hold the phone wrote:
Thanks for the corrected table, Malmo -- it does make interesting reading. One thing that sort of leaps out is that the IAAF tables seem to be a bit generous to 3000m/2 mile times, possibly because of they're contested less often. The graph suggests that BK, MT, AG and DR have each had their best overall performance at that distance..
Ockhams Razor comes to play here. Why don't you consider those 3k/2 mile times to be better than their other times? I do
hold the phone wrote:
Also mildy surprising that Hall peaks at HM (and 25K) rather than the full marathon, though that may simply reflect the fact that sub-60 halfs and 2:06 marathons are rare enough that I don't have much intuition as to their relative worths. Were the 25K and 30K points taken from Hall's splits today, or are they simply from the curve fit? If they're splits, it's sort of surprising that the relative merit of his performance (according to the IAAF) was decreasing as he ran.
Anyway, I should probably stop microanalyzing the nice data. Thanks again for providing it.
Hall doesn't have 25k and 35k times, those are interpolated data points.
marijuologist wrote:
Hall has run a few good marathons. He is nowhere near Webb and Kennedy.
What? Did you try to smoke the futon again?
malmo wrote:
Hall was 5th and 7th in the two most loaded marathons of all time. It doesn't get any better than that.
Actually it does.
malmo wrote:That's a question for Jackson Pollack.
"Pollock"
A "pollack" is an edible greenish-brown fish of the cod family. I imagine they don't answer any questions very well.
popeye doyle wrote:
Of course these are just numbers, actual performances may vary. :)
http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/Competitions/TechnicalArea/ScoringOutdoor2008_742.pdf
When is the last time the tables changed?