Terrence Mahon: Olympic Wrap Up - 9/02/08

If there is one thing that I will take from the competitions in Beijing it is the eternal axiom: “The only thing that is constant in the universe is CHANGE”.  It is an axiom that I hope I never forget. 

I saw many things change at this Olympics, perhaps more at this one than at any other that I can remember. I also believe that it was the lack of this understanding that left some of us—coaches, athletes, and even spectators—stuck in the past while we looked on in disbelief at what was happening. I can see now that the best athletes, coaches, training systems—be they national or individual—are the ones that are constantly changing, constantly evolving, constantly moving forward with the inevitably new demands that are required to be on top in the sport.

This notion of change was apparent in nearly every track and field event that I witnessed. Not only did we see a changing of the guard in the sprint power from the U.S. to Jamaica, but we also saw great athletes who were favored to win gold suffer because they were holding on to the past. The athletes who were able to get on top of the podium were the ones who brought something new to their event. These were the ones who rewrote the record books, these were the ones who understood that what was good enough last year will not be good enough today. We saw great athletes and national training systems that had once faltered at championships now rise even higher. Athletes, coaches, and nations were figuring it out. As a whole I am not sure we did it this time. I think that we were basking in the glow of last year’s successes in Osaka and forgot that “change” can and will happen in a very short time. While many of us looked to repeat what worked before, many others looked to create what would work for the future.

It was foolish of me to think that when it came to the marathon, heat and humidity would play in our favor. Yes, it did in the past. As far as training systems go, we can prepare our athletes well to handle tough situations. We can teach them conversion tables based on heat indices and relative humidity. We can monitor dehydration levels and set appropriate plans for counteracting that happening in the race. We can plan for getting in enough carbohydrates and electrolytes to avoid the “bonk.”  We can teach pace so as to avoid the meltdown that happens when you go out at too haphazard a pace and burn up too much fuel. It worked at Worlds in ’91 and ’93, at the Olympics in ’04, but it did not prove itself as well in Beijing.

This is not to say that our athletes didn’t run well. To have two U.S. men finish in the top 10 in the marathon was a great feat. Shalane getting the bronze medal at 10,000m while setting a new American record was phenomenal. However, what was totally discounted was that we assumed that chasing medals would be easier here than placing top three in a major marathon or Golden League track meet. We thought that the weather in Beijing would level the playing field or even move it in our favor.  Why? Because we are smart and have a great staff of coaches and scientists to figure it all out.  However, I think we were quite naïve, or maybe just arrogant, in this respect. To not believe that others can adapt and change, that figuring this stuff out only works for educated western training systems, was a huge mistake. In the information age anyone with a computer and a little resolve can start to uncover the mysteries of competing in inclement weather. It’s apparent that Jamaica, Ethiopia, and Kenya have some pretty good computers and maybe some even better old-fashioned desire.

I think that what we saw in the men’s marathon and on the track in the women’s 10k was a total reversal of what we thought was going to happen. These races totally changed my understanding of what I thought possible in distance running. To see two women run sub-30 minutes in a championship 10K as well as one man run sub-2:07 in the marathon was astonishing. To watch Bekele run 4:57 for his last 2K of the 5K, after setting a new Olympic record in the 10K, left me in awe. These were athletes who were not only talented individuals, but also ones who understood their own strengths and weaknesses alongside that of their competitors. They were athletes who saw how they had been defeated in the past and worked hard to remedy the situation. When they toed the line they had plans not only for heat and humidity, but also for how to summon the Olympic spirit to help them succeed in record-breaking runs where most of modern science would say that is was not possible. It was the ideal blend of good coaching, great training, hard work, and intense desire. It was never more evident than in Usian Bolt, who took down Michael Johnson’s 200m time with a swagger that could only befit someone who knew the record was theirs before the gun was ever fired.

We must also not forget that on the distance running side of things, there were no paced races. These were not the metronomic events that we are used to seeing on both the track in Europe and on the level streets of the World Marathon Majors events. These were more boxing matches than running races. These were races of combat and strategy, of ebbs and flows, of attack and recover. Samuel Wanjiru threw in surges that would shift the pace per mile more than 20 seconds from one to the next, all the while running at below world-record pace for much of the event. So determined was he to bring home the gold medal for Kenya that he would not run one second longer than he had to. Maybe he had realized that he was the best runner as long as the race didn’t last more than 2 hours and 8 minutes. Maybe he realized that the longer the race took, the greater the opposition’s chances at success. Since his marathons typically don’t last longer than 2:06, why take the chance of getting into unknown territory? Once the first mile was covered in 4:41, it quickly eliminated anyone’s chances of success in an economical race. Wanjiru was not about to let the next Bordin or Baldini come to life on the streets of Beijing. If you were going to wrestle the gold away from Kenya, it was going to be a 26.2-mile affair and it was going to happen with as many pace shifts as humanly possible. If he had to surge every 100m to win, then I am sure that this is what he would have done. This is a new era of marathoning, and I believe that it is here to stay for quite a while. 

I am not sure what to say about the likes of Tirunesh Dibaba. To run a 14:43 for her last 5K of the 10K with a closing lap of 60 seconds pretty much says it all  Did I forget to mention that she set a new personal best and Olympic record! Along with Kenenisa Bekele, the display of both tremendous aerobic endurance and phenomenal top-end speed is quite a sight. When an athlete possesses such attributes, the possibility of beating them gets pretty tricky—just ask Elvan. I am still working on my theory on how to accomplish this one  I will let you know when I do. It will be my goal for the next four years. 

In getting ready for London 2012, we must remember that what worked here for those that succeeded will most likely not work again. Training methodologies will improve. Superpowers in the sprints and distances will change hands. Times and paces thought beyond belief will become possible. We must be ready for change. If we don’t change, then we don’t grow. If we don’t accept that athletes will run faster, jump farther, soar higher, then we have forgotten what the Olympics are all about. If Beijing showed us anything, it is that once every four years, great athletes who have been dreaming of showcasing their hard work to the world will finally get their chance. They are not going to take it lightly and are they are going to give everything they have to get it done. At times it will seem beyond human, beyond logic and beyond belief—but believe me, it is real and it will continue to happen. Get ready, change is coming sooner than we think! 

About

Top Posts

Interviews of Olympians