Solinsky's 10k Run PROVES That 10k Runners Are Not That Talented

gotta be kidding me too... wrote:

The only reason that Galen is such a name in this sport is because of the 10k, the event with the lowest amount of talent.

Whenever somebody with REAL talent, with fast times in the 800-5k, runs the 10k, they usually run very well.

Alan Webb did it to Dathan, Chris did it to Galen.

I'm sure that if Lagat, Lopez, Manzano, Tegenkamp all focused on the 10k for a year, they'd be under 27min as well. It's just a fact that on the track, the lower the race distance, the more prestige it has, and all of our best runners are milers/5k specialists.

Thoughts?

Solinsky is a freak of nature. How come Mottram could only muster a 27:34 when he's run 3:48, 8:03 and 12:55?

3200guy wrote:

gotta be kidding me too... wrote:

It's just a fact that on the track, the lower the race distance, the more prestige it has, and all of our best runners are milers/5k specialists.

Thoughts?

Solinsky is a freak of nature. How come Mottram could only muster a 27:34 when he's run 3:48, 8:03 and 12:55?

so by your logic, 50m dash champions are more renowned than 10k runners.

I was there when he ran 27:34 at Stanford. The pace slowed drastically once the rabbit dropped out, and it essentially became tactical the last 3mi. If there was somebody to push him, I guarantee you he would have been MUCH closer to 27 flat. Also, he only ran it once, and that was his debut. And also, he WON the race, further proving my point.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that each one of those guys can break 27 on their DEBUT, but if they had a couple to try out in a year, then definitely under 27. You can bet on it.

50m dash is not a commonly held, Championship IAAF track and Field Event. The lowest one would go is the 100m.

And obviously, 100m runners are more renowned than 10k runners.

gotta be kidding me too... wrote:

I'm sure that if Lagat, Lopez, Manzano, Tegenkamp all focused on the 10k for a year, they'd be under 27min as well.

Said Aouita (MAR) 27:26.11 Bislett July 5, 86

They run the 1500/5000 for a reason, because they can't run the 10k.

First of all, consider the fact that the 10000 is not a highly contested event compared to say the 5000, athletes rarely get a chance to run the 10,000 outside of a championship event, mainly because it is a long race and it is 25 laps of pounding. So yes those who are considered 10k runners are those who enjoy and or have had success at the distance. All of the great 10k runners had fast 5k times, but because the 10k is seldom run, its tough to say who's a 10k specialist.

So yes 10k runners who train for the 10k can be talented, considering they run the 5k and 3000 more often.

"The only reason that Galen is such a name in this sport is because of the 10k, the event with the lowest amount of talent."

Yeah, and not that he was a 4:01 Miler in highschool and set the highschool/AJR record of 13:37 (getting the 3000m enroute), and an AR in 5k indoor last year, and then went under that again this year. If 10kers are so untalented how come a 10ker/marathoner like Ritz can come down and upstage Tegenkamp by getting the 5k AR? How did Rupp beat Solinsky at the 3000m in a championship race just, what, 2 months ago?

0/10

Troll.

GTFO.

Most college kids can't run the 10km. They run in the 32-35 minute range. Chris said he was doing marathon training. bitch.

Ok, then how could an untalented G. Rupp move down and be one of the best, 1500m runners of his senior year, one of the deepest fields ever? Isn't this arguement be turned around to say the 1500m runners suck, look at Rupp beating Ulrey with a lead who went on to make the WC team. Look at Rupp beating 800m Olympian and NCAA champion Wheating into 3rd place at conference, and Eliot Heath into 4th, in a kicker's race.

J.R. wrote:

gotta be kidding me too... wrote:

I'm sure that if Lagat, Lopez, Manzano, Tegenkamp all focused on the 10k for a year, they'd be under 27min as well.

Said Aouita (MAR) 27:26.11 Bislett July 5, 86

They run the 1500/5000 for a reason, because they can't run the 10k.

When Aouita ran that 27:26, the world record was 27:13, so he was 14 seconds off the world record. If being 14 seconds off the world record means he "can't run the 10k" then I guess you are right.

potato wrote:

J.R. wrote:

Said Aouita (MAR) 27:26.11 Bislett July 5, 86

They run the 1500/5000 for a reason, because they can't run the 10k.

When Aouita ran that 27:26, the world record was 27:13, so he was 14 seconds off the world record. If being 14 seconds off the world record means he "can't run the 10k" then I guess you are right.

The 10000 WR was very soft back then. Aouita´s 1500 PB is only 3 sec slower than today´s WR, but his 10k PB is almost a minute slower.

oipkoskhsj wrote:

Ok, then how could an untalented G. Rupp move down and be one of the best, 1500m runners of his senior year, one of the deepest fields ever? Isn't this arguement be turned around to say the 1500m runners suck, look at Rupp beating Ulrey with a lead who went on to make the WC team. Look at Rupp beating 800m Olympian and NCAA champion Wheating into 3rd place at conference, and Eliot Heath into 4th, in a kicker's race.

And Rupp beat Heath (who made the world indoor 1500 team) at both conference and regionals in the 1500 while rupp was running 3 races in 2 days at both and he beat Solinsky (a supposed 3K-5K guy) in the 3K just a month or two ago in a race that mattered a lot (qualifying for worlds) and in a 5K before. OP argument is useless.