• Login
  • |
  • Contact

    LIVE SUPPORT

    SEND US A MESSAGE

    ContactCode

    OTHER

    Email:
    info@trackie.com

    Voicemail:
    1.877.456.5544

You are viewing page of 4.

Discussion Forum >>

TrackieReg - Free Online Registration for pretty much anything!
Reply to topic Go to last post
Avatar
User since:
May 23rd, 2015
Posts: 16
thumbs_up 1
Report  ORIGINAL

weeiceman said 1 week ago

Canuck team at Worlds

Show Original Post
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #76 

    Runfastrunfar said 2 days ago

    "When someone is in the NCAA system their focus is on university meets first and summer meets second."


    This is not uniformly true. It depends on the NCAA program (school/track team) that you are going to.

    I know several schools/coaches that have the EXACT opposite view. Other schools actually pay "bonuses" for every athlete that makes a national team. If you look at the very best NCAA track schools in Division I you will see that their rosters are "filled" with Olympic, World, International, and National-level athletes. In fact, it is almost impossible now to win the NCAA without at least 2-3 truly "world-class" athletes (on the male AND female side of the equation). If you doubt me, please look at the "winning times, distances, and heights" of the winners and then compare them to the Olympic/World qualifying standards.

    The USports Track and Field system does NOT emphasis international competition or competing at a world-class level (lack of outdoor events).

    I am not talking about the athletes, coaches, supporting staff, or schools, I know for a fact that they are giving it their all. I am talking about the actual system/structure of USports' track and field.

    There is no Decathlon, Heptathlon, Hammer, Javelin, Discus, Steeplechase, 400m, Relays. Up until recently the Pentathlon was contested for male multi-eventers in the USports/CIS system but World Indoors has pole-vault and the 60m - two major point-getters in the Decathlon (the 60m becomes the 100m).

    Realistically, "carding" will NOT "get it done". Evidence of this assertion is a paper that came out of the Winnipeg Sports Centre that states training costs for "elite" level sports is the average "training cost deficit" for Senior athletes is $15,000 a year and for Developmental athletes $30,000 a year.

    The problem is athletes average about $25,000 a year. Over an Olympic cycle we are talking about $60,000 - $120,000 in the hole. The total amount of "training cost debt" carried by Canadian athletes in all sports is $27.5 MILLION. This is why we see a sharp drop-off in the number of Senior Canadian track and field athletes from the Junior ranks OR they go South. Even Donovan Bailey on CBC said that going "South" was the way to go IF you wanted to go all the way in the present situation we have now.

    Almost the entire Canadian World Relays Gold Medal Team 4X100 Men's Relay Team is composed of NCAA "trained" Canadians. But they were "discovered/developed/coached" here in Canada at the Youth and Junior-level. Therefore, it means we have the talent, coaching know-how, and the "resources" to get it done but come up "short" when they start to enter the Senior ranks (university/college; Age 17 - 23).

    (Sources: Manitoba Sport Institute - Why are Canadian athletes Struggling Financially; Global News - Canada "$27.5 million in debt Canadian athletes".)

    The UK also has the same issue. British male Youth and Junior-level sprinters are as fast if not faster than their American counterparts but by the time the British athletes are 23 they are not as fast as their US "cousins".

    Most of the British Men's 2017 Gold Medal 4x100 Team went to through the NCAA, are being trained in the US, or have an American coach.

    My question is what system do you think would work; who is doing it right; what can we do as Canadian "track" people to prepare/assist Canadian athletes?

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #77 

    accountability said 2 days ago

    so answer this... Who is accountable?

    Quote comment
  • obvious User since:
    Apr 1st, 2007
    Posts: 743
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #78 

    Obvious said 2 days ago

    Quoting: accountability
    "so answer this... Who is accountable?"


    So answer this....accountable for what, specifically?

    Having you simply repeat that no medals is a disaster/failure/embarrassment, you still haven't identified specific athletes or performances that didn't measure up to your expectations.

    Gilbert has some valid points about relays, but surely there must be some acknowledgement that the men's team is not going to run as fast when you take out DeGrasse. (And in terms of the lack of 'experience' he mentions regarding the relays, isn't that something Gilbert himself should be responsible for in getting the team to a few meets and training camps?)

    Quote comment
  • sub49 User since:
    Apr 3rd, 2016
    Posts: 47
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #79 

    sub49 said 2 days ago

    Interesting comment regarding relays from Gilbert. On the men's 4x100 side, Aaron Brown looked to be in the shape of his life in the 200, so I'm assuming Gilbert is either referring to Smellie, Rodney, or Ajomale who were 'out of shape'.

    I have staunchly defended Gilbert, but here I believe he may be at fault. He decided to select Ajomale after watching him run 10.4 and place 8th at the Canadian trials. There were several other athletes in better form who could have been chosen. That's on him.

    On the Women's 4x400 side, as I mentioned earlier, we could have run Watson in the heats. We are not the American's, and cannot rotate any pieces in and out and know that we will still qualify. At Rio last year, Watson had to split 50point in both the heats and finals to get us to where we finished. She's likely the fastest 400m flat runner in the country, and taking her out is not something I'd have done lightly.

    I maintain my comments above that AC/Gilbert are not to blame for the zero medals, and that the majority of our performances were very successful, but here I can't help but think it is a bit rich to see him blame 'athlete fitness' when the signs were there.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #80 

    Anonymous said 2 days ago

    Quoting: Obvious
    "So answer this....accountable for what, specifically?

    Having you simply repeat that no medals is a disaster/failure/embarrassment, you still haven't identified specific athletes or performances that didn't measure up to your expectations.

    Gilbert has some valid points about relays, but surely there must be some acknowledgement that the men's team is not going to run as fast when you take out DeGrasse. (And in terms of the lack of 'experience' he mentions regarding the relays, isn't that something Gilbert himself should be responsible for in getting the team to a few meets and training camps?)"


    These are the events/athletes that performed below expectations:

    100m (men): both Smellie and Rodney should have made it to the semi finals but were very slow in the heats with some terrible times.

    200m (men): Brown's DQ was, with all due respect, a very amateurish error. At his level, I don't think you can defend stepping on the line like that (this happens WAY too much with our sprinters).

    400m (women): ALL of them, Travia, Carline and Aiyanna, were inexplicably slow. It was quite shocking to see, especially because we've seen how fast Muir can be in the past.

    800m (men): I'm not sure what he was thinking, but McBride could (and should) have easily won that final. It seemed like he made a massive tactical error in going out hard at the front like that, he should have known better.

    1500m (women): Reid should have done better in the heats, she's MUCH better than that, so no excuse. Yes, Sifuentes and Stafford had great heats with SBs, but they fell apart in the semi's.

    5000m (men): Ahmed should have contested for a medal. To be fourth at the Olympics and then fall to sixth here was a disappointment.

    Marathon (men): Gillis, although not his fault, as he was ill (best he could do given the situation).

    110/100m Hurdles: Cabral pulling his hamstring (or something) in the semis - he had the potential to be a finalist again. As for Whyte and George, they both underperformed, and should have been in the semis/finals respectively.

    400m Hurdles (women): Was fully expecting Watson to break the Canadian record, which did not happen (she did make the final though, as was speculated in another thread).

    High Jump: once again, Mike Mason fell apart and didn't make the final. It's painful to watch and his inconsistency has become, well... consistent. Treasure had the ability to make the final, like at the Olympics, but failed to execute.

    Long Jump (women): given the fact that she was rated THIRD in the world going in, Nettey absolutely should have been in the final, at the very least. Instead, it looks like she may have peaked early; she was actually a major threat for a medal.

    Pole Vault (men): not unexpected, but Barber again underperformed. I would have thought he would have rebounded by his personal issues, but it seems not. To not be able to make it over 5.75m is very disappointing indeed.

    Shot Put: Nedow consistently seems to freeze at major events, this being the latest. He is more than capable of throwing over 21m so its incredibly frustrating to watch. Suttie has thrown much better this season and her result was a let down.

    Hammer (women): Weir having a No Measurement was a giant shock - she had been so good all year, I struggle to understand what happened.

    Javelin (women): another let-down for Gleadle - she should be in the top 6 consistently, if not challenging for a medal, yet like some of our other throwers, gets psyched out at the big meets when it counts. She is another I was fully expecting to break a Canadian Record,

    4x100m (men): I'm sure that those four could have run faster, even without De Grasse (granted it was a slightly different team, but they did in the heats at Rio).

    4x400m (women): HUGE mistake not putting Watson in - I don't understand what Glenroy was thinking. Yes, it was a seasonal best, but they should have been able to run faster and at least make the final.

    20km RW (men): Thorne, I'm assuming, must have been sick or injured, otherwise I can't explain how he would finish 51st (never seen him finish so low before).

    50km RW (men): I believe that I read that Dunfee wasn't well - very sad, as I expected him to medal with ease (relatively speaking).

    Decathlon: Warner was sick and could not perform at his best, which was obviously a disappointment (his finishing in the top 8 was impressive, however).

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #81 

    Andrew Jones said 2 days ago

    800m (men): I'm not sure what he was thinking, but McBride could (and should) have easily won that final. It seemed like he made a massive tactical error in going out hard at the front like that, he should have known better.

    1500m (women): Reid should have done better in the heats, she's MUCH better than that, so no excuse. Yes, Sifuentes and Stafford had great heats with SBs, but they fell apart in the semi's.

    5000m (men): Ahmed should have contested for a medal. To be fourth at the Olympics and then fall to sixth here was a disappointment.


    I'd agree with some of the points you made, not so much on the ones listed above.

    McBride easily win(ning the) final? Not likely, as this was his first appearance in a major final. He'll no doubt learn from this, and one thing I think he found out was that the 800m at the highest level is -- if you want to succeed -- an inherently physical and crowded contest. He will have to learn to run in the pack and from behind, as only Rudisha at his peak could front-run to glory.

    Stafford ran a 4:04 (PB) to make the final. She then had to run the next day and did well, I think, to run 4:08. No shame in that, and she is setting up well for Doha '19.

    Ahmed decided to double and, unlike Rio where he saved himself for the 5000m, ran a NR in the 10000m. The only doubler to beat him was the other Mo.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #82 

    Andrew Jones said 2 days ago

    Stafford ran a 4:04 (PB) to make the final

    Meant to say semi-final.

    Quote comment
  • sub49 User since:
    Apr 3rd, 2016
    Posts: 47
    thumbs_up 7
    Report    REPLY #83 

    sub49 said 2 days ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "These are the events/athletes that performed below expectations:

    100m (men): both Smellie and Rodney should have made it to the semi finals but were very slow in the heats with some terrible times.

    200m (men): Brown's DQ was, with all due respect, a very amateurish error. At his level, I don't think you can defend stepping on the line like that (this happens WAY too much with our sprinters).

    400m (women): ALL of them, Travia, Carline and Aiyanna, were inexplicably slow. It was quite shocking to see, especially because we've seen how fast Muir can be in the past.

    800m (men): I'm not sure what he was thinking, but McBride could (and should) have easily won that final. It seemed like he made a massive tactical error in going out hard at the front like that, he should have known better.

    1500m (women): Reid should have done better in the heats, she's MUCH better than that, so no excuse. Yes, Sifuentes and Stafford had great heats with SBs, but they fell apart in the semi's.

    5000m (men): Ahmed should have contested for a medal. To be fourth at the Olympics and then fall to sixth here was a disappointment.

    Marathon (men): Gillis, although not his fault, as he was ill (best he could do given the situation).

    110/100m Hurdles: Cabral pulling his hamstring (or something) in the semis - he had the potential to be a finalist again. As for Whyte and George, they both underperformed, and should have been in the semis/finals respectively.

    400m Hurdles (women): Was fully expecting Watson to break the Canadian record, which did not happen (she did make the final though, as was speculated in another thread).

    High Jump: once again, Mike Mason fell apart and didn't make the final. It's painful to watch and his inconsistency has become, well... consistent. Treasure had the ability to make the final, like at the Olympics, but failed to execute.

    Long Jump (women): given the fact that she was rated THIRD in the world going in, Nettey absolutely should have been in the final, at the very least. Instead, it looks like she may have peaked early; she was actually a major threat for a medal.

    Pole Vault (men): not unexpected, but Barber again underperformed. I would have thought he would have rebounded by his personal issues, but it seems not. To not be able to make it over 5.75m is very disappointing indeed.

    Shot Put: Nedow consistently seems to freeze at major events, this being the latest. He is more than capable of throwing over 21m so its incredibly frustrating to watch. Suttie has thrown much better this season and her result was a let down.

    Hammer (women): Weir having a No Measurement was a giant shock - she had been so good all year, I struggle to understand what happened.

    Javelin (women): another let-down for Gleadle - she should be in the top 6 consistently, if not challenging for a medal, yet like some of our other throwers, gets psyched out at the big meets when it counts. She is another I was fully expecting to break a Canadian Record,

    4x100m (men): I'm sure that those four could have run faster, even without De Grasse (granted it was a slightly different team, but they did in the heats at Rio).

    4x400m (women): HUGE mistake not putting Watson in - I don't understand what Glenroy was thinking. Yes, it was a seasonal best, but they should have been able to run faster and at least make the final.

    20km RW (men): Thorne, I'm assuming, must have been sick or injured, otherwise I can't explain how he would finish 51st (never seen him finish so low before).

    50km RW (men): I believe that I read that Dunfee wasn't well - very sad, as I expected him to medal with ease (relatively speaking).

    Decathlon: Warner was sick and could not perform at his best, which was obviously a disappointment (his finishing in the top 8 was impressive, however)."


    With all due respect, this is ridiculous. I urge you to look at where these athletes ranked in qualifying before saying some of these things.

    For example "Rodney should have qualified to semis". Rodney qualified for this meet as the slowest man in the ENTIRE event (excluding BCA entries), whether or not he should have been entered in the 100 is a whole different argument but how can you expect a man with the tied for SLOWEST non BCA seed time to make the semis???

    There are so many other examples here where you've said you 'expect' an athlete to finish like 10-15 places up on their ranking, it's outrageous. Do you not realize there are a finite number of high placings at international meets with well-funded athletes from around the world who are all vying for them? It is ludicrous that you think our athletes should simply be able to walk in and blow all stats out of the water and finish way above their projections.

    "I fully expected them to break the Canadian record". Because it's so easy to break a Canadian record...Sage is finishing off an 8 month collegiate season and will surely break the record in the years to come. Also Gleadle should consistently be top 6??? She's barely ranked top 10 in this meet, why on earth would we assume she can instantly become top 6, are athletes 6-10 just going to roll out of the way?

    Also a bunch of your numbers are plain wrong. For example, Nettey ranked third going into this meet?? She's ranked SIXTH, check your facts....

    I appreciate you providing concrete points where you feel we've under performed, but many of these don't even make sense, almost all of them are unreasonable if you actually look at the numbers, and several of them use straight up false facts...

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 5
    Report    REPLY #84 

    Anonymous said 2 days ago

    There are no absolutes, but the majority of NCAA programs want their athletes to compete at a high level from December through June.

    "If you look at the very best NCAA track schools in Division I you will see that their rosters are "filled" with Olympic, World, International, and National-level athletes. "

    Look at Fred Kerley from Texas A&M. He ran a 20.85 indoor 200m and was on the winning 3:10 team that ran 4x400. He did this on December 10th 2016. His most recent competitive effort at the WC was anchoring the US 4x400. Not reasonable to ask a young athlete to perform at such a high level for 8 + months.

    It's a big ask to have our top athletes who happen to be at NCAA schools to compete well in a late summer WC.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #85 

    Anonymous said 2 days ago

    Quoting: sub49
    "With all due respect, this is ridiculous. I urge you to look at where these athletes ranked in qualifying before saying some of these things.

    For example "Rodney should have qualified to semis". Rodney qualified for this meet as the slowest man in the ENTIRE event (excluding BCA entries), whether or not he should have been entered in the 100 is a whole different argument but how can you expect a man with the tied for SLOWEST non BCA seed time to make the semis???

    There are so many other examples here where you've said you 'expect' an athlete to finish like 10-15 places up on their ranking, it's outrageous. Do you not realize there are a finite number of high placings at international meets with well-funded athletes from around the world who are all vying for them? It is ludicrous that you think our athletes should simply be able to walk in and blow all stats out of the water and finish way above their projections.

    "I fully expected them to break the Canadian record". Because it's so easy to break a Canadian record...Sage is finishing off an 8 month collegiate season and will surely break the record in the years to come. Also Gleadle should consistently be top 6??? She's barely ranked top 10 in this meet, why on earth would we assume she can instantly become top 6, are athletes 6-10 just going to roll out of the way?

    Also a bunch of your numbers are plain wrong. For example, Nettey ranked third going into this meet?? She's ranked SIXTH, check your facts....

    I appreciate you providing concrete points where you feel we've under performed, but many of these don't even make sense, almost all of them are unreasonable if you actually look at the numbers, and several of them use straight up false facts..."


    For Rodney, I was basing my prediction off of the fact that he ran very well at Nationals, so felt that he could be even better/peak at Worlds in this event.

    Sage Watson: I was basing the estimate based on her NCAA season (where she was unbeaten) and how close she had gotten in previous meets this year. It again seemed like she was peaking at the right time to do so. Still a great performance, just not what I had expected.

    Liz Gleadle: I've read commentary before that she is capable of 65m+ throws, and she certainly has the talent/ability to do so.

    Nettey: That was an error on my part, I was thinking of an IAAF list from months ago, apologies. I do still think she was more than capable of making the final, so disappointed for her.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #86 

    + or - said 2 days ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "These are the events/athletes that performed below expectations:

    100m (men): both Smellie and Rodney should have made it to the semi finals but were very slow in the heats with some terrible times.

    200m (men): Brown's DQ was, with all due respect, a very amateurish error. At his level, I don't think you can defend stepping on the line like that (this happens WAY too much with our sprinters).

    400m (women): ALL of them, Travia, Carline and Aiyanna, were inexplicably slow. It was quite shocking to see, especially because we've seen how fast Muir can be in the past.

    800m (men): I'm not sure what he was thinking, but McBride could (and should) have easily won that final. It seemed like he made a massive tactical error in going out hard at the front like that, he should have known better.

    1500m (women): Reid should have done better in the heats, she's MUCH better than that, so no excuse. Yes, Sifuentes and Stafford had great heats with SBs, but they fell apart in the semi's.

    5000m (men): Ahmed should have contested for a medal. To be fourth at the Olympics and then fall to sixth here was a disappointment.

    Marathon (men): Gillis, although not his fault, as he was ill (best he could do given the situation).

    110/100m Hurdles: Cabral pulling his hamstring (or something) in the semis - he had the potential to be a finalist again. As for Whyte and George, they both underperformed, and should have been in the semis/finals respectively.

    400m Hurdles (women): Was fully expecting Watson to break the Canadian record, which did not happen (she did make the final though, as was speculated in another thread).

    High Jump: once again, Mike Mason fell apart and didn't make the final. It's painful to watch and his inconsistency has become, well... consistent. Treasure had the ability to make the final, like at the Olympics, but failed to execute.

    Long Jump (women): given the fact that she was rated THIRD in the world going in, Nettey absolutely should have been in the final, at the very least. Instead, it looks like she may have peaked early; she was actually a major threat for a medal.

    Pole Vault (men): not unexpected, but Barber again underperformed. I would have thought he would have rebounded by his personal issues, but it seems not. To not be able to make it over 5.75m is very disappointing indeed.

    Shot Put: Nedow consistently seems to freeze at major events, this being the latest. He is more than capable of throwing over 21m so its incredibly frustrating to watch. Suttie has thrown much better this season and her result was a let down.

    Hammer (women): Weir having a No Measurement was a giant shock - she had been so good all year, I struggle to understand what happened.

    Javelin (women): another let-down for Gleadle - she should be in the top 6 consistently, if not challenging for a medal, yet like some of our other throwers, gets psyched out at the big meets when it counts. She is another I was fully expecting to break a Canadian Record,

    4x100m (men): I'm sure that those four could have run faster, even without De Grasse (granted it was a slightly different team, but they did in the heats at Rio).

    4x400m (women): HUGE mistake not putting Watson in - I don't understand what Glenroy was thinking. Yes, it was a seasonal best, but they should have been able to run faster and at least make the final.

    20km RW (men): Thorne, I'm assuming, must have been sick or injured, otherwise I can't explain how he would finish 51st (never seen him finish so low before).

    50km RW (men): I believe that I read that Dunfee wasn't well - very sad, as I expected him to medal with ease (relatively speaking).

    Decathlon: Warner was sick and could not perform at his best, which was obviously a disappointment (his finishing in the top 8 was impressive, however)."


    Wouldn't it have been easier to detail who list who performed better than expected?

    Turn that frown upside down and come at this from the positive side rather than arm chair quarterback after the fact.

    Quote comment
  • sub49 User since:
    Apr 3rd, 2016
    Posts: 47
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #87 

    sub49 said 2 days ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "For Rodney, I was basing my prediction off of the fact that he ran very well at Nationals, so felt that he could be even better/peak at Worlds in this event.

    Sage Watson: I was basing the estimate based on her NCAA season (where she was unbeaten) and how close she had gotten in previous meets this year. It again seemed like she was peaking at the right time to do so. Still a great performance, just not what I had expected.

    Liz Gleadle: I've read commentary before that she is capable of 65m+ throws, and she certainly has the talent/ability to do so.

    Nettey: That was an error on my part, I was thinking of an IAAF list from months ago, apologies. I do still think she was more than capable of making the final, so disappointed for her."


    Okay that's definitely fair, can't argue with that.

    This post was edited by sub49 2 days ago . 
    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #88 

    Anonymous said 2 days ago

    Quoting: sub49
    "Okay that's definitely fair, can't argue with that."



    I appreciate your criticisms of my critique, I think that talking about the performances in a civil way in one way of helping to figure out how to improve things in the future, by no means am trying to diminish the athletes, who I know by in large are trying their best, but there has to be a reason why we have multiple athletes, who looked to be in peak record setting or medal winning form before the meet (and were not sick/injured), were not able to execute on the day of competition. It seems like this does happen way to often with our athletes and something needs to change. Better sports psychology services? More national training camps? More funding for sports therapy and additional coaching resources? I don't know, but we need to do something to ensure consistent results, which other nations seem to be able to produce.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #89 

    Anonymous said 1 day ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "pretty sure that the dude who won the 200m wasn't doping and for you to insinuate that without any evidence is childish at best. Stop deflecting blame it on others and own up to the fact that we blew it."


    In the absence of many spectacular athletes and/or their best form, many medals were up for grabs at these championships.

    To accuse someone of doping without even some sort of evidence sickens me. Guliyev has been a really good 200m for the past years, his PB is 19.88 ffs. Anyone of the men in that 200 final - as most if not all those guys ran sub-20 - could have won but it was just Guliyev's day. The time wasn't fast by world finals standards but he performed the best when it counted.

    Another example is Bosse of France. I really enjoyed his post-race interview: " I just won a race when it counted." Again, nearly everyone in that final was capable of winning including McBride.

    Don't forget that the team is young and if anything, it (it being the medal count since that's what most of you non-track fans care about) can only go up in Doha in two years time.

    Quote comment
  • new-post-last-visitanonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 37332
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #90 

    Curious said 1 day ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "I appreciate your criticisms of my critique, I think that talking about the performances in a civil way in one way of helping to figure out how to improve things in the future, by no means am trying to diminish the athletes, who I know by in large are trying their best, but there has to be a reason why we have multiple athletes, who looked to be in peak record setting or medal winning form before the meet (and were not sick/injured), were not able to execute on the day of competition. It seems like this does happen way to often with our athletes and something needs to change. Better sports psychology services? More national training camps? More funding for sports therapy and additional coaching resources? I don't know, but we need to do something to ensure consistent results, which other nations seem to be able to produce."


    It could really all come down to just luck, if you believe in that... we didn't do very well the last time we competed in that stadium in 2012 (apart from Derek Drouin). Maybe that venue is just cursed for Canadians? Could use a lucky loonie or two? Lol

    Quote comment
Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Anonymous

says…    

Image Quote Underline Italics Bold
Submit Preview

By posting on our forum you are agreeing to the following guidelines.

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

 

Benefits of creating an account!

  • No need to reveal your real name.
  • Quicker to post (no need to enter the "two words" above each time).
  • Gives you the ability to edit your own comments and subscribe to topics.
  • It's free & quick to create an account!
Submit & Create Account

 

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1