5000m World Record Splits: A Progression

wtfunny wrote:

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

The last lap was 54.66s, the running into lane 2 would barely add 0.1s to his time.

This was the Ethiopian Olympic trials. Strangely only a couple of weeks later none of these Ethiopians could run near this pace and got smashed by Mo. Rather odd to say the least.

Maybe you didn't see the London 2012 race? Gebremeskel should've won it, but ran a disastrous tactical race. He didn't close a faster last lap than Mo .. he just positioned himself horribly prior to that. There's no question Geb was physically capable of winning that race.

Exactly. Geb was in 8th or 9th Place at the Bell about 10 to 15 min behind Mo. he had to work his way through all those people and still almost caught Farah at the line. As you put it , his tactics were a disaster and cost him the gold

" 10 to 15 METERS "

Tyrone ReXXXing wrote:

wtfunny wrote:

Maybe you didn't see the London 2012 race? Gebremeskel should've won it, but ran a disastrous tactical race. He didn't close a faster last lap than Mo .. he just positioned himself horribly prior to that. There's no question Geb was physically capable of winning that race.

Exactly. Geb was in 8th or 9th Place at the Bell about 10 to 15 min behind Mo. he had to work his way through all those people and still almost caught Farah at the line. As you put it , his tactics were a disaster and cost him the gold

and more from autocorrect ...

"He DID close a faster last lap than Mo ..."

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:The last lap was 54.66s, the running into lane 2 would barely add 0.1s to his time

is this a joke ???

can't you do basic math ???

to run on lane 2 line entirly on bends on a lap adds distance of

2 * (1.22 - 0.3) * pi = 5.78m

->

405.78m run in 54.66

-> for 400 : (400/405.78) * 54.66 =

53.88s

This was the Ethiopian Olympic trials. Strangely only a couple of weeks later none of these Ethiopians could run near this pace and got smashed by Mo. Rather odd to say the least

do you have any clue of the difference between a paced race & un paced one ???

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

calculo wrote:

learn to analyse

paris-'12

it was crap to 3k in ~ 7'45 which is 12'55 pace

last lap of 54+ with winner running huge amount wide on bends

flat-out from gun-tape, the top- 6 wouda been

~ 12'35 - 12'45

Is this a joke???

once again you have absolutely no clue about the sport or level of talent exhibited

gebremeskel in paris had a line of fit likely between

~ 49.00 / 1'44.50

->

3'26.99

4'42.73

7'18.36

12'40.53

to

~ 49.00 / 1'44.25

->

3'26.10 !!

4'41.28

7'15.63 !!!

12'34.84 !!

experienced eye ventures me towards latter estimate

& i'm no ethiopian but he really shoud have thought about running the 1500 in games as he was in shape to follow maloofi & even kick off him for the win

he certainly couda won the 1500 if he'd managed to get a team-mate in the race who woud pace him to bell

the ethiopian 1500 record really shoud have been 3'26+ in '12 if gebremeskel had managed to squeeze in a paced 1500 in his paris shape & sad to say but he woud have uttely annihilated the 3k WR

just an academic exercise but neither of those 2 estimates indicate wr 10k shape

the theoretical 10ks woud be :

26'42.31

&

26'27.80

very much 3k/5k was his wheelhouse but a 3'26+ in addition isn't a bad clocking for non-specialist distance run off 5k/3k training

if he'd remained uninjured after '12 & shifted to 1500 training he definitely wouda broken the 1500WR & by likely a huge margin

i do think he couda dipped into 3'24's in '13 or '14 or '15 if he'd made the distance move downwards

& like i said, i'm no ethiopian or their fan...

Excellent point. Along those lines: there are three 12:30s in history, all between 1997 and 2004.

Then there are 23 times in the 12:40s, with 17 thereof between 1995 and 2007, and 6 in 2012.

Fastest 5000 after 2012 per year:

2013: 12:51.34

2014: 12:54.83

2015: 12:53.98

2016: 12:59.29

2017: 12:55.23

Lots of coincidences here.

calculo wrote:

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:The last lap was 54.66s, the running into lane 2 would barely add 0.1s to his time

is this a joke ???

can't you do basic math ???

to run on lane 2 line entirly on bends on a lap adds distance of

2 * (1.22 - 0.3) * pi = 5.78m

->

405.78m run in 54.66

-> for 400 : (400/405.78) * 54.66 =

53.88s

This was the Ethiopian Olympic trials. Strangely only a couple of weeks later none of these Ethiopians could run near this pace and got smashed by Mo. Rather odd to say the least

do you have any clue of the difference between a paced race & un paced one ???

Well where do I start Venti?

If you bothered to watch the race you would see that Gebresoisauce ran most of the lap in lane 1, he was only in lane 2 from 500-400m to go (which isn't part of the last lap) and the last 70m. Again, an extra foot, wow.

Measuring in a static fashion is problematic, you can land in lane 2 with your right foot and then back in the middle of lane 1 with your left foot. This no real extra distance.

Now let's just use your faulty math. 12:46.81 - 0.77s is still 12:46, wow.

What you fail to point out is throughout the race many of the runners run inside the 300mm with their left feet, hence running under distance.

Venti wrote "do you have any clue of the difference between a paced race & un paced one???" They had excellent pacing in that race, very few 5ks were better.

calculo wrote:

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

Is this a joke???

once again you have absolutely no clue about the sport or level of talent exhibited

gebremeskel in paris had a line of fit likely between

~ 49.00 / 1'44.50

->

3'26.99

4'42.73

7'18.36

12'40.53

to

~ 49.00 / 1'44.25

->

3'26.10 !!

4'41.28

7'15.63 !!!

12'34.84 !!

experienced eye ventures me towards latter estimate

What a joke, he can't run 49s and or sub 3:30. So you predictions are already faulty. 7:15 is this a joke??? A pacer would have to keep up 3:37 1500m pace, try finding that person.

All your data projections are distorted by the epo era.

Except that "are" is actually a verb, not a noun, and I intended to use the present tense. Perhaps it's more clear if I say "Paris 2012 showed us that there are ALWAYS a handful of runners that can be there (under 12:50) if they have to." The capability is there, but the incentive is not.

Organic Ding-Dong Addict wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Paris 2012 showed us that there are still a handful of runners that can be there if they have to, when the first 6 ran sub-12:50, with less than optimal pacing and splits.

You do realize that "are" is a present-tense noun and that "Paris 2012" was over five years ago, right?[/quote]

casual obsever wrote:

LM wrote:

Closing 54 in a 12:46 race is smokin! Is it really that hard to imagine that if the race hadn't had a slow start they might have run a few seconds faster?

No. But it was still the fastest race of this decade, and if you use the same logic, you can bring for example Komen down to... well, 12:32 - 12:33, according to calculo.

In other words, the adjusted 12:46 is still some 8 - 10 seconds slower than the adjusted times 15 - 20 years ago.

I wouldn't disagree with that. I don't know Komen's race, but if he closed 12:40 in something like that, then yes it's almost certain he would have been able to run faster. I think each record out there has at least a small margin that could be shaved from it. Bekele's 5000/10000 for instance only got pacing to 2k/5k respectively. I'd think an ideal job would be 3k/7-8k.

Bottom line is Gebremeskel did show crazy good form in that race. I disagree with calculo that the marginally bad pacing at 12:55 pace cost them as much as it did, as you make most of that back from the kick if it's close...but not all. I'd have a hard time imagining Gebremeskel at 12:35, but I could absolutely see 12:40.

If you follow calculo's posts, he always has fast times at 1500/3000. It's clearly how the fitting works. The 800s are usually very near believable times that we can picture these guys running. The 1500/3000 always seem lightning fast. Calculo has claimed a lot of guys with ability to break Komen's record of 7:20 and run close to 3:26.

Seeing Mo run 3:28 though, and Gebremeskel able to close as fast as Mo in several of his races; knowing he might have been even stronger aerobically....makes it difficult for me to think Gebremeskel can't run at least 3:28. Closes like London especially so, because those are fairly easy races that aren't testing aerobic ability...it's just a pure test of who has the most FRC left in the tank. Being able to close like that in such a slow race means his FRC matches or is VERY near Farah's. Combine that with likely equal, or slightly superior aerobic fitness and Gebremeskel has to right there with Farah at all the distances.

Calculo, any chance we would get some peak lines for peak Kenster, Gebremeskel, and Farah. I'm assuming here that Bekele was a much stronger runner aerobically than Farah or Gebremeskel. Should be little slower at 3k/1500/800 and a bit faster at 10k/half.

casual obsever wrote:

Excellent point. Along those lines: there are three 12:30s in history, all between 1997 and 2004.

Then there are 23 times in the 12:40s, with 17 thereof between 1995 and 2007, and 6 in 2012.

Fastest 5000 after 2012 per year:

2013: 12:51.34

2014: 12:54.83

2015: 12:53.98

2016: 12:59.29

2017: 12:55.23

Lots of coincidences here.

Really think it's more a function of the racing. When was the last time you saw anybody go for a fast 5k and stay with rabbits? Pretty sure that was Paris.

Look at it this way: Rupp was 12:5x guy; Hill who we know can move it is a 13:05 guy, Mead is 13:00 guy, True is a 13:00 guy. These guys all get CREAMED internationally. Why are great kickers like Hill getting creamed? Well, there isn't enough left in the FRC tank at the end, because the race is too close to max. A difference of 5s isn't going to do it either. We did have consistent winners like Farah. Farah like everyone else has bad days, and on those days you can easily be 10-20s out of peak fitness. Farah won everything, often in 13:0x or 13:1x. If he was a 12:50 guy and was 10s out of shape, he'd showing up at a 13:00 guy on that day. No chance in hell a 13:00 guy closes 52 to run 13:0x. There is little doubt guys like Farah can run at least into the 12:4x range, and quite possibly close to 12:40 flat.

calculo wrote:

All your data projections are distorted by the epo era

nonsense

back to epo drivel

they have had reliable epo tests for over past decade or are you clueless about the ramzi case ???

⤴In Epopia? I still don't think that in 2017, they have OOC blood testing there.

LM wrote:

Really think it's more a function of the racing. When was the last time you saw anybody go for a fast 5k and stay with rabbits? Pretty sure that was Paris.

It's not that there aren't paced races. The pacers just aim for slower times, because race organizers and athletes + coaches know how unrealistic a 12:35 (or 26:10) nowadays is.

Look at Rupp's records for example, and he was routinely among the top-10 worldwide, e.g. here in 2014:

And yes, I could see Farah running a 12:43 or similar (well, not anymore). But he is, by a huge margin, the most successful one in this decade, and applying the same criteria to the guys from the last decade, you can visualize a couple of guys running 12:33 - 12:35.

casual obsever wrote:

It's not that there aren't paced races. The pacers just aim for slower times, because race organizers and athletes + coaches know how unrealistic a 12:35 (or 26:10) nowadays is.

Look at Rupp's records for example, and he was routinely among the top-10 worldwide, e.g. here in 2014:

http://www.flotrack.org/article/24325-rupp-shatters-american-indoor-5k-record#.WhK8uzdrzIU

And yes, I could see Farah running a 12:43 or similar (well, not anymore). But he is, by a huge margin, the most successful one in this decade, and applying the same criteria to the guys from the last decade, you can visualize a couple of guys running 12:33 - 12:35.

Yea, that's pretty accurate to how I see it. It's not that there aren't paced racers, but they are paced a little slower; and most importantly 90% or more of the races they don't even follow the pacer.

On a side tangent about Rupp, I always thought he was good for low 12:50s, but he took quite a few crack at it and never went down there. It's hard for me to think a guy with 26:44 and 3:50 couldn't do say, 12:53, but he didn't and tried more than once...

And yes, absolutely, applying the same criteria I definitely think it's possible someone from that era could have run closer to 12:30 than 12:40, and as you pointed out there is little doubt the top depth in that era was much greater than the top depth today. Today it looks like you had 2-3 guys that could have scared 12:40. 15 years ago there were probably 4-5 that could have scared 12:30, and another group probably with the ability to run 12:40-12:45

Maybe it's not just drugs like many suggest. It's possible that these people trained

about as well as a human being could and also ran some very smart races.

(I'm not saying that none of them were doped up.)

This is getting silly.

is this a joke ???

can't you watch or analyse properly ???

he's running last 2 bends either on lane 2 line, occasionally fractionally outside or more often just inside

no

this is laughable !

can't you do basic math ???

~ 5.78m or 18+'

more nonsense

400m is distance run if you are tight to kerb in lane 1 for all of it

your centre of mass will be ~ 30cm from kerb which is where the iaaf mandate the shortest route or 400m occurs

any deviation of this especially on bends adds serious extra distance

clueless

he kicked in a route-1 of 53-high in an intrinsic 12'45 knocking off the 3/4s from both times

the fastest finish kennster ever had in a fast clocking was 53+ in a 12'48 which was all route-1

gebremeskel was every bit the match of a peak kennster

again you have no clue

it is the trajectory of the centre of mass which is the consideration

even with L foot tight against kerb on each step, the centre of mass in the running action is out from there & ungenerously iaaf have it at 30cm from kerb, when it shoud be more like 40+cm

learn some basic math & physics

nonsense

it was better than other attempts but still crap

3k split was 7'43.53 which is 12'52.55 pace

4k split was 10'19.54 which is 12'54.43 pace

it is still rubbish pace when winner was clearly in < 12'40 shape & 2nd - 6th couda definitely gone 12'40 - 12'45 if pace had been 7'37.5 - 7'40.0 / 10'08 - 10'10

is this a joke ???

do you know anything about the sport ???

he had quicker last lap than mo in games-'12 & likely better basic speed & mo finished a slow 5k with a 50+, meaning mo had likely 49+ speed

gebremeskel had at worst equal speed to mo, likely almost certainly quicker

as for 3'30, how clueless are you to know mo ran 3'28 twice, the last one virtually undrafted to bell which cost him near 2s & a 3'27-flat clocking

gebremeskel couda certainly matched that in paris shape

you clearly have no clue about logic

it is certainly nowhere as impressive as 9.58 or 19.19 or 43.03, all done after rounds

do you have any clue about basic logic ???

it is irrelevant that it woud be hard to find pacers good enough to take him thru 4'50

it does not detract from his possible ability back then

anyhows there are 1/2-dozen kenyans who if you paid them enough who couda paced him to 4'50 before dropping out provided they had 1st pacer taking them thru 4 laps in 3'52

nonsense

back to epo drivel

they have had reliable epo tests for over past decade or are you clueless about the ramzi case ???