything I've written in these last two posts! Just kidding, I do of course predict based on what I believe will happen, but hey, sport is unpredictable and there's no harm in going out on a limb and making wild predictions. The obvious disclaimer at this point is that most of these predictions are likely to be wrong! But it's an interesting means to introduce some of the more interesting stories of 2008 - stories we'll certainly be covering, analysing and dissecting. So do join us before, during and after these events, and we'll do our best to bring the HOW? and WHY? to the WHO? and WHAT?
Next up, incidentally, we'll start on our series-concept again. We're not entirely sure what series that will be. We've definitely lined up series on altitude, lactate and exercise in the cold, so they're on the horizon...
Ross
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)