Mo Farah VS London field in FULL marathon

>2:11

No.

Mo Farah wins in 2:02:12 with 53 second last 400 meters. Salazaar seen in the stands looking down on Mo with a death glare that can melt ice.

giving Farah only 26:40 for 10k seems specious. He's run close to that while not running a fast rabbited race and quite a while ago. He can run 26:30 surely.

jjjjjjjjjjjj wrote:

giving Farah only 26:40 for 10k seems specious. He's run close to that while not running a fast rabbited race and quite a while ago. He can run 26:30 surely.

Additionally, his 13.1 value is certainly worth better than 60:23, by Ventolin style calculation. That's the exact time he ran on a non-optimal course, while still having quite a kick left at the end. If he was forced to run flat out from the gun under ideal conditions on a perfect course, I wouldn't be surprised to see him break 59.

This is the Double Olympic Champion we are talking about, of course he could win.

he still has too much speed for the 1/2M ( more specifically, his speed will decay quicker than established M guys )

on a track, i'd offer him 12'44/26'35 ( his 5k has to be comparable to geb2 who went 12'46 with plenty of gas at the end to finish with a 54

i don't think he was quite a 26'30 guy ( 10k is new event for him - he's better at 5k ), but 26'35 intrinsic was more than enough to win the slow london 10k )

for a track

12'44/26'35 ->58'38 , 2'01'58

for a road, i'd add about 1'00 for 1/2M & 2'00 for M

so i reckon mo is currently capable of mid-59/2'04-flat, but M is just a theoretical number as he is a long way from training for a M ( similar to working out rudisha's 1500 potential - it's just theoretical )

however, you can look at the 1/2M with some confidence as he has been training for it

qwerty12345 wrote:

This is the Double Olympic Champion we are talking about, of course he could win.

Just like Haile Gebrselassie in his first London marathon.

I have a question. After looking at the conversion charts, is it correct to say that Zersenay's WR Half-marathon (58:23 in Lisbon) is the best distance running performance of all time, track or otherwise?

The only other one I can think of is Komen's 7:20 3K

qwerty12345 wrote:

This is the Double Olympic Champion we are talking about, of course he could win.

He has never ran a marathon before though. Marathon & track a quite a bit different

bangalangadanga wrote:

Mo Farah wins in 2:02:12 with 53 second last 400 meters. Salazaar seen in the stands looking down on Mo with a death glare that can melt ice.

LOL.

Or:

Geoffrey Mutai starts to get anxious about Patrick Makau's closing speed, ratchets up the pace at 35k to take the sting out of the kickers, wins in 2:03:15...Salazar won't talk to Mutai afterward, accusing him of "costing Mo the race."

mgm wrote:

I have a question. After looking at the conversion charts, is it correct to say that Zersenay's WR Half-marathon (58:23 in Lisbon) is the best distance running performance of all time, track or otherwise?

The only other one I can think of is Komen's 7:20 3K

I think it is right up there, although 7:20 is more extraterrestrial still.

It's remarkable that 58:23 is under FAR less threat than 2:03:38, even though of course runners can and do race the half much more often. Nobody other than Tadese has chance of sniffing it right now, and yes I include the entire London field in that statement.

ventolin^3 wrote:

so i reckon mo is currently capable of mid-59/2'04-flat, but M is just a theoretical number as he is a long way from training for a M ( similar to working out rudisha's 1500 potential - it's just theoretical )

however, you can look at the 1/2M with some confidence as he has been training for it

I think that's spot on for the half, vent, but would give him closer to 2:05-low for the marathon at this point. 2:04:55 was no joke for Tergat, and he had consistent 59-low ability in the half and far more lifetime volume and marathon-specific prep than Farah. But like you said, it's just theoretical :)

long sox wrote:

qwerty12345 wrote:

This is the Double Olympic Champion we are talking about, of course he could win.

Just like Haile Gebrselassie in his first London marathon.

Could being the operative word in both cases: MF 'could win' - HG 'could have won'.

bangalangadanga wrote: Mo Farah wins in 2:02:12 with 53 second last 400 meters. Salazaar seen in the stands looking down on Mo with a death glare that can melt ice.

Rupp ran too fast and it resulted in both Farah and him taking a time out.

Part of the plan is "slow-steady improvements." Must stick to the plan to avoid the death glare.

He SHOULD still feel great when he goes through half in 61:45. Anyone who's run a marathon knows the first half is easy. No chance he's even tempted to continue no matter how "great" he feels.

Regardless, no way he wins the race. For one, marathon shape is vastly different from 10k shape, even from half shape. Plus, I would dare to say the current marathon running scene is a bit more competitive than the current 5K/10K running scene right now.

Thus it's more likely that these guys would beat Mo in a 10K than Mo beats them in a marathon. I.e., not too likely.

rupp-certified saladbar wrote:It's remarkable that 58:23 is under FAR less threat than 2:03:38, even though of course runners can and do race the half much more often. Nobody other than Tadese has chance of sniffing it right now, and yes I include the entire London field in that statement.

the dubai 1/2M recently with 2 guys at sub-59 wouda been very close to 58'23 if they had started off other than at a pedestrian pace in initial 5 - 10k

zedster's wr is very much a possibilty for the likes of geoffrey kipsang, mutai & makau ( a 58'52 in '09 when only a 2"06 guy )

however, the top guys only seem to use the 1/2M as a tune-up nowdays for the M rather than spend the season only running 1/2Ms - it's a neglected event by the top M'ers despite lots of 1/2M races available

rupp-certified saladbar wrote:I think that's spot on for the half, vent, but would give him closer to 2:05-low for the marathon at this point. 2:04:55 was no joke for Tergat, and he had consistent 59-low ability in the half and far more lifetime volume and marathon-specific prep than Farah. But like you said, it's just theoretical :)

i doubt mo coud crack 2"06 currently

tergat is not the best comparator

he was ancient & past his peak when he moved up to M & also possibly beyond his best racing distance ( maybe 10k or 1/2M was his best event ) despite breaking the wr

i do believe that if he'd started it a few years before, he wouda been around/nearer to geb's pb of 2"03'59 rather than a 2"04'55 which is nothing special on the all-time list ( currently 26th all-time mark for legit courses - & likely to be outside top-30 after today)

He is a track racer in background track training. I and not certain he can hang with these guys for the Half. There are probably 20 guys in this field that would eat him alive in a marathon right now.

Geb was also a great track racer; he was also a great track runner (truly stunning times, although his first 5000 WR was a track race, not a WR attempt. However, when he ran the marathon he had to revamp his running style. Mo is very, very good; Geb was better -- no way Mo would make a dent if he tried to keep going unless he hailed a cab.

26mi235 wrote:Geb was also a great track racer; he was also a great track runner (truly stunning times, although his first 5000 WR was a track race, not a WR attempt

can't agree

hengelo in those days was a low key meet only run by elites to chase times

he won 12'56wr to 13'10 for 2nd

it wasn't much of a race

besides, he had been itching to get the record after mis-judging chelimo's break in stuttgart '93 & coudn't quite catch up the gap, losing in 13'03 to 13'02

he already looked in 13-flat shape that meet, so wr was expected anytime soon