Official 2009 LRC 5000m USA Men's 5k Rankings Thread: Lagat 1, Ritz 2, Tegenkamp 3

Well put Space Ghost. This is all just about opinions.

That's why my answer to the question "Whose 5K season would you rather have?" would be Ritz. There's a new world champion every year, but there is always only one American record holder at a time.

I wonder if Bob Kennedy would trade the AR he held for 13 years for a WC medal in '96?

Chucko--what a dope you are. Of course Lagat could have run faster than 12:59 in 2006 because his PR is . . . wait, I'm checking . . . oh, his PR is 12:59. Hmm. Chucko--sorry!

chucko wrote:

Again, lets run logic, he didn't run a 12:56 this year because he didn't really want to.

Montesquieu wrote:

Chucko--what a dope you are. Of course Lagat could have run faster than 12:59 in 2006 because his PR is . . . wait, I'm checking . . . oh, his PR is 12:59. Hmm. Chucko--sorry!

chucko wrote:

Again, lets run logic, he didn't run a 12:56 this year because he didn't really want to.

no, chucko is an idiot and the letsun rankings are actually pretty good overall. Astonishingly good actually.

If Lagat and Ritz had a race who would win.I'm thinking no matter what Ritz couldn't shake off lagat and he would always get outkicked.Even at Lagat's age.

Mrr82 wrote:

What bothers me is that German/Derricks record breaking performances count for so little. I love guys like Riley...but are you serious? Riley runs a 13:21 and is ranked above an 18 year old who in 48 states would have still be in highschool who went 13:25? That's just not right...that's a huge moment in American running that is being undervalued big time...he passed Derrick, Rupp, Sanchez, Pre, Lindgren, Ritz, etc....

Riley was ranked behind Fernandez.

Mrr82 wrote:

chucko wrote:

Ah yes, lets run logic, the fastest race ever by an American gets you second place in the American rankings.

Get a reality check...12:56 is a joke for Lagat if he ever really wanted to do it. He went 12:59 a few years ago, closing in 51.9 i believe it was!?

What bothers me is that German/Derricks record breaking performances count for so little. I love guys like Riley...but are you serious? Riley runs a 13:21 and is ranked above an 18 year old who in 48 states would have still be in highschool who went 13:25? That's just not right...that's a huge moment in American running that is being undervalued big time...he passed Derrick, Rupp, Sanchez, Pre, Lindgren, Ritz, etc....

YOU get a reality check. 12:56 is not a joke for anyone, except maybe Bekele or Geb. Besides, what happened to running the race to see who's better? Ritz wins in my book because of his big improvement to capture that record while Lagat was doing mostly 1500s. He hasn't run that kind of time for 5k in quite a while, so it's a far stretch for me to say he's the best of 2009.

I remember after the week when Ritz and Teg did their runs, the Brojos made an argument for Teg's performance being better (or maybe it was Teg's performance indicating better ability... slight difference). I think it was something about Ritz having nicely spaced runners to pick off in the last mile, and Teg's being more of a race, and not perfectly paced in the first mile.So I agree with you, I definitely don't think they're working with a super consistent metric for these rankings. But that's okay (they successfully generated discussion).

I think World Medals count more then American Records in the distance events. Winning a world medal means you have to be better then all but 2 of the best runners in the world. Setting an American record means you have to be faster then any American to run the event. We all know that several Kenyans and Ethiopians could run our American Record or close in any given year, so to win a medal you have to beat several people of U.S. Record caliber. Look, Tegenkamp ran 12:58 and was 8th in his race. Remember, American records mean fastest American ever, world medals mean best in the world in a given year. I'd take a World Medal!! And nobody can ever take those away from you, unless you cheated.

I would most definitely rather have a 12:56 than a 13:03.

Ritz 1st in the 10k and 1st in the 5k.

This is obvious in both events. Ritz has the fastest time, and placed highest in the world champs. Double whammy. No one else compares.

Ritz 1st

15s faster on time, 2 places faster at world champs

Rupp 2nd

Nelson 3rd

Fag 4th

The rest based on time.

Ritz has the fastest time in the 5k. Period. Teg has the 2nd fastest, and failed at the world champs. He gets no extra kudos for that. Lagat ran 13:03, early in the season. That does not compare to 12:56 or 12:58. The 2rd at world champs, albeit slow, lends a little credence to the earlier time. It is whimpy to get a ranking solely on place though, and no time. The 13:03 puts him in 3rd, not the placing at world champs. What people could have, might have, or should have done does not count.

Ritz 1st

Teg 2nd

Lagat 3rd

Solinsky 4th outdoor 13:18

Rupp 5th indoor 13:18

The rest based on time.

so... Lagat gets the number one spot, cause we are not ranking on times........ then Ritz gets number two ahead of Teg because of the TIME he ran.. riiiiiiiiiggght....

So his personal best is is three seconds slower than the Amercian record. Whats your point? All that means is in his prime he was still three seconds slower than the current American record holder.

There's a certain amount of luck to achieving a Record preformance. Of course, you have to put in the training and hardwork to have a shot, but there are so many exterior factors that all have to align for it to actually happen. Lagat, Teg, and Ritz clearly all had the talent and put in the work necessary to have a shot at the AR this year. Ritz happened to be the guy that did it. Everything was right for him that day, the race, his mental focus, the execution, everything... Similarily, everything finally came together for Teg a few weeks later. Lots of people will vocally cite record attempts as their goals at specific races, but for it to happen everything has to go right and they have to be ready.

Championship-style racing is a different animal. The race happens if an athlete is ready or not. If an ahtlete isn't ready to go for a PR or AR, he'll bag a race get ready for another attmept. WC or the US Championships will go on if you're ready or not. There are no rabbits, the pace is inconsistant, there are trials, many athltes are doubling events, all the talented runners show up, the pressure is probably so much more intense than the average meet. It takes a different mental approach than simply running fast.

Bernard Lagat showed up this year in the 5k. He didn't run as fast Ritz did. However, he came alot closer to Bekele in WC than Ritz did in Zurich regardless of time. In a tactical race Lagat is just plain dangerous.

All top 3 being relatively equal in talent, being the guy who shows up, puts it on the line and goes for the medal is way tougher than simply running records.

That said, Ritz is totally a gamer too. He showed up at the WC 10k and WC half. However, with regard to the 5k, Lagat was the best this year.

Now Ritz over Teg.... that's more debatable...

Montesquieu wrote:

Chucko--what a dope you are. Of course Lagat could have run faster than 12:59 in 2006 because his PR is . . . wait, I'm checking . . . oh, his PR is 12:59. Hmm. Chucko--sorry!

Lagat's PR in the 10,000 is... Oh wait, he has never run a 10,000 on the track. Oh my god, that means anybody who has ever run a 10K on the track is better than Lagat!

Your an iiot.

Here are my thoughts. Yes Lagat was closer to Bekele than Ritz but it was his type of race. Lagat has a better chance of running with Bekele in a tactical race instead of a timed race. Had Lagat been in Ritz's race I think that Ritz beats him. All in all I personally think that I want the American record more than the silver. If it was gold that would be different. No one is going to remember who the silver medalist was. We still talk about Bob Kennedy and his record.

The big question in terms of who was "better," I think, is how Lagat would have fared in the GL meet where Ritz set the AR. Obviously Ritz would have had his doors blown of by Lagat at the World Champs. I think that since Lagat ran 13:03 in May he likely could have run ~12:58 or so in Ritz's race with good pacing, etc. So <2 seconds back from Ritz in a time trial race, compared to the ~4-5 seconds that I suspect Ritz would have lost by in the WC final, all in the last 600.

I vote Lagat as being "better"

But that's not really what the rankings are about. Lagat had hands-down a better year at the 5000. Taking Bekele to the line in a World Championship beats any time trial performance short of 12:45

I own up to being an idiot on several occasions in the five decades plus I've been alive, but here I'm on terra firma. Lagat has run many 5000s and he has not bettered 12:59. So the claim that he could run better faster than Ritz when he hasn't do so in eleven years of running the event rings a bit hollow. And if you're going to call someone an idiot, please type the word correctly.

Daily Torper wrote:

Montesquieu wrote:

Chucko--what a dope you are. Of course Lagat could have run faster than 12:59 in 2006 because his PR is . . . wait, I'm checking . . . oh, his PR is 12:59. Hmm. Chucko--sorry!

Lagat's PR in the 10,000 is... Oh wait, he has never run a 10,000 on the track. Oh my god, that means anybody who has ever run a 10K on the track is better than Lagat!

Your an iiot.

You are a total idiot! "Teg failed at the World Champs" He had an excellent season; finished next to Bekele in the prelims; ran an excellent final (was in 6th, about 3 steps behind the leaders with 150 meters to go), but simply did not have the wheels when he needed them on that evening (I was there and saw his performances in Berlin! I would have to agree that Lagat should be first; toss up between Teg and Ritz next, no problem with giving it to Ritz because of the AR. Since the African dominance at the world level, no American born male athlete has done a whole lot better than Teg (4th in WC '07, made Oly Final, and then another WC final). I assuming that people like you that say that he "failed at the WC" are quite successful at the world level in your profession!!!!!!!!!

Ritz has the fastest time in the 5k. Period. Teg has the 2nd fastest, and failed at the world champs. He gets no extra kudos for that. Lagat ran 13:03, early in the season. That does not compare to 12:56 or 12:58. The 2rd at world champs, albeit slow, lends a little credence to the earlier time. It is whimpy to get a ranking solely on place though, and no time. The 13:03 puts him in 3rd, not the placing at world champs. What people could have, might have, or should have done does not count.

Ritz 1st

Teg 2nd

Lagat 3rd

Solinsky 4th outdoor 13:18

Rupp 5th indoor 13:18

The rest based on time.[/quote]

This is how I see the rankings in the 5K for 2009:

1st- Ritz

2nd- Teg

3rd- Lagat

4th- Solinsky

5th- Jager

6th- Rupp

7th- Fam

8th- Riley

9th- German

Also, I can't believe that Jonathon Riley now runs under Saucony and not for Jerry anymore

Ask yourself this, who's more likely to win an Olympic gold medal at this distance? There's your answer.