A sub-4 mile does not cause nor is necessary for "a faster top speed." As has already been pointed out, he spent 8-9 years developing his middle distance speed. It's not going to improve beyond that unless he was being poorly coached during that stretch. Has this been dumbed-down enough for your cognitive level?
All of Tergat's sub3k PRs came from that Monaco 7:28 3000:
http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biographies/letter=0/athcode=9745/index.html
1500 Metres 3:42.3 01/01/1996
One Mile 3:58.4 Monaco 10/08/1996
2000 Metres 4:57.4 Monaco 10/08/1996
3000 Metres 7:28.70 Monaco 10/08/1996
no doubt he can run 3:54 or better.
I dare him to run a 4 minute mile; Alan Webb can run a sub-4 minute mile while eating a donut.
letsrun_fast wrote:
I dare him to run a 4 minute mile; Alan Webb can run a sub-4 minute mile while eating a donut.
At this point, it's questionable if Webb can even break 4.
doo doo wrote:
I will then explain the causation to you.
Having a faster top speed causes you to be more efficient at longer distances. If this is too much for you to understand... it can never be explained.
I think that's wrong. But it's unlikely that you'll respect my opinion.
letsrun_fast wrote:
I dare him to run a 4 minute mile; Alan Webb can run a sub-4 minute mile while eating a donut.
It surely looks like he has eaten a lot of them lately.
tommy s. wrote:
All of Tergat's sub3k PRs came from that Monaco 7:28 3000:
no doubt he can run 3:54 or better.
Could have, not can.
fUrCeOsNhN wrote:
lohalloran wrote:I read somewhere that Tergats PR in the mile was like 3:59 or so....i also remember reading that he ran the last kilometer of a cross race at sub 4 minute pace. Some guys are just built for endurance. Tons of people have run faster in the mile than Tergat but only a couple have run faster in the 10k and half marathon and only one has run faster in the marathon.
Tergat split a 3:58.7 mile on his way to a 7:28 3k...You would think he could have gone at least 3:54 in a mile race...he did have some speed.
That's sort of the point...even someone who you think is a pure endurance runner developed his speed enough to be just about world class at 3000m...it seems Hall hasn't done that, at least recently.
Not like it matters if he could've split that at the end of a race. Geb would've split faster.. EVERYTIME...
Geb > Tergat
i think hall should just focused on the 100m, he stands a fairly decent chance against bolt.
ryan hall return to the track wrote:
Of course it matters. I'm amazed he's ran 2:06low without breaking 4 minutes for the mile or even 28 minutes for 10k on the track. The marathon is increasingly becoming a speed event...Gebresselassie, Wanjiru, Tergat, Goumri, Lel could all run well under 4 minutes for the mile...
Geb-3:31/7:25/12:39/26:22
Wanjiru-26:41/58:33
Tergat 7:28/12:49/26:2x
Goumri-7:32/12:50
Lel-doesn't race on the track much, but closing the marathon in 28s for the last 200m shows that he knows that speed is important and has focused on it.
vs
Hall-3:42 7 (!) years ago/13:16 3+ years ago/28:08
Hall thought he would be a miler for a long time, and ran 800s and 1500s and 3000s in an effort to pursue that goal. Then he quickly moved up in distance, running the 20k record then 59:43 1/2 marathon record then of course 2:08 in london, an effortless 2:09low in hilly central park with a 1:02 last half, a great 2:06 in london then...the Olympics. Maybe he has been away from the track too long...he looked sluggish and had absolutely no "pop" in his stride at all.
Ritz and Hall have both worked on their speed over the years-but Hall has taken the route of pure road racer over the past few years while Ritz has been working on his speed at the same time as road racing-he ran 8:11 for 2 miles,7:39 for 3000 and 13:16 all in 2007-fairly recently. Hall hasn't raced seriously on the track in years.
The best marathoners know that they need speed to race the marathon successfully, and that means running on the track even if they are not able to win medals. Wanjiru feels comfortable at 4:50 pace not because he has better endurance then Hall but because he can run a 10k at 4:18 pace while Hall can only muster a 4:25-4:28 pace. Not to mention, I don't see Hall ever winning a major marathon in a close finish because a 30 second 200m is all out to him.
Shorter in 1972 got 5th in the 10000m before winning the marathon. Haile before running his wr had a solid performance in the 10000m. Wanjiru got beat by Bekele at 10000m but ran 26:41. I'm sure he didn't mind that much-it was just preperation for his actual event. And don't even get me started about Zatopek...
Hall HAD all of the tools to become a successful marathoner-born at altitude, 3:42 speed as a high schooler, work ethic, support crew, great mechanics...but he hasn't worked on his speed and so will not be competitive again until he wakes up and realizes that is what he is missing.
Actually running fast in shorter events has NOTHING to do with running fast in the marathon. What matters is the ABILITY to run fast. Do you honestly think that Hall isn't working on his speed? Do you really think he ran back to back 28:20 10k's then tossed on 1.1k in 3:03(2:42 k pace) and that his real race pace for the 10k is his 28:0's PR? He ran 28:22 at Cow Harbor by himself a place where the second best time ever is 28:44 and literally a 100 plus sub 28:44 guys have run. Think maybe is capable of running a bit faster then his PRs?
Frank shorter ran a lifetime best of 27:55 9 seconds better then Halls PR but his marathon best was 2:10, four minutes slower, do you really think Hall should be looking to Frank for how to prep for the marathon? He beats him by nearly a mile!
Bill Rodgers PR for the mile was 4:18.8 but he ran 28:04 for 10k and 2:09. Don't you need to be faster then that in the mile to run those times? Yes! but you don't need to do it in a race, you just need to be capable of doing it.
Again and again I see this stupid argument on Letsrun and I just don't get how nobody brings this up. To run under 27:30 for 10k you certainly need to be strong enough to run sub 2:10 in the marathon, but you don't see anyone saying "Rupp won't break 27:30 because he has never run a 2:09 marathon."
Will Wanjiru ever sub-4:00 for the Mile?
Who cares, not their specialty.
I think the mental side of training for a sub-4 is just as important as the physical side. From everything I've heard Ryan say, the two things that help him put together a successful training/racing block are (1)being excited about it and (2)being with Sara (his wife). So, it might behoove him to think about focusing the 5 months after Boston on track racing. He'd be on the same racing/travel schedule as Sara, which would help. Also, I think knowing that he could bust some huge prs would be an exciting prospect. Maybe train for the 5k with some forays down to 1500m/mile and a 10,000m or 2. He would gain both mental confidence and physical efficiency for his next marathon training block if he goes into it a 3:57/13:10/27:20 guy.
This isn't remotely true. The marathon requires development of a skill (fat burning) that just doesn't matter in the 10k. If you look through the lists you will find a bunch of fast 10k guys with 2:12-14 marathoners since they struggle in the last miles.But you general point is right. Hall has run 13:17. That is fast enough speed to run sub 27:30 and definitely enought to suggest breaking 4 mins will not be a super hard challenge. this assumes he can get back into that kind of shape
nj wrote:
Again and again I see this stupid argument on Letsrun and I just don't get how nobody brings this up. To run under 27:30 for 10k you certainly need to be strong enough to run sub 2:10 in the marathon, but you don't see anyone saying "Rupp won't break 27:30 because he has never run a 2:09 marathon."
OR wrote:But you general point is right. Hall has run 13:17. That is fast enough speed to run sub 27:30 and definitely enought to suggest breaking 4 mins will not be a super hard challenge. this assumes he can get back into that kind of shape
100% agree, and it was actually 13:16.03. Hall had problems in college with overtraining, and he finally got everything to work together that summer of 2005 when he won Ncaa's and took 3rd at Nats. I have no doubt in my mind that on that day he could have broken 4. His problem throught most of his college career is that he was always fried. Fact is he choose to run the 5k that year and things clicked, and that's where he ran the best track race of his life. On that day he was surely capable of some big things in anything from 1500-10k.
However why would we have to "assume" he can get back in that kind of shape? Why would he be out of that kind of shape? guys like Geb says it's a myth that you lose your speed when training for the marathon if you're doing it correctly. And he basically proved that when he went from the marathon back to the track coming off an injury and still broke the world indoor 2 mile record while El g failed at it.
Thanks for being a Stanford fan kid. But I doubt you've ever been to Palo Alto, much less within around the Cardinal program. You basically don't know what you're talking about except in occassional bits and pieces.
His 5000 times suggest he definitely had the ability to run a sub-4:00 mile, but at this point, given his talent in the marathon, that shouldn't even be a goal.
Menlo Phil wrote:
Thanks for being a Stanford fan kid. But I doubt you've ever been to Palo Alto, much less within around the Cardinal program. You basically don't know what you're talking about except in occassional bits and pieces.
Everything i said was true and straight from Hall's mouth himself. No where did i say it was Stanfords fault that he overtrained. Ryan Hall says it from his own doing.
So you basically don't know what you're talking about, so get a life.
I said from the very beginning of Hall's marathon tangent that he needed to cut the bull shit and maximize his potential on the track. Does he need to run 1500s and miles? NOOO! What he needs to be doing is competing with Teg in the 5k as well as becoming the premeire 10k athlete in the U.S. Who gives two shits if he can run sub 4! the guys hes competing against at the international level have run sub 27:00 !!! How the hell does he expect to compete with them when he has yet to break 28:00??? Oh and one more thing... WHY THE F*** IS HE RUNNING BOSTON! what the F*** is he gonna prove there? go to London and stick your nose in race and get pulled to a 2:05.xx! c'mmon...
ryan hall return to the track wrote:
Of course it matters. I'm amazed he's ran 2:06low without breaking 4 minutes for the mile or even 28 minutes for 10k on the track. The marathon is increasingly becoming a speed event...Gebresselassie, Wanjiru, Tergat, Goumri, Lel could all run well under 4 minutes for the mile...
Geb-3:31/7:25/12:39/26:22
Wanjiru-26:41/58:33
Tergat 7:28/12:49/26:2x
Goumri-7:32/12:50
Lel-doesn't race on the track much, but closing the marathon in 28s for the last 200m shows that he knows that speed is important and has focused on it.
vs
Hall-3:42 7 (!) years ago/13:16 3+ years ago/28:08
Hall thought he would be a miler for a long time, and ran 800s and 1500s and 3000s in an effort to pursue that goal. Then he quickly moved up in distance, running the 20k record then 59:43 1/2 marathon record then of course 2:08 in london, an effortless 2:09low in hilly central park with a 1:02 last half, a great 2:06 in london then...the Olympics. Maybe he has been away from the track too long...he looked sluggish and had absolutely no "pop" in his stride at all.
Ritz and Hall have both worked on their speed over the years-but Hall has taken the route of pure road racer over the past few years while Ritz has been working on his speed at the same time as road racing-he ran 8:11 for 2 miles,7:39 for 3000 and 13:16 all in 2007-fairly recently. Hall hasn't raced seriously on the track in years.
The best marathoners know that they need speed to race the marathon successfully, and that means running on the track even if they are not able to win medals. Wanjiru feels comfortable at 4:50 pace not because he has better endurance then Hall but because he can run a 10k at 4:18 pace while Hall can only muster a 4:25-4:28 pace. Not to mention, I don't see Hall ever winning a major marathon in a close finish because a 30 second 200m is all out to him.
Shorter in 1972 got 5th in the 10000m before winning the marathon. Haile before running his wr had a solid performance in the 10000m. Wanjiru got beat by Bekele at 10000m but ran 26:41. I'm sure he didn't mind that much-it was just preperation for his actual event. And don't even get me started about Zatopek...
Hall HAD all of the tools to become a successful marathoner-born at altitude, 3:42 speed as a high schooler, work ethic, support crew, great mechanics...but he hasn't worked on his speed and so will not be competitive again until he wakes up and realizes that is what he is missing.
The marathon will NEVER be a speed event. Also, Hall can obviously run a sub-4, but just isn't focusing on it right now. The same can be said about so many other people that this is not even a valid question, really.
So this threah needs do die now-mile speed has no relevance to marathon prowess.
But, it does to 5000 meter times, which in term is relevant to 10,000 meter times, which seems relevant to marathon ability.
Bottom line getting Ryan Hall to run a mile or 5000 pr might involve taking away from his marathon training.
I saw Douglas Waukihuru from Kenya try to take a year to develop speed after working the Japanese system and running 8:07 3000 meter races didn't seem to help him get any better in the marathon at that stage in his career.