Bernard Lagat may try 5000/10000m double in 2012...discussion and predictions

chet wrote:

By next year Lagat will struggle to run 27:00. Of course, being that he will be 36 years old, this will be impressive nonetheless...

In Berlin Brendan Foster said something like, "that guy knows how to win medals...". I'm not sure yet if I'd bet on him for gold, but I'd bet on him to medal. 2000-2012 is quite a span.

Let's do this. The percent increase from the mens to the womens WR in the 10000 is 11%. Using this does give a projected 10000 for a women going off of 27:00 to be 29:58. 29:58 would rank as the 5th best women performance of all time. 27:00 would rank as the 68th best mens performance of all time. This also assumes that the womens WR is legitimate and there are a lot of questions about that. Again, I agree the women are behind the men but it is not that drastic of a difference. I would say a 27:00 for the men is more similar to a 30:20 for the women.

no

i mentioned nothing at all about what the women's 10k wr is - it's irrelevant - there are 800/1500/3k/5k wrs to use as data as well

as for your premise 27'00 = 30'20, where on earth do you get that from ???

applying that to ingrid kristiansen when she ran 30'13 in '86 that means according to your ratio, the men's equivalent time wouda been then

~ 26'53 !!!

the wr at the time was mamede's 27'13

are you seriously going to claim ingrid was the equivalent of a 20s better runner than the men's wr holder at the time ???

( see what you get with 10 - 11% difference - nearer 10% as the gap gets smaller with increasing distance as power becomes stripped out & endurance predominates - at M distance it may be nearer 8%/9% )

I did the numbers:

10k: +10-11% = 28:55.8 - 29:11.6

5k: +10-11% = 13:52.7 - 14:00.3

3k: +10-11% = 8:04.0 - 8:08.4

1500m: +10-11% = 3:46.6 - 3:48.7

800m: +10-11% = 1:51.1 - 1:52.1

women's 10k 30mins. minus 10-11% = 26:42 - 27:00

Current women's WR for 10k: 29:31.78

Ok, but why, when I add 10-11% to 26:17, do I get 28:55.8 - 29:11.6, and then when I subtract 11% from 29:31.78, it equals 26:16.88, pretty much equal to the men's WR? What is your take on "the numbers"?

Precisely Watson wrote:

I did the numbers:

10k: +10-11% = 28:55.8 - 29:11.6

5k: +10-11% = 13:52.7 - 14:00.3

3k: +10-11% = 8:04.0 - 8:08.4

1500m: +10-11% = 3:46.6 - 3:48.7

800m: +10-11% = 1:51.1 - 1:52.1

women's 10k 30mins. minus 10-11% = 26:42 - 27:00

Current women's WR for 10k: 29:31.78

Ok, but why, when I add 10-11% to 26:17, do I get 28:55.8 - 29:11.6, and then when I subtract 11% from 29:31.78, it equals 26:16.88, pretty much equal to the men's WR? What is your take on "the numbers"?

I guess a better question is, why is this percentage difference based on men's performances and not the other way around? Why the discrepancy? Answer: it's arbitrary and you're pulling it out of your ass. It looks good at first, but you don't really know what the women's world records "should" be.

Ventolin and Precisely

Why don't you guys stop littering other posters threads with your nonesense. Who cares what you two think? How about creating your own threads and see how many responses you get...very few!

Bernard Lagat is definitely past his prime in the 1500m; however, how soon we forget that men and women have been improving in middle and long distance events over the last several years all way to 38 to 40yrs old. So isn't not guaranteed that Lagat has reach his peak (since he is training for 5000m) just because he past age 35. Heck there were a few athletes (33-38yrs old) making big improvements-including a couple Spainards- in the 1500m/3000m and steeple over the last few years.

Athletes are improving much later in their careers than the norm was 10-15 years ago, so will Bernard Lagat in the 5000m and 10000m.

Thanks for being that up about athletes improving late in their careers because thats being a trend among elite atheltes. Bernard training for longer distance could very well result in a big improvement in the 5000m and unexpected results in the 10000m. Its not like its a rare occurance for athletes to produce great performances after they hit 35 or older, several others have done it why can't Bernard?

Precisely Watson wrote:

Stick a fork in Bernie. He needs to retire. I'm tired of hearing about him, he's washed up and should quit trying to be world-class. Ok, maybe he's not THAT washed up, but he's on the down-swing, and truthfully, I'm just sick of him.

What like when he won last world indoor a few months ago

You were born on the down-swing, talking down a world class athlete won't change that

Considering Lagat and Geb are roughly the same age, and considering that Geb is the second greatest 10000 runner of all time, then it says if Lagat can go sub 26:50, that Geb could go faster still ...

Of course he can't, though I recognize that he did go 26:50 two years ago I believe.

Geb is not the second greatest 10000 runner of all time. He is the greatest.

No one has won more Olympic and World Championship Golds.

Plus he has a Silver, a Bronze and a 6th that Bekele doesn't have.

Plus he broke the world record more times with a 30 s net drop.

And his initial undefeated streak was along as Bekele's.

Interesting Bernard Lagat's interview June 2010

http://racingnews.runnersworld.com/2010/06/a-brief-chat-with-bernard-lagat-8.html#more-7013

His recent 12.53 points at approx 26.50.

ventolin^3 wrote:

no

women's distance track events ( except the 3k ) are weak compared to men

women's times still have not caught up with the men ( & may not for some decades ) & the difference imo should be

~ 10 - 11%

try that for men's wrs & what it implies it should be for the gals - & what it implies for 30'00[/quote]

Since you take the women's 10,000 as 29:30, why do you not accord the [uhmm] 8:05 the same status (real question, not rhetoric, I do think that there are some differences between the two but question both]?

Precisely Watson wrote:

Stick a fork in Bernie. He needs to retire. I'm tired of hearing about him, he's washed up and should quit trying to be world-class. Ok, maybe he's not THAT washed up, but he's on the down-swing, and truthfully, I'm just sick of him.

28:14 or drop out.

No one has won more Olympic and World Championship Golds.

Bekele has 6, Geb has 5.

Plus he has a Silver, a Bronze and a 6th that Bekele

doesn't have.

Bekele has never lost a 10000, that's much more impressive.

Plus he broke the world record more times with a 30 s net drop.

World record was much weaker when Geb first broke it, Bekele has bettered Geb's best time twice now.

And his initial undefeated streak was along as Bekele's.

Not sure when you start Geb's career but he lost a 10000 in 1993. His first international exposure was 1992.

Geb has 6. Go back to school ha ha YO...

I predict Bekele will beat him in both.

My bad. 6 it is.

The argument between Geb and Bekele is an interesting one. Basically Geb changed the game, made the 10k a faster and more impressive record and set the standard for Bekele chase.

Bekele has dominated the 10k and shaved time off the master's record.

so who is better? the master that changed the game and pushed the event to a new standard or the student who has not pushed the event to a new level but has dominated like no one in recent history.

I vote for Geb. His adidas commercial where he speaks about breaking his own world record 9 times still gives me chills.