Charles Jock 3:49.66 1500!!!!

JJJJJJJ wrote:

Rodal wasn't running against a 1:41 flat WR holder who also could run 3:30 in the 15 and 45 in the 4.

What are you even talking about?? Are you seriously just making up times that you guess people could run, and bringing that to the table? What a joke. Anyway, Rudisha has done nothing to suggest he could run 3:30. He is a 400/800 man, not an 800/1500 man. He might be great in a 1000, but he's not going near 3:30.

JJJJJJJ wrote:

I recommend Jock try the 400 or 400 hurdles. He reminds me of Kirani James.

You recommend, do you? I'm sure he'll take that under advisement, you idiot.

Listen. Kirani James has a 200/400 background. He is what we call a SPRINTER. He has probably never run a 1500 in his life. He could not be more different from Charles Jock.

To summon the mighty Ventolin, your post is the dumbest drivel I have ever seen on letsrun. And that is saying a lot.

i have no dog in this fight

in fact, tightening up crappy over-distance times is virtually insoluble

i'd throw up that last year he went

46.30 / 1'44.75 ->

3'37.1

his 3'57 was 20s slower than expected if his 400/800 lasted "perfectly" to 1500

he's gone 8s faster at 1500 this year, which with some prestidigitation ( this is hunch only ), one coud throw up

(8/20)*8

off his previous theoretical 3'37.1 ->

3'33.9

assuming his 800 speed is unchanged ( big if )

46.30 / 3'33.9 ->

1'43.9

i think tentatively, you gotta think <1'44...

1 Hyams, Sam Unattached 3:52.11

2 Shaw, Brandon Brooks/Evo T 3:52.46

3 Kangogo, Alfred Alaska Ancho 3:52.57

4 Pizzo, Anthony The Masters 3:53.19

5 Brosnan, Sean Bowerman Ath 3:53.28

6 Bojorquez, Carlos SD Mesa 3:53.44

7 Jock, Charles UC Irvine 3:53.62

8 Naden, Bennett Claremont-Mu 3:53.66

9 Gilbertson, John The Masters 3:54.00

10 Jabaz, Jorge Argentina 3:54.21

11 Osbourne, Nicholas UC Irvine 3:54.75

12 Perez - Graham, LA Trade Tec 3:55.25

13 Newton-Neal, Tommy UC Irvine 3:55.48

14 Nelson, Rex Unattached 3:55.99

15 cushing-murray, cal coast/co 3:56.07

couldn't quite catch him (some of these finishers--pizzo, osbourne, nelson, probably a couple of others?--were actually from the second heat). anxious to see what jock prognosticators say this race means. has jock regressed? i would argue this is still meaningless. worth noting we went out in 64/2:07-ish--someone had me in 2:09 sitting on the pack--with perfect conditions, young guys went out like wusses, old guy was hangin' on for dear life...

His splits were 65/63/60/ and 55 for the last 400. Looked pretty easy if you asked me, walked off the track like nothing was wrong after.

where was this???

SmallTimeTC wrote:

The dude was heavily criticized for "only" running 3:53 the other week

I don't think anyone was criticizing him for his time. People were simply pointing out to the OP that the time wasn't really good enough to warrant a thread.

Not bad considering the splits....and how many of the guys in that race are running the 4 x 400 at Aztec today? I would guess zero.

Charles Jock is a 400m/800m runner in the mould of Alberto Juantorena (but quite a lot slimmer) - nobody ever asked him to run the 1,500m. So while it is nice to see that he is trying to build endurance, it is irrelevant to his ability as an 800m runner.

socalcush wrote:anxious to see what jock prognosticators say this race means. has jock regressed? i would argue this is still meaningless. worth noting we went out in 64/2:07-ish--someone had me in 2:09 sitting on the pack--with perfect conditions, young guys went out like wusses, old guy was hangin' on for dear life...

What your post means is that you were pwned by Ventolin just above you. I guess I made the bad assumption in the original post about Jock's 1500 that people here commenting about 800 already knew what is in Ventolin's post.

For someone running ~1:45, the energy consumpion of an 800 is approximately 60%. Aerobic power is a significant part even if you are a 400/800 type with 44-point speed. For a female running around 2:00, the energy consumption is ~70%, even if you're Jelimo.

If the first lap of an 800 is run close to one's 400 capability, the second lap is quite aerobic--you need more aerobic support when you start running out of anaerobic power. If an 400/800 runner has more aerobic power, he/she can:

(1) Run the second lap harder with the first lap close to 400 max;

(2) Run the first lap harder and run the second lap at the same speed;

(3) Get through heats better due to using less anaerobic ammunition before the final.

If all you need is 400 speed, why didn't Sanya Richards-Ross just go out and break the 800 WR last year instead of running almost 20 seconds slower than that record?

In the above, the energy consumption of an 800 is 50% aerobic for a male ~1:45, and 70% aerobic for a female running ~2:00.

Duffield and Dwason, IAAF New Studies in Athletics, 4.3.

Considering the splits, it looks quite good for him. Is that the fastest you have run as a master? Very nice, something like a 4:13 mile.