New Zealand 10,000 Metres Championships 3rd January 2012

Stephen, congratulations on your win and national title. Your honesty and willingness to try some field events in order to gain some 'mongrel' will see you go far. For that, I salute you...Just make sure the you have that mongrel on a leash or the council officers may have something to say or give you

I felt rather compelled to go back and check some of the comments here as a certain limited few have come out and stated that a certain Mr Lett etc has been 'criticised'. I personally cannot find any such instances of actual 'criticism' as such; in fact, the only criticism comes from those who seem to have taken their 'normalised moral high ground' to jump to the aid of what they summise to be a wounded and hurt runner. This however doesn't surprise me one iota given these very same people who have been pointing their fingers haven't actually offered much to the sport of athletics over their very limited years of involvement. Yes they may be, or have been ok runners, but anything else? I think not!

It is a sad state of affairs when the national champ feels compelled (rightly) to come out and defend his performance/achievement. You can only beat what is put in front of you. Poor form for the writer of a race report to attempt to diminish the performance, whether expressly or implicitly. Lett trains hard and races hard (and frequently) and doesn't deserve someone having a snipe after he's just defended his NZ title (irrespective of the winning time). Disrespectful.

It is a sad state of affairs when the national champ feels compelled (rightly) to come out and defend his performance/achievement. You can only beat what is put in front of you. Poor form for the writer of a race report to attempt to diminish the performance, whether expressly or implicitly. Lett trains hard and races hard (and frequently) and doesn't deserve someone having a snipe after he's just defended his NZ title (irrespective of the winning time). Disrespectful.

A very detailed race report thanks Mr Kennedy and thanks for my defence team (Hurrah, Wayne, red back) much appreciated I certainly don't feel like a "poor Mr Lett" in winning a national title. While it would have been great to have strong, deep fields for the 10000m champs, you race who is there and do your best to win a national title. It was certainly a very important race for me and I'm stoked to have won it twice albeit in slower time than 192-whatever. I hope that by training hard and consistenly year after year the times will come down in the right race at the right time.

I agree that it would have been better to have the two meets combined to add a bit more weight to them both. I would be a bit concerned however if there were 8 or 9 contenders for the win in a 10k aas Mr Kennedys race report may be more akin to a large novel than an article. Its good to have passionate fans of the sport however and I certainly love reading race reports which give an insight into other peoples opinions on the race.

Good race review, however I just have two clafiications...both assume that you were referring to me when you refer to Sarah's coach.
1. I was not in the stands i was trackside at the start/finish line giving advice and shouting encouragement - to all competitors.
2. I am no longer coaching Sarah (and wasn't then either), but I do agree, Biscuit did go out to hard.

I agree with both Hurring & The_Matamata_Express. Mr Lett won and is the champ, he can/may go faster if and when required.

.Re David Kennedy's statement :"Who was the best athlete in the field?...Ms Biss by a country mile (she is also intelligent and experienced, which according to Mr Biltong is the criteria for a coach not talking to her)...."

Disagree... Sally was the best. She won because she trains extremely hard, is dedicated and deserved to win. She is also a very intelligent runner who knows how to pace herself. Expect more records to fall at Oceanias in a few weeks.

Firstly, thank you kind people for your comments, one never knows, until you put it out there, quite what the reaction to ones writing will be, so I am gratified to see it was positive. Indeed, 'Steve Skilling,' almost glowing,... I think.
And 'Has Been' you are right, what would be the harm in combining the two events, and what a way to start the new year... I am reminded here of the immortal words of the great John Davies, who when questioned about his best time for 1500m said:
"never mind about the distance, my best time was in the sand dunes after Tauranga Twilight."
...and I believe he was in the 48 year age group at the time as well, Ms Ryan.

'P_cog' ...just a small correction...Ms Biss' first 200m was 35 which is of course a 29.10 10k pace. Her first 400m was 72, which is 30:00 min pace...and yes you are right, "Biscuit what were you thinking?...Of course the only person to answer this is Ms Biss herself, and I would hope that once she finishes psychologically flogging herself around her bathroom with a knotted tea towel, might perhaps tell us... In the meantime though, you'll have to make do with my suspicion that it was not too much beyond a crisis of confidence although perhaps 'blind panic' might be a more apt description...and that whatever else it was after that, it certainly wasn't cognitive.
With regards to Savidan and Matthews, In order to compare them with modern athletes I do use a little athletic license. Yes you are right 'p_cog' they were 3 and 6 milers. However, in saying that it is probably wrong to even call them 6 milers, and they certainly wouldn't have described themselves as such. New Zealand didn't have a six mile at the national track champs until 1937. The first six mile Bill Savidan ever ran was the Empire games in 1930, where he won.(and what an inspired selection that turned out to be) The first 10k he ever ran was at the Olympics in 1932, where he was 4th.. So these men were rank amateurs when it came to running 6 miles. It is therefore unfair to compare their 6 mile times with todays 10k runners. BUT...they were world class three milers, and the depth of three miling in New Zealand in the 1930's was immense. Randolph Rose, Bill Savidan, Cecil Matthews, and even Jack Lovelock were all world ranked.
So it is from these times that I base my conversions to 10K.
There is floating about, a remarkably accurate formula that I here put to use...it is as follows. Divide the 3 mile time by 12 to get the lap times, add 2 seconds for the slowdown over the extra 200m to get the 5000m time, then double that time and add a minute. As an example, Paul Martelleti's best 5000m time for 2011 was 14:19.5 this converts, using this formula, to 29:39, whereas his actual time for 10k was 29.43. So when you see this..( = ) it is this formula that I am using.
Now back to the poor Mr Lett's much maligned 30:36.
Before we start though, I would like to draw your attention to Neville Hill. He won the Australia/ NZ champs over 3 miles in 1911 by 220 yards in 14:53 (=15:30 5K =32:00 10K...so 101 years later the useless b*stard would only have got 5th in the NZ 10K of 2012), and on that basis he was selected for the 5 and 10k at the Stockholm Olympics of 1912. He thus became our first New Zealand distance running Olympian. He ran 15:56.8 for 4th in the first heat of the 5K, and with three from each heat to advance to the finals he was eliminated. He didn't disgrace himself however, and perhaps with the luck of running in another heat, he may have made the final. This was the final where Hannes Kolehmainen(FIN) (14:36.6) beat Jean Bouin (FRA) (14:36.7) by .01 second and broke Alfred Shrubbs 1904 W.R. of 14:59.
Jean Bouin must have perhaps wondered about the iniquities of life...2nd by 0.1 in the Olympics, played international rugby for France, and then was shot in 1914....but I digress. Neville Hill also started in the heats of the 10k but withdrew mid race.
This 1912 team was possibly our most successful Olympic team ever. Of the three New Zealanders in the team Malcolm Champion won gold in swimming, Anthony Wilding won Bronze in tennis. Only Neville Hill, on the track, didn't win a medal.
Moving on from 1912. In 1927 Randolph Rose coming off his world grass track mile record of 4:13.6 ran the = of 31:14 for 10K (3 mile 14:29.2. =15:07 5K) at the national track champs. So how good was Randolph Rose? Well 15:07 would have got him 7th in the Olympic 5K final in 1928, where Ville Ritola(14:38) beat Paavo Nurmi(14:40)( which reversed the result of 1924,) and 31:14 would have got him 3rd in the 10K.
.....but..so far so good for Mr Lett. He would have won the national title in 1927...although I would not have liked to be on the receiving end of Randolph Rose's charging head down sprint, should he have managed to hang on to Mr Lett long enough to use it.....In saying that though, Randolph Rose had size 11 feet, and apparently made quite some noise when he started to sprint...so it is likely that Mr Lett would have heard him coming.
...but then, out of the depression years of the late 1920's, came the golden era of the 1930's..
...In 1931 Norm Cooper ran = 31:28 (14:35 3mile)...so without a doubt Mr Lett would also have been New Zealand 10K Champion in 1931..
In march of 1932, Bill Savidan ran = 31:28(3mile 14:36) before returning the = of 30:40 (5K in 14:49.6 for 4th) at the LA Olympics. The problem the selectors would have faced, of course, would have been whether to send Mr Lett as defending NZ champion or Mr Savidan to the Olympics. They would of course have sent Mr Savidan because he was the Empire champion,(and would have had that 'inspired' selector from 1930 on his side) and the the headlines in the NZ Herald would have no doubt stridently lambasted the selectors on Mr Lett's behalf.
Just as an aside though. Remember how I was bellyaching about having to spend an extra four hours and a tank of gas travelling to an extra track meet...well spare a thought for the athletes travelling to the 1932 Olympics.
Now, as you will be aware the Olympics were held in L.A. which at that time had the biggest sea port in the USA. A port which was but a short distance to where the Olympics were being held (in fact the yachting was held in LA port waters). So, what were the NZ Olympic Committee thinking? When after 17 days of chugging across the Pacific Ocean, the ship carrying the New Zealanders docked in, of all places, San Francisco. They then transhipped, where they then spent another two days chugging across the Pacific Ocean to LA. Now, I don't know how much 'gas' a ship uses in two days, but I would hazard a guess that it was considerably more than my wagon used in 4 hours.
The 22 year old Jack Lovelock fared little better. He spent 7 days travelling by ship across the Atlantic from England to New York, and then another 7 days on a train getting to LA. No wonder he only managed 7th in the 1500m final....and got pilloried by the New Zealand press for his troubles.
But LA aside...here's where it starts to get a mite tougher for our apocryphal Mr Lett's 30:36...
In 1936 Cecil Matthews ran = 30:42 before leaving for the Berlin Olympics, as did Jack Lovelock in England 8 weeks before the games with an = 30:34. Whew.... Mr Lett might have struggled to get a medal at the nationals of 1936...there is no way he would have survived the finishing sprints of Lovelock and Matthews
In 1937 Matthews ran =30:20 and then came his great year of 1938 and the = 30:07. (incidently, the six mile gold that Matthews won in 1938 was the only time he ever ran the distance). So Mr Lett wouldn't have won the national 10K title in 1932, 1936, 1937 or 1938, indeed, would have been lucky to have placed in 1936. The jury (me) is still out whether he would have beaten Savidan in 1930, although the statistics say he would have won by 4 seconds.
Then, of course, came the war in 1939, and with it the end of NZ's Golden summers of the 1930's. As also became some of the worlds finest athletes, fertilizer for the poppies of Flanders Fields. It was not until 1948 that Harold Nelson gathered again NZ's 10K momentum.
Biltong...you are right, "a good coach does not have to say anything to his athlete during a race"..to which I would add...'but a Great coach would know when to.'
Who was the best athlete in the field?...Ms Biss by a country mile (she is also intelligent and experienced, which according to Mr Biltong is the criteria for a coach not talking to her)....so, who is the national champion?...Ms Gibbs by a country mile. The question you have to ask, Mr Biltong, is why?
My observation was, that if, after 100m, Ms Biss had been told to "slow the F#ck down" then she would now be the national 10K champion. I further observed that this should have been her coaches job...In saying this Ms Biss didn't wear a watch either. She wears one in training because you could see the white mark...and here I advance that hoary old adage that you never do anything in a race that you havn't done in training...so she wears a watch in training but not in a race?...hmmmm.
In contrast Ms Gibbs had her lap times taped to her watch. (or at least, from the stands, I think she did...she certainly held her watch in front of her face for long periods on several occasions throughout the race )
In conclusion, I am reminded here of Lydiard, who while driving Murray Halberg and Neville Scott to a race, turned to Scott and said
"you know Neville there isn't a man alive who could beat you at the moment over 5K."
Halberg of course would have got the lemon squeezer lips, and would have thought..."LIKE F*CK...while Scott would have been thinking...GEEZ...Lydiard thinks I'm unbeatable"....Touche....a good coach, then, Mr Biltong would have kept his mouth shut?...but a great one didn't.
As it turned out though, Lydiard perhaps should have kept silent...although I suspect he didn't have the ability. The race was the heats of the 5K in Tokyo in 1964 where both athletes crapped out.

Yes, I have got to agree with Coggie and HasBeen - that was a great race review from David Kennedy. I have read it three times. One point I dispute though. A good coach does not need to say anything to his/her runner during a race and likewise a good intelligent experienced runner does not need to get any instruction from his/her coach during the race. I am going to read that review one more time - it was goooood!

Geriatric Ward - I'm hoping that your comment "48 year olds don't party... " is tongue in cheek as having just turned 48 I certainly don't consider my party days over or even my running days!!

Thats a great review

The meets definitely were not as large as previous years.
They are also sandwedged in the king of the mountain race and half ironman. Hard to run all 3. Ask Angus Bell who only did 2.
I would combine the twi light and 10km and have them on new years eve. Waht a way to get the party started,

http://www.taurangaramblers.co.nz/results/2012/2012-01-03%20New%20Zealand%2010,000%20Metre%20ChampionshipsMeeting%20Tauranga%20%203rd%20January%202012%20Results.pdf Results for supporting events on http://www.taurangaramblers.co.nz with New Zealand 10,000 metres Championhip on Athletics New Zealand website.