TK1451 wrote:
Stop trolling dumbass. You're saying the key to having an American run 12:50 is to NOT have lots of 20 year-olds running 13:2X or faster? Good logic.
I appreciate your efforts but I am leaving Mrr82 alone.
Knowledge, I have learned, is finite while ignorance is infinite. When you find yourself arguing with an ignorant person, stop because your opponent has unlimited resources.
Trialswatcher wrote:
Jager's 3K to two mile converted is approx. 8:18 for two miles.
take 3K time divide by .926 I believe.
Gets you to 8:18 fraction.
I have to say that conversion seems safe but total BS. There's almost no way a guy that fit could run 3000m at 62s/lap and close the last 218m in 37... I'll give you 8:15 - 8:16 at the slowest. And that would incorporate him slowing downa bit as well, not not an un-fit high schooler amount.
Great News! wrote:
Trialswatcher wrote:Jager's 3K to two mile converted is approx. 8:18 for two miles.
take 3K time divide by .926 I believe.
Gets you to 8:18 fraction.
I have to say that conversion seems safe but total BS. There's almost no way a guy that fit could run 3000m at 62s/lap and close the last 218m in 37... I'll give you 8:15 - 8:16 at the slowest. And that would incorporate him slowing downa bit as well, not not an un-fit high schooler amount.
Jager was probably completely spent after that 3000, and couldn't have run another 218m let alone run it in 37. The conversion is made to account for slow down factor. If he was actually running a 2-mile he wouldn't have closed 2800-3000 nearly as fast as he did, and then closed the final bit a little faster. 8:17-8:18 is right on.
having watched his 7.41 in Monaco I thought he was gonna drop a 7.37 or so till the bell when he really appeared to tie up - another great prospect you've got there
not unless he got faster over a longer distance...
I take it you do not understand conversions, right? It does not say that they run the one time up to the 3000 mark and then finish the race at the incremental time. He would be totally spent at the incremental point and then trashed for running the rest. The race is run slightly slower throughout.
Great News! wrote:
Trialswatcher wrote:Jager's 3K to two mile converted is approx. 8:18 for two miles.
take 3K time divide by .926 I believe.
Gets you to 8:18 fraction.
I have to say that conversion seems safe but total BS. There's almost no way a guy that fit could run 3000m at 62s/lap and close the last 218m in 37... I'll give you 8:15 - 8:16 at the slowest. And that would incorporate him slowing downa bit as well, not not an un-fit high schooler amount.
7:41 3k pace maintained for 2M would be 8:14.5, so 8:17-18 is reasonable. Amazing to think that Ritz ran an 8:11 2M (and 13:16 5000m at Brasschaatt) and we don't think of him as a 5k guy.
rule the roost wrote:
13:22
7:41
3:54
Any of German's PRs' is more impressive.
Rir Rirrir wrote:
Any of German's PRs' is more impressive.
No.
In this particular case he actually gets a faster conversion than he would have probably run he was already spent and struggled quite a bit that last 600, he might have NEVER run the last 218 meters on same or close pace he was already at 65 seconds pace plus for last 400-500, and fading every meter, all out .
Next 200M might have taken goodness knows how many seconds , plus the extra 18M
Rir Rirrir wrote:
Any of German's PRs' is more impressive.
0/10
C'mon. Try to use just a smidgeon of imagination.
jjjjjjjjjj wrote:
7:41 3k pace maintained for 2M would be 8:14.5, so 8:17-18 is reasonable. Amazing to think that Ritz ran an 8:11 2M (and 13:16 5000m at Brasschaatt) and we don't think of him as a 5k guy.
I think of him as a 10k guy with reasonable speed.