Sprint Geezer wrote:
Per unit body mass, Bekele has the edge at 0.38, over Solinsky and Mourhit tied at 0.37--essentially the same.
That ratio is a pure measure of pace. I don't understand why this statement is significant.
Sprint Geezer wrote:
Per unit body mass, Bekele has the edge at 0.38, over Solinsky and Mourhit tied at 0.37--essentially the same.
That ratio is a pure measure of pace. I don't understand why this statement is significant.
Sprint Geezer wrote:
Per unit body mass, Bekele has the edge at 0.38, over Solinsky and Mourhit tied at 0.37--essentially the same.
P.Whelan wrote:That ratio is a pure measure of pace. I don't understand why this statement is significant.
Because of the OP's ansatz that the human energy burn rate during running is 1 Cal/kg/km (an approximation, to be sure), then P.Whelan is correct, this isn't an interesting quantity.
BTW-it is speed (km/min) not pace (min/km) that this is equivalent to.
haha YO wrote:
I can personally guarentee you that no one over 200 pounds has ever run sub 17 for 5k.
Steve Gerhart UC Davis 3:42 1500, 14:22 5k....booyah
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3206273&page=1In order for a 30:00 10ker to match Solinsky's mark in the 10k, he'd have to weight 179 lbs. So I guess it's someone fathomable...
USA is number one!
I just love how running nerds go on and on ad nauseum about how "big" and "jacked" Solinsky is - at 73kg/151 pounds and 6'1", his BMI is what? 21.x?
Sorry, guys, Sol is one of my favorite runners, but he is a still just a pinner.
i run with a guy in australia who weighs 85kg/187lb n he has run 14.41 for a 5km.I think thats very impressive.Especiialy considering his very capable of running under 14.20
Great that he's "very capable" of going 2 seconds per lap faster than his PR.
So...why doesn't he?
If I had a nickel for everyone who was "very capable" of breaking their PR...
pretty simple man,he hasnt raced the distance n has improved both his 3k n 10k pbs by big margins since.
I recognized your observations in the original post, if you read it.
My main point was the possibility of increasing development of heat with greater body mass due to the greater rate of energy expenditure.
As we all know (another generalization) the ratio of surface area to volume of the human body gets smaller as the body gets bigger (assuming the same basic body type). This translates to, all other things being equal, a decreasing ability to reject heat with increasing mass.
When you combine the two--an increase in heat generated, and a decrease in the ability to reject that heat, you will run into a performance barrier in distance running.
In the marathon it is obvious. I don't know if the effect manifests over 10k or 5k, but it would be dependent on the environmental conditions.
I guess my main point was just wondering how Solinsky would perform in either extreme heat, or at longer distances, or in some combination of both.
Sprint Geezer, you could do the calc. on some of these big guys:
Werner Schildhauer
Martti Vanio
Ron Clarke
Derek Clayton
Dave Bedford
Alberto Juantarena
Gelindo Bordin
kent tekulve wrote:
And I can guarantee that somebody has...
Prove it. Should be easy enough if it has happened.
CrackyB wrote:
Steve Gerhart UC Davis 3:42 1500, 14:22 5k....booyah
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3206273&page=1
Not buying it. Again, distance runners tend to exaggerate weights beyond belief. Hell, there are people on here who call Alan Webb fat. I am not buying for a second that a 14:22 guy weighed 200+. 180, yeah. To most distance runners seeing a 6'4" guy weighing 180 would make them think of a 200 pound runner.
I have heard that Jerry Rice in his prime could run under 16 minutes in the 5k. NFL.com has his weight at 200 pounds
MSU-DISTANCE wrote:
I have heard that Jerry Rice in his prime could run under 16 minutes in the 5k. NFL.com has his weight at 200 pounds
Bullshit. "Have heard" instantly tells me it is made up. I "have heard" Alan Iverson ran a 4:20 mile around basketball court in baggy bball shorts.
Sprint Geezer wrote:
My main point was the possibility of increasing development of heat with greater body mass due to the greater rate of energy expenditure.
I agree. But that doesn't change the fact that the number as stated is meaningless, because of the initial ansatz. What would be of interest is differences in the actual calories burned/kg/km (as opposed to just positing 1), which is a measure of efficiency, no?
this is a cool little article analyzing solinsky vis a vis other sub-27minute runners. it touches on mass, weight, among other factors.
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2010/05/sub-27-10km-limit-exclusive-club.html
CrackyB wrote:
Steve Gerhart UC Davis 3:42 1500, 14:22 5k....booyah
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3206273&page=1
haha YO wrote:Not buying it. I am not buying for a second that a 14:22 guy weighed 200+. 180, yeah. To most distance runners seeing a 6'4" guy weighing 180 would make them think of a 200 pound runner.
Using the 1 Cal/kg/km number as postulated by the OP (I still maintain this is quite an approximation), a 14:22, 180 lb guy would have a 28.48 calorie/min power output which is slightly higher than Solinsky's.
Which number?
As you correctly identified, the per-unit-body-mass is essentially a measure of speed.
Just because the initial ansatz, as you like to call it, Herr lucKY2b(!) is imprecise, does not render the rate of energy expenditure meaningless--it simply renders it imprecise.
For the purposes of this obviously non-scientific post, I assumed running efficiencies among the elites to be sufficiently similar to be considered identical, per unit body mass. This is not an academic paper! If it were, individual athletes would be in a controlled environment with sophisticated equipment to measure temperature, gases, HR, electrical load on apparatus, etc..
Although imprecise, the number isn't meaningless when it comes to heat generation.
Also, the number was interesting for me personally, since mine turned out to be so crappy. Since I have more lean muscle mass than Solinsky (unless he has hollow bones), yet my number is lower, that indicates to me that my personal rate of aerobic energy development over 5k or 10k sucks--either that, or I'm a terribly inefficient distance runner. Most likely it is a combination of both.
It's interesting personally because it evidenced to me that my 5k time sucks not only because I weigh a ton for a 5k runner, but that also, at base, my aerobic capability is wanting. I have tried to train it to some extent using low mileage, apparently to no avail.
The other question is to what extent the number is limited by core, or muscular, temperature. I remember from physiology that the rate of possible aerobic work falls with increasing temperature, after a certain point--maybe my point is low, or maybe my heat-rejection mechanisms are inferior due, in part, to my size or BMI, or maybe due to other factors.
Ultimately, my back-of-an-envelope analysis has suggested to me that my running efforts are probably better directed below probably 800m.
Anyway, I refuse to give up on the 5k. I checked our track yesterday, and it remains covered by at least a foot of snow--although it is melting fast. I'm going to do a 5k around it soon, on a nice day, and see what happens.
Sprint Geezer wrote:
My main point was the possibility of increasing development of heat with greater body mass due to the greater rate of energy expenditure.
As we all know (another generalization) the ratio of surface area to volume of the human body gets smaller as the body gets bigger (assuming the same basic body type). This translates to, all other things being equal, a decreasing ability to reject heat with increasing mass.
When you combine the two--an increase in heat generated, and a decrease in the ability to reject that heat, you will run into a performance barrier in distance running.
In the marathon it is obvious. I don't know if the effect manifests over 10k or 5k, but it would be dependent on the environmental conditions.
I guess my main point was just wondering how Solinsky would perform in either extreme heat, or at longer distances, or in some combination of both.
So smaller runners must be sweating more of their body mass in distance races?
How much can a larger runner increase his sweat rate by storing more water and sodium and training in warmer/more humind conditions?
Some smaller runners don't like the heat, Gebreselassie comes to mind, so this issue has some individual variation.