disappointing race for tergat- 4th.
disappointing race for tergat- 4th.
The spread on this race was the most unbelievable part. Two guys at 26:55-56 but after that theres is very large gaps. I don't understand how all these elite athletes could be on such different levels. There is a huge difference between 28xx and 2655.
David Monti wrote:
Keeper of Record is right. The course, although certified for distance, is severely aided, losing 55 meters from start to finish according to a graphic on the race website. So, no world record or national records in Madrid last night.
As soon as I saw the names and times of some of the finishers, I knew that the race was severely aided. The top two finishers still ran very well, but nowhere close to the equivalent of a 27-minute 10K on a loop course. Offhand, I would guess that, to get an equivalent time for a record-quality course, you'd need to add at least twenty seconds -- perhaps as much as thirty seconds -- to the times of the top two finishers, and proportionately more for the rest. The real story is the battle among three world-class runners, and not their finishing times.
It's not something to prove empirically, but the 650m altitude for a 10km race also perhaps a slight factor in emphasising the quality of the runs up front?
probably the rest of the field went out with those guys and paid for it. it's too early for a lot of people to be in great shape, so that kind of pace takes a horrible toll. props to Browne though - it's a solid place.
Were the leaders riding road bikes ??!!!! Geesh, that's fast for this time of year.