Olympics Track & Field

Alex Kubacki wrote:

healdgator wrote:Let me go ahead and say that I know Meb is a different situation than Lagat. I should have lumped him more in with Manzano and Rupp. But that was 8 years ago.

Manazano was born in Mexico. Not sure when he came to the US.

well crap

healdgator wrote:

Alex Kubacki wrote:

healdgator wrote:Let me go ahead and say that I know Meb is a different situation than Lagat. I should have lumped him more in with Manzano and Rupp. But that was 8 years ago.

Manazano was born in Mexico. Not sure when he came to the US.

well crap

uncrap. He moved to the US when he was 4.

Aren't we all immigrants? As far as I know, none of us are "native americans". No offense given or taken, I hope, I just cringe when people fault Meb and others.

Anyway, not sure the Algerian was/is really "doping", but I sure wish I could "recover" from injury the way he did. No wonder the IOC questioned his integrity regarding the 800m.

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:Aren't we all immigrants? As far as I know, none of us are "native americans". No offense given or taken, I hope, I just cringe when people fault Meb and others.

Anyway, not sure the Algerian was/is really "doping", but I sure wish I could "recover" from injury the way he did. No wonder the IOC questioned his integrity regarding the 800m.

Yeah, I'm with you on this one, Michele. I'm not sure what difference it makes where someone was born or when they moved here. Being the first in my family born in the U.S., I also cringed. While my parents emigrated when they were 25, I'd offer they're as American as anyone else's parents, even if they speak with an accent.

Lots of the athletes winning medals for other countries are the products of American training, too. They are choosing, because of their heritage, to compete for their birth country. That's their right, under the rules.

As for the Algerian, I'm not sure I agree with the original ruling, but once made, well, they should have stood their ground. They just cut their own legs out from under themselves. Or, maybe they already did in an earlier ruling and it came back to bite them.

Whatever the circumstances, it made an exciting event less exciting.

It's not about the individual. I didn't root for Manzano or Centrowitz any more than I would for Lagat or Meb. Well, maybe less for Lagat. They are just as american as anybody else. But when Lagat comes up through a different system, then immigrates and wins for the U.S., it doesn't really say much for the development of American distance running. When people who come up in our system do well, especially multiple people, it seems like we are on the right path for the future. Like I said, I shouldn't have lumped Meb in with Lagat. I may be wrong, but it seemed to me that Lagat became a US citizen for professional competitive reasons, at least in part.

As for the Algerian runner, his inclusion didn't bother me or affect my enjoyment of the event at all. I would rather the best competitors be included than not. The backtracking based on a doctor's note seemed pretty arbitrary to me (especially since he seemed perfectly fine in the 1500 final), but I'm glad they found a reason to let him compete.

healdgator wrote:It's not about the individual. I didn't root for Manzano or Centrowitz any more than I would for Lagat or Meb. Well, maybe less for Lagat. They are just as american as anybody else. But when Lagat comes up through a different system, then immigrates and wins for the U.S., it doesn't really say much for the development of American distance running. When people who come up in our system do well, especially multiple people, it seems like we are on the right path for the future. Like I said, I shouldn't have lumped Meb in with Lagat. I may be wrong, but it seemed to me that Lagat became a US citizen for professional competitive reasons, at least in part.

Agreed, Brian. I understand your point.

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:

healdgator wrote:It's not about the individual. I didn't root for Manzano or Centrowitz any more than I would for Lagat or Meb. Well, maybe less for Lagat. They are just as american as anybody else. But when Lagat comes up through a different system, then immigrates and wins for the U.S., it doesn't really say much for the development of American distance running. When people who come up in our system do well, especially multiple people, it seems like we are on the right path for the future. Like I said, I shouldn't have lumped Meb in with Lagat. I may be wrong, but it seemed to me that Lagat became a US citizen for professional competitive reasons, at least in part.

Agreed, Brian. I understand your point.

Sorry, but I don't. I know, Brian, you aren't trying to be parochial, but judging Lagat, or anyone, for their reasons for emigrating is dangerous.

A little poking around tells me that, having just won silver in Athens, sitting out for a year - while in his prime - when he made the switch that becoming a U.S. citizen was to his detriment from a professional competitive standpoint. He probably lost a lot of money in doing so.

Quite possibly, he made the decision based on family considerations. His wife is a Canadian of Chinese descent, and I'm going to bet that the level of acceptance she was experiencing was a bigger driver. They had two kids, in 2006 and 2008, so chances are they wanted the advantages offered here versus Kenya.

In fact, given his wife's nationality, it occurs to me he would have stood more to gain professionally by emigrating to Canada than to the U.S. I don't think it's at all fair to call Lagat anything other than an American athlete.

Martin VW wrote:

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:

healdgator wrote:It's not about the individual. I didn't root for Manzano or Centrowitz any more than I would for Lagat or Meb. Well, maybe less for Lagat. They are just as american as anybody else. But when Lagat comes up through a different system, then immigrates and wins for the U.S., it doesn't really say much for the development of American distance running. When people who come up in our system do well, especially multiple people, it seems like we are on the right path for the future. Like I said, I shouldn't have lumped Meb in with Lagat. I may be wrong, but it seemed to me that Lagat became a US citizen for professional competitive reasons, at least in part.

Agreed, Brian. I understand your point.

Sorry, but I don't. I know, Brian, you aren't trying to be parochial, but judging Lagat, or anyone, for their reasons for emigrating is dangerous.

A little poking around tells me that, having just won silver in Athens, sitting out for a year - while in his prime - when he made the switch was to his detriment to becoming a U.S. citizen from a professional competitive standpoint. He probably lost a lot of money in doing so.

Quite possibly, he made the decision based on family considerations. His wife is a Canadian of Chinese descent, and I'm going to bet that the level of acceptance she was experiencing was a bigger driver. They had two kids, in 2006 and 2008, so chances are they wanted the advantages offered here versus Kenya.

In fact, given his wife's nationality, it occurs to me he would have stood more to gain professionally by emigrating to Canada than to the U.S. I don't think it's at all fair to call Lagat anything other than an American athlete.

I don't want to speak for Brian, but I think the point is this: I take pride in seeing the American distance running system succeed on the world level. Galen Rupp, Leo Manzano, Meb, Hall, Ritz, etc. came up through the US system, ran for US colleges, and are now on the medal stands because of their training in the US.

While I am proud to call Lagat a fellow citizen, his winning a medal is in no way a barometer as to whether the US "system" of training distance runners is working and will continue to work for future generations. He became a US citizen as a gold medal caliber runner.

In the same vein, I enjoy seeing Mo Fareh win. Though he's not running for the US, he's training under a US system, which tells me Salazar and the other US distance programs have reestablished themselves as forces in international competitions.

That's all. Its about seeing our programs work.

Dave-O wrote:
That's all. Its about seeing our programs work.

I'll just add that there is also a dramatic difference between a young boy born and raised in the Rift Valley and a similar young boy born and raised here in the US. There, running potential is actively scouted and developed from a young age with a focus on competitive running excellence. Here, athletic potential is actively scouted and developed with a focus on baseball, football, soccer, hockey, et al. Running talent is often an desired attribute for other, more popular sports. A boy in the US has a lot more distraction and varied opportunity than his Kenyan counterpart... while also having a less physically demanding 'normal' daily life.

To see an American (who was raised here) excel in international running competition is different than seeing an American who was raised/trained in the Rift Valley. I would feel the same way if it were an American-born citizen who grew up and trained from a young age in the Rift Valley but came back and competed as an adult for America. It's not just about the citizenship, it's also about how you came to be who you are and learned to do what you do. An 'American runner', to me, means you dealt with all of the cultural/societal issues of growing up in America. That's different than being a Kenyan runner, who runs for America.

Mr MattM wrote:

Dave-O wrote:
That's all. Its about seeing our programs work.

I'll just add that there is also a dramatic difference between a young boy born and raised in the Rift Valley and a similar young boy born and raised here in the US. There, running potential is actively scouted and developed from a young age with a focus on competitive running excellence. Here, athletic potential is actively scouted and developed with a focus on baseball, football, soccer, hockey, et al. Running talent is often an desired attribute for other, more popular sports. A boy in the US has a lot more distraction and varied opportunity than his Kenyan counterpart... while also having a less physically demanding 'normal' daily life.

To see an American (who was raised here) excel in international running competition is different than seeing an American who was raised/trained in the Rift Valley. I would feel the same way if it were an American-born citizen who grew up and trained from a young age in the Rift Valley but came back and competed as an adult for America. It's not just about the citizenship, it's also about how you came to be who you are and learned to do what you do. An 'American runner', to me, means you dealt with all of the cultural/societal issues of growing up in America. That's different than being a Kenyan runner, who runs for America.

Soccer? Oh no, unless you are talking about girls.

I understood the point about being a product of the American system.

It's such a blurry line. Did he develop in Kenya? Certainly. But, didn't he also develop at WSU? Where did he truly learn that final 5% that pushed him to the top of the pyramid? Who should get credit? Do any of us really know that, enough to speak of Lagat in a different light than other U.S. athletes?

Should we discount the accomplishments of the U.S. gymnasts? Only the athletes are "American." They are a product of a system that imported the Romanian and Chinese training philosophies.

OK, then how about the 1980's Miracle team? Herb Brooks, and I believe all of the players, were raised in the U.S., so certainly they're emblematic of the USA Hockey system, right? Nope. They won by adopting the Russian hockey system, one that Herb - and only Herb - was employing at the U of M to win national championships.

To make things a little more complicated, Lagat was recruited and coached by a Chinese coach who coached and was educated in both Chinese and American system.

Btw, I understand we are talking about elites here, but anyone cares discussing what kind of product Jerry belongs ........

Martin VW wrote:
It's such a blurry line.

No, it's not at all. If he had grown up in the US, would he even have been a runner? There's no need to be contrarian just to be contrarian.

mul21 wrote:

Martin VW wrote:
It's such a blurry line.

No, it's not at all. If he had grown up in the US, would he even have been a runner? There's no need to be contrarian just to be contrarian.

Never mind.

Martin VW wrote:I understood the point about being a product of the American system.

It's such a blurry line. Did he develop in Kenya? Certainly. But, didn't he also develop at WSU? Where did he truly learn that final 5% that pushed him to the top of the pyramid? Who should get credit? Do any of us really know that, enough to speak of Lagat in a different light than other U.S. athletes?

Should we discount the accomplishments of the U.S. gymnasts? Only the athletes are "American." They are a product of a system that imported the Romanian and Chinese training philosophies.

OK, then how about the 1980's Miracle team? Herb Brooks, and I believe all of the players, were raised in the U.S., so certainly they're emblematic of the USA Hockey system, right? Nope. They won by adopting the Russian hockey system, one that Herb - and only Herb - was employing at the U of M to win national championships.

The line could be blurry, but in Lagat's case it really isn't unless you try to make it so. He came here to go to college, then he went back home to compete for his birth country. It was only after he already achieved running stardom that he became a citizen of the U.S. (and still competed for Kenya). It was even later that he decided to compete for the U.S. That doesn't make him any less of an American, but it certainly makes him a lot less of a product of the American system.

If I had been running in jr. high or high school at the time, Bernard Lagat's world championships would not have made me believe that I (or any of my teammates) could challenge for world titles or gold medals. Even at my age, I watch Manzano win a silver medal and think, "if that guy can do it. . . "

healdgator wrote:

Martin VW wrote:I understood the point about being a product of the American system.

It's such a blurry line. Did he develop in Kenya? Certainly. But, didn't he also develop at WSU? Where did he truly learn that final 5% that pushed him to the top of the pyramid? Who should get credit? Do any of us really know that, enough to speak of Lagat in a different light than other U.S. athletes?

Should we discount the accomplishments of the U.S. gymnasts? Only the athletes are "American." They are a product of a system that imported the Romanian and Chinese training philosophies.

OK, then how about the 1980's Miracle team? Herb Brooks, and I believe all of the players, were raised in the U.S., so certainly they're emblematic of the USA Hockey system, right? Nope. They won by adopting the Russian hockey system, one that Herb - and only Herb - was employing at the U of M to win national championships.

The line could be blurry, but in Lagat's case it really isn't unless you try to make it so. He came here to go to college, then he went back home to compete for his birth country. It was only after he already achieved running stardom that he became a citizen of the U.S. (and still competed for Kenya). It was even later that he decided to compete for the U.S. That doesn't make him any less of an American, but it certainly makes him a lot less of a product of the American system.

If I had been running in jr. high or high school at the time, Bernard Lagat's world championships would not have made me believe that I (or any of my teammates) could challenge for world titles or gold medals. Even at my age, I watch Manzano win a silver medal and think, "if that guy can do it. . . "

Thank you for your INTELLIGENT post explaining your mindset, Brian, even though we disagree. That's how special interest forums are supposed to work.

How's that for being contrarian, Jim?

Oh, Martin... now you're just being a popularist...

I don't know what the spoiler rules are here, but for the love of everything holy, please watch the Men's 800m final.

Dave-O wrote:I don't know what the spoiler rules are here, but for the love of everything holy, please watch the Men's 800m final.

And the Men's 200m final. And the Women's Soccer Final.

Dave-O wrote:I don't know what the spoiler rules are here, but for the love of everything holy, please watch the Men's 800m final.

In fact don't wait, watch it at this link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n-oGiLDO88&feature=plcp

It's not the best quality and I don't know what language the announcers are speaking, but the race is awesome.

Chris M wrote:

Dave-O wrote:I don't know what the spoiler rules are here, but for the love of everything holy, please watch the Men's 800m final.

And the Men's 200m final. And the Women's Soccer Final.

And Ashton Eaton

Martin VW wrote:

Thank you for your INTELLIGENT post explaining your mindset, Brian, even though we disagree. That's how special interest forums are supposed to work.

How's that for being contrarian, Jim?

I thought Brian was very clear as to what his point was and I didn't need to restate what he had said. Your need for people to be so detailed to the nth degree when they're trying to get their point across is exhausting. But thanks for the personal shot.

Edit: And I wrote this before I saw the hissy fit in your blog.

Dave-O wrote:

Chris M wrote:

Dave-O wrote:I don't know what the spoiler rules are here, but for the love of everything holy, please watch the Men's 800m final.

And the Men's 200m final. And the Women's Soccer Final.

And Ashton Eaton

Nice 1500m By Ashton to complete the Gold medal!

Dave-O wrote:I don't know what the spoiler rules are here, but for the love of everything holy, please watch the Men's 800m final.

Yeah unreal!! 1:40:91 800m WOW!!! That was awesome!!