All I have to say is that I think the way you structured this question was disrespectful to Stephen Haas, who ran to win the race and can't be blamed for the quality of the field, or the slowish time in which he won.
Too often the original content on the LR "Week in Review" and similar pieces overshoots the irreverent tone the authors seem to be aiming for, and is unnecessarily mocking and dismissive of American runners.
You'd have to visit all the villages in Kenya's side of the Great Rift Valley to really know...if word got out to everyone, though, I'd say a few dozen max. 30? How many Americans could run 8:48, or 8:13ish for 3k? Not really that many, when you think about it.
I hope all this goes without saying that an 8:48 at the garden is at least an ~8:30 effort at BU or the Armory.
_________________________________________________________________________
I'd say a 13:40-13:45 5k time is equivalent to a 8:48 2 mile at Millrose. And what was that about 30 athletes? Right now, about 50 Kenyan athletes are capable of running a sub-13 5k. At least 10-15 times that can run 13:45. So we're saying at the very least ~600-700 Kenyans can run the equivalent of a 8:48 two mile. If all appearance fees we're covered and the deal got out to all the Kenyans, than i'd say around 1/3-1/2 would go. That would mean at the very least 200 athletes would be put on a plane which would be just over one plane full.
bobby e. wrote:
All I have to say is that I think the way you structured this question was disrespectful to Stephen Haas, who ran to win the race and can't be blamed for the quality of the field, or the slowish time in which he won.
Too often the original content on the LR "Week in Review" and similar pieces overshoots the irreverent tone the authors seem to be aiming for, and is unnecessarily mocking and dismissive of American runners.
Seriously. Haas is a good guy and is still out there fighting the good fight 6 years after college. We need more guys like him.
^Not we're were sorry for my English mistake.
malmo wrote:
kartelite wrote:2. Your answer of zero is still wrong, basic game theory tells you that, and experiments and pretty much any analogous real-life situation would confirm it if you think about it for half a second.
You're a mathematician. Show me the proof? "Basic game theory"
Seriously, stop calling me a mathematician. I passed econ phd qualifiers that involved much more complicated, but similar, problems to this. You're smart enough to realize that the Nash equilibrium solution to this problem isn't 0. Doesn't matter if you frame it as a simultaneous or one-at-a-time move game...first case, if you can run 8:35 and no one else is in line, you will line up. DUH. It's almost like a "common resource" problem, where you would get more than the socially optimal number choosing to compete. Obviously, you have to make assumptions about if we say every run has a probability distribution or a "fixed" time they can run...you also would technically have to define utility functions. Nevertheless, with the parameters given it becomes a trivial, yet pain in the ass to actually model, problem.
Do you not see that rojo's question, as he worded it, is a riskless arb for many?
Back to my rewording of the game.
The rules of the game are.
1) show up and if you win you'll collect $6200 (average yearly salary of a CPA in Kenya. Average income natiowide is $1600 PER YEAR)
2) cost of getting in the game is $1600.
3) you do not know how many people will play the game.
If no one shows up all you have to do is run faster than 8:48 and you win 6200. Cost = $1600 = a year's salary in Kenya. payout was 2.87:1
How many people do you think are going to risk a year's salary to make less than 3 years salary?
Even if you are allowed to back out of the game upon seeing others in the airport, how do you know hwho is on another flight, or already in New York?
Do you really think that this is a viable game to play?
^What if all appearance fees and travel expenses were payed and ANYONE who ran 8:48 and under got $6,200 dollars.
You say that this money goes to anyone who "could" show up and run 8:48 for 2 miles. This means that they don't get the money for running the time, they get the money for having the ability to show up and run the time, correct? So why would they show up when the payment is made to anyone who could show up and run the time and not just those who do show up and run the time?
do you see what is happening here?
This is the second time in a couple of weeks that people are being hammered for trying to write creatively. A certain unnamed female in Colorado was whaled on for 12 pages because she tried to say something in an interesting way.
Now rojo does the same thing and gets hits upside the head - he could have written 'how many sub 8:48 Kenyans are there?' but instead he tried to add a little color to the post.
I don't think Rojo meant the question as Malmo shot back at him so literally - I think Rojo meant 'how many Kenyans could do this'
and secondarily 'how many Kenyans could have shown up for a large prize' and there is probably even a connotation of 'can you believe this - a dude won $6200 for a non world-class time.
In other words - I know this is the internet, but can we let people be a little creative here without getting nails shot at them? Can we be a little better readers?
Really??? wrote:
^What if all appearance fees and travel expenses were payed and ANYONE who ran 8:48 and under got $6,200 dollars.
Then that's a riskless arbitrage, in addition to being a stupid scenario.
agip wrote:
In other words - I know this is the internet, but can we let people be a little creative here without getting nails shot at them? Can we be a little better readers?
Rojo is getting nails shot at him? English please?
malmo wrote:
agip wrote:In other words - I know this is the internet, but can we let people be a little creative here without getting nails shot at them? Can we be a little better readers?
Rojo is getting nails shot at him? English please?
you know, given a black eye. hurled brickbats. picked on. ripped up. slinged mud on. torn apart. upbraided.
see - I'm trying to be creative here.
Just from the question alone, I would say 3 people would be in line.
First, the chance of a good runner hanging around the airport ready to get on a flight would be slim.
Second, there are always a couple people who will try anything.
That means you may actually get one guy who is capable of running that 8:48 for the money.
Where exactly at the airport will you have them run?
agip wrote:
you know, given a black eye. hurled brickbats. picked on. ripped up. slinged mud on. torn apart. upbraided.
see - I'm trying to be creative here.
I see, you are a creative person -- creative when it comes to reading comprehension.
I agree, nothing against Haas but where were the other guys? For a "pro" runner $6,200 is a good pay day. You would think that there would be at least a dozen guys within an hours drive of NYC that could have competed for the win.
well lets not beat around the bush.
WERE GOOD RUNNERS EXCLUDED TO SHOWCASE RUPP??
1. rupp of course wound up not running
2. tom jordan usually has excellent fields at the pre classic, and does not have a history of watering down fields, to showcase an individual runner.
3. rupp does not appear to be avoiding top competition based on the field he will face in a 5k in germany on february 11th.
4. rupp's coach always competed against the best possible runners in his running days.
5. all this points to no on my question, but it looks like something sleazy is going on when a meet like millrose has such a weak field.
6. not even considering the money, i would think top runners would want to run a race on TV as any chance of exposure in this sport is important.
Really??? wrote:
I'd say a 13:40-13:45 5k time is equivalent to a 8:48 2 mile at Millrose. And what was that about 30 athletes? Right now, about 50 Kenyan athletes are capable of running a sub-13 5k. At least 10-15 times that can run 13:45. So we're saying at the very least ~600-700 Kenyans can run the equivalent of a 8:48 two mile. If all appearance fees we're covered and the deal got out to all the Kenyans, than i'd say around 1/3-1/2 would go. That would mean at the very least 200 athletes would be put on a plane which would be just over one plane full.
I agree that the 848 at Millrose equals about 13:40. I also agree that my initial estimation was off - on further research, 49 Kenyans broke 1340 last year. I'm sure there are several 10kers and milers who didn't race the event at all, who were also capable. And I'm sure there are some guys who just didn't race, or didn't have access to a race. I think that puts the number around 150 to 200, though. Not 500-600. Not even close.
And the statement that 50 Kenyans can break 13 minutes is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Where the hell are you getting the number 50 from? In the entire 2010 season, 17 athletes in the world broke 13:00 in the 5k. 9 were from Kenya:
Eliud Kipchoge
Vincent Kiprop Chepkok
Mark Kosgey Kiptoo
Josphat Menjo
Lucas Rotich
Mathew Kisorio
Edwin Soi
Jacob Cheshari
Leonard Komon
And in 2009, guys that didn't do it 2010:
Josphat Kipkoetch
Joseph Ebuya
According to Jack Daniels' conversions, a 13:01 5k is equivalent to 3:29 for 1500, 7:27 for 3k, and 27:07 for 10k. The Kenyans not listed on the above lists who achieved any of those roughly equivalent performances in 2010 or 2009:
Silas Kiplagat
Augustine Choge
Daniel Lemashon
Josphat Ndambiri
Moses Masai
Martin Mathathi
Gedion Ngatuny
That is a total of 18 Kenyan athletes who have run performances that indicate they are possibly in sub 13 shape - many at the peak of their seasons - over the past two years. You are claiming that there roughly 32 more "just out there", right now??? That is even more absurd than saying 600 Kenyans could run 8:48.
The line would be around 20-25 long if it was a sub 13 plane.
The line would be around 200 long if it was a sub 8:48 2 mile plane.
Let us make it simple for you. How many Kenyans can run 8:48 for two miles? There, now all the numbers have been taken out. Is your answer still zero?
You ride the short bus don't you?
agip wrote:
do you see what is happening here?
This is the second time in a couple of weeks that people are being hammered for trying to write creatively. A certain unnamed female in Colorado was whaled on for 12 pages because she tried to say something in an interesting way.
Now rojo does the same thing and gets hits upside the head - he could have written 'how many sub 8:48 Kenyans are there?' but instead he tried to add a little color to the post.
I don't think Rojo meant the question as Malmo shot back at him so literally - I think Rojo meant 'how many Kenyans could do this'
and secondarily 'how many Kenyans could have shown up for a large prize' and there is probably even a connotation of 'can you believe this - a dude won $6200 for a non world-class time.
In other words - I know this is the internet, but can we let people be a little creative here without getting nails shot at them? Can we be a little better readers?
You pretty much nailed it on the head.
That being said, like the women in Colorado, I think i'm going to get very upset and have weldon pull this entire website down as i dont like being criticized.
Joking.
As this poster understands, I was wondering how many Kenyans could run an 848 in the Garden if we covered their expenses and paid them $6200 (all of them not just the winner). The colorful image of them lined up at least 500 deep at the airport was one that made me laugh.