Kiwi Smack wrote:
Most of the top 10,000 runners, best 400 times are 48 seconds are faster. There best 200m, 400m or 600 meters times, are almost never report.
You know absolutely NOTHING about about world class distance running. I can think of any top 10k runners who could break 48s for 400, and you could probably count the number under 50s on one hand.
SPEED is a quality depending from the following factors :
a) Percentage of Fast Fibers (something genetic)
b) Level of muscular strength (fundamental for the length of the strides)
c) Power of the nervous system (fundamental for the frequency of the action)
d) Technique of running (fundamental for the efficiency)
e) Ability in relaxation
At least, we speak about BIOMECHANICAL qualities. In the case of short distances, the main problems is HOW TO INCREASE THE MAX SPEED.
Instead, when we speak about ENDURANCE, we speak about BIOENERGETIC and METABOLIC qualities. In the case of EVERY event of ENDURANCE, the main problem is HOW TO LAST LONGER AT A HIGHER POSSIBLE PERCENTAGE OF YOUR MAX SPEED.
This means that there is a correlation between the SPEED OF THE RACE and the SPEED OF TRAINING. When we speak of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE, we have the problem to chose the system for running more distance at the specific pace of the race.
For every different speed, our muscles produce different level of lactate. When we run at our max speed, we recruit the most part of our FAST FIBERS, and we produce in very short time high quantity of lactate, so we are in the area of LACTIC POWER. This is, for example, the area where we have to work for coaching a specialist of 100m when we want to prepare 200m, and when we want to prepare a specialist of 400m. WE NEED TO INCREASE THE LACTIC POWER, BUT WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN INCREASING THE LACTIC CAPACITY, because the duration of the race doesn't require the ability in producing a lot of lactate, but the ability to produce in short time more lactate possible.
When we want to extend the distance, for example moving to 800m, we need to train our lactic system to produce HIGH QUANTITY OF LACTATE IN SHORT TIME (Lactic Capacity). This is connected with the LACTIC POWER, and there is no any real connection with the Aerobic System.
For giving clear ideas about training, if LACTIC POWER is the result of a race of 400 / 600m (for example, 46" / 1'16"), LACTIC CAPACITY is the ability to run in training 3-4 times the same distance, using an intesity of 90-95% of your Lactic Power, with long recovery (for example, 4x400 in 50" with 5' recovery, or 3x600 in 1'19" with 7'/8' recovery.
In all these cases, we speak about SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE, of course specific for the distance of 800m.
When we look for a longer distance, we need, obviously, to reduce the speed. In this case, the direct intervention of the AEROBIC SYSTEM becomes more and more important, growing with the length of the race.
Reducing the speed, we can't recruit all our FAST FIBERS, but only a percentage of them. Longer is the race, less intervention of fast fibers there is.
In methodology, we don't consider CORRELATED with any specific training speed that is 10% faster of the speed of the race. So, when we speak about SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE we speak of speeds that are between 100% and 110% of the speed of the race.
Some example :
800m in 1'48" :
100% speed = 13"5 every 100m. 10% of 13"5 is 1"35, and 110% of speed is (13"5 - 1"35) 12"15 for 100m.
We can train the SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE using speed between 12"15 and 13" every 100m, of course in different distances : 10x200 in 24"8 is SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE TRAINING, the same 7x300m in 39", or 5x400m in 53", or 3x600m in 1'20".
Every speed FASTER than 110% is SPECIAL SPEED, but doesn't have any specific function. If I go for 3 times 200m in 23", or 6x100m in 11"5, this is part of my mechanical training, BUT DOESN'T HAVE ANY PARTICULAR INFLUENCE ON THE BIOENERGETIC AND METHABOLIC SYSTEM. So, if I have an athlete running fast (for example 46" in 400m), that doesn't have any training of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE (more volume at a slower but specific pace), he's not able running a fast 800m NOT BECAUSE HIS LACK OF SPEED, BUT BECAUSE HIS LACK OF SPECIFIC ENDURANCE.
This kind of percentage works for every distance. So, if we speak of a 10000m runner able to run 26'40" (16" every 100m), we can say that the Specific Speed Endurance is to extend the durantion of a speed of 14"4 every 100m (28"8 in 200, 43"2 in 300, 57"6 in 400, 1'12" in 500, 1'26"4 in 600, 1'55"2 for 800, 2'24" for 1000m). To develop a high volume of km in one session (for example 12/14 km) using these type of speed, mixing the distances, is an example of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE for a specialist, like when we run 7x3000m in 8'30" for a marathon runner able running 2:04:00 this is a workout of SPECIFIC MARATHON SPEED ENDURANCE.
So, stop looking at SPEED like an ABSOLUTE CONCEPTION, but start to look at speed like something RELATED WITH THE SPECIFIC SPEED OF THE RACE.
You must understand that, in middle and long distances, there is an INTERACTION between volume and intensity, and the first effect in increasing SPECIFIC VOLUME is to increase the BASIC SPEED OF THE EVENT (not the max speed !).
For example, if I'm able to run 10x400m in 60" with 60" of recovery, and I finish this training with 15 mml of lactate, when I becoma able to run 13x400 in 60" with 60" of recovery finishing at the same level (15 mml), obviously I have more SPECIFIC ENDURANCE, because I'm able to last longer at the same speed (so, this is a training of ENDURANCE). But this 2 workouts (possible for example to improve from 10 till 13 times in one month), if at the end produce the same level of lactate, are carried on AT THE SAME INTERNAL LOAD.
So, when I'm able to run 13 times instead 10 times in 60", at the same internal load, I can try to run again 10 times only, finishing at the level of 15 mml, AND I DISCOVER THAT I CAN RUN IN 58"5 INSTEAD 60".
This means that, using a training of Endurance, I AM ABLE TO INCREASE MY BASIC SPECIFIC SPEED.
This is the reason because we speak about the FINAL OF AEROBIC ATHLETES. You need to think that EVERY COMPETITION IS A COMPETITION OF SPEED, because at the end ALWAYS the winner is the fastest ON ALL THE DISTANCE. But the winner can only be the fastest AMONG ALL THE ATHLETES HAVING THE SAME LEVEL OF ENDURANCE, so the priority is ALWAYS to look for increasing the SPECIFIC ENDURANCE.
At least, what can you do with all your speed when you are not able to arrive in the last lap with the leaders ?
malmo wrote:
Kiwi Smack wrote:Most of the top 10,000 runners, best 400 times are 48 seconds are faster. There best 200m, 400m or 600 meters times, are almost never report.
You know absolutely NOTHING about about world class distance running. I can think of any top 10k runners who could break 48s for 400, and you could probably count the number under 50s on one hand.
Maybe because you are not a world class runner.
I agree with your numbers, man that guy have speed.
Coach Canova, I'm learning a lot about speed and speed endurance training. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Speed at the end of the race seems like something that the athlete doesn't always have even if he has trained for it (with the exception of Bekele, the King, and maybe a few others).
Farah himself has shown he can finish very fast at 5000 and 10000 but he could not beat Jeilan's speed. What is it about speed that athlete sometimes finds it at the end of the race and sometimes not?
Also, how do you train speed endurance for the marathon? Are Mosop, Kirui and others doing the same kinds of workouts? Adjusted for the specific speed of that event, of course.
Renato Canova wrote:
SPEED is a quality depending from the following factors :
a) Percentage of Fast Fibers (something genetic)
b) Level of muscular strength (fundamental for the length of the strides)
c) Power of the nervous system (fundamental for the frequency of the action)
d) Technique of running (fundamental for the efficiency)
e) Ability in relaxation
At least, we speak about BIOMECHANICAL qualities. In the case of short distances, the main problems is HOW TO INCREASE THE MAX SPEED.
Instead, when we speak about ENDURANCE, we speak about BIOENERGETIC and METABOLIC qualities. In the case of EVERY event of ENDURANCE, the main problem is HOW TO LAST LONGER AT A HIGHER POSSIBLE PERCENTAGE OF YOUR MAX SPEED.
This means that there is a correlation between the SPEED OF THE RACE and the SPEED OF TRAINING. When we speak of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE, we have the problem to chose the system for running more distance at the specific pace of the race.
For every different speed, our muscles produce different level of lactate. When we run at our max speed, we recruit the most part of our FAST FIBERS, and we produce in very short time high quantity of lactate, so we are in the area of LACTIC POWER. This is, for example, the area where we have to work for coaching a specialist of 100m when we want to prepare 200m, and when we want to prepare a specialist of 400m. WE NEED TO INCREASE THE LACTIC POWER, BUT WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN INCREASING THE LACTIC CAPACITY, because the duration of the race doesn't require the ability in producing a lot of lactate, but the ability to produce in short time more lactate possible.
When we want to extend the distance, for example moving to 800m, we need to train our lactic system to produce HIGH QUANTITY OF LACTATE IN SHORT TIME (Lactic Capacity). This is connected with the LACTIC POWER, and there is no any real connection with the Aerobic System.
For giving clear ideas about training, if LACTIC POWER is the result of a race of 400 / 600m (for example, 46" / 1'16"), LACTIC CAPACITY is the ability to run in training 3-4 times the same distance, using an intesity of 90-95% of your Lactic Power, with long recovery (for example, 4x400 in 50" with 5' recovery, or 3x600 in 1'19" with 7'/8' recovery.
In all these cases, we speak about SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE, of course specific for the distance of 800m.
When we look for a longer distance, we need, obviously, to reduce the speed. In this case, the direct intervention of the AEROBIC SYSTEM becomes more and more important, growing with the length of the race.
Reducing the speed, we can't recruit all our FAST FIBERS, but only a percentage of them. Longer is the race, less intervention of fast fibers there is.
In methodology, we don't consider CORRELATED with any specific training speed that is 10% faster of the speed of the race. So, when we speak about SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE we speak of speeds that are between 100% and 110% of the speed of the race.
Some example :
800m in 1'48" :
100% speed = 13"5 every 100m. 10% of 13"5 is 1"35, and 110% of speed is (13"5 - 1"35) 12"15 for 100m.
We can train the SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE using speed between 12"15 and 13" every 100m, of course in different distances : 10x200 in 24"8 is SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE TRAINING, the same 7x300m in 39", or 5x400m in 53", or 3x600m in 1'20".
Every speed FASTER than 110% is SPECIAL SPEED, but doesn't have any specific function. If I go for 3 times 200m in 23", or 6x100m in 11"5, this is part of my mechanical training, BUT DOESN'T HAVE ANY PARTICULAR INFLUENCE ON THE BIOENERGETIC AND METHABOLIC SYSTEM. So, if I have an athlete running fast (for example 46" in 400m), that doesn't have any training of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE (more volume at a slower but specific pace), he's not able running a fast 800m NOT BECAUSE HIS LACK OF SPEED, BUT BECAUSE HIS LACK OF SPECIFIC ENDURANCE.
This kind of percentage works for every distance. So, if we speak of a 10000m runner able to run 26'40" (16" every 100m), we can say that the Specific Speed Endurance is to extend the durantion of a speed of 14"4 every 100m (28"8 in 200, 43"2 in 300, 57"6 in 400, 1'12" in 500, 1'26"4 in 600, 1'55"2 for 800, 2'24" for 1000m). To develop a high volume of km in one session (for example 12/14 km) using these type of speed, mixing the distances, is an example of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE for a specialist, like when we run 7x3000m in 8'30" for a marathon runner able running 2:04:00 this is a workout of SPECIFIC MARATHON SPEED ENDURANCE.
So, stop looking at SPEED like an ABSOLUTE CONCEPTION, but start to look at speed like something RELATED WITH THE SPECIFIC SPEED OF THE RACE.
You must understand that, in middle and long distances, there is an INTERACTION between volume and intensity, and the first effect in increasing SPECIFIC VOLUME is to increase the BASIC SPEED OF THE EVENT (not the max speed !).
For example, if I'm able to run 10x400m in 60" with 60" of recovery, and I finish this training with 15 mml of lactate, when I becoma able to run 13x400 in 60" with 60" of recovery finishing at the same level (15 mml), obviously I have more SPECIFIC ENDURANCE, because I'm able to last longer at the same speed (so, this is a training of ENDURANCE). But this 2 workouts (possible for example to improve from 10 till 13 times in one month), if at the end produce the same level of lactate, are carried on AT THE SAME INTERNAL LOAD.
So, when I'm able to run 13 times instead 10 times in 60", at the same internal load, I can try to run again 10 times only, finishing at the level of 15 mml, AND I DISCOVER THAT I CAN RUN IN 58"5 INSTEAD 60".
This means that, using a training of Endurance, I AM ABLE TO INCREASE MY BASIC SPECIFIC SPEED.
This is the reason because we speak about the FINAL OF AEROBIC ATHLETES. You need to think that EVERY COMPETITION IS A COMPETITION OF SPEED, because at the end ALWAYS the winner is the fastest ON ALL THE DISTANCE. But the winner can only be the fastest AMONG ALL THE ATHLETES HAVING THE SAME LEVEL OF ENDURANCE, so the priority is ALWAYS to look for increasing the SPECIFIC ENDURANCE.
At least, what can you do with all your speed when you are not able to arrive in the last lap with the leaders ?
I'm sorry . . . I'm sure this is useful information, but the way you present it is so convoluted and confusing that I have a hard time figuring out how it relates to Farah being outkicked by Jeilan.
Do you people even run? wrote:
Renato Canova wrote:SPEED is a quality depending from the following factors :
a) Percentage of Fast Fibers (something genetic)
b) Level of muscular strength (fundamental for the length of the strides)
c) Power of the nervous system (fundamental for the frequency of the action)
d) Technique of running (fundamental for the efficiency)
e) Ability in relaxation
At least, we speak about BIOMECHANICAL qualities. In the case of short distances, the main problems is HOW TO INCREASE THE MAX SPEED.
Instead, when we speak about ENDURANCE, we speak about BIOENERGETIC and METABOLIC qualities. In the case of EVERY event of ENDURANCE, the main problem is HOW TO LAST LONGER AT A HIGHER POSSIBLE PERCENTAGE OF YOUR MAX SPEED.
This means that there is a correlation between the SPEED OF THE RACE and the SPEED OF TRAINING. When we speak of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE, we have the problem to chose the system for running more distance at the specific pace of the race.
For every different speed, our muscles produce different level of lactate. When we run at our max speed, we recruit the most part of our FAST FIBERS, and we produce in very short time high quantity of lactate, so we are in the area of LACTIC POWER. This is, for example, the area where we have to work for coaching a specialist of 100m when we want to prepare 200m, and when we want to prepare a specialist of 400m. WE NEED TO INCREASE THE LACTIC POWER, BUT WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN INCREASING THE LACTIC CAPACITY, because the duration of the race doesn't require the ability in producing a lot of lactate, but the ability to produce in short time more lactate possible.
When we want to extend the distance, for example moving to 800m, we need to train our lactic system to produce HIGH QUANTITY OF LACTATE IN SHORT TIME (Lactic Capacity). This is connected with the LACTIC POWER, and there is no any real connection with the Aerobic System.
For giving clear ideas about training, if LACTIC POWER is the result of a race of 400 / 600m (for example, 46" / 1'16"), LACTIC CAPACITY is the ability to run in training 3-4 times the same distance, using an intesity of 90-95% of your Lactic Power, with long recovery (for example, 4x400 in 50" with 5' recovery, or 3x600 in 1'19" with 7'/8' recovery.
In all these cases, we speak about SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE, of course specific for the distance of 800m.
When we look for a longer distance, we need, obviously, to reduce the speed. In this case, the direct intervention of the AEROBIC SYSTEM becomes more and more important, growing with the length of the race.
Reducing the speed, we can't recruit all our FAST FIBERS, but only a percentage of them. Longer is the race, less intervention of fast fibers there is.
In methodology, we don't consider CORRELATED with any specific training speed that is 10% faster of the speed of the race. So, when we speak about SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE we speak of speeds that are between 100% and 110% of the speed of the race.
Some example :
800m in 1'48" :
100% speed = 13"5 every 100m. 10% of 13"5 is 1"35, and 110% of speed is (13"5 - 1"35) 12"15 for 100m.
We can train the SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE using speed between 12"15 and 13" every 100m, of course in different distances : 10x200 in 24"8 is SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE TRAINING, the same 7x300m in 39", or 5x400m in 53", or 3x600m in 1'20".
Every speed FASTER than 110% is SPECIAL SPEED, but doesn't have any specific function. If I go for 3 times 200m in 23", or 6x100m in 11"5, this is part of my mechanical training, BUT DOESN'T HAVE ANY PARTICULAR INFLUENCE ON THE BIOENERGETIC AND METHABOLIC SYSTEM. So, if I have an athlete running fast (for example 46" in 400m), that doesn't have any training of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE (more volume at a slower but specific pace), he's not able running a fast 800m NOT BECAUSE HIS LACK OF SPEED, BUT BECAUSE HIS LACK OF SPECIFIC ENDURANCE.
This kind of percentage works for every distance. So, if we speak of a 10000m runner able to run 26'40" (16" every 100m), we can say that the Specific Speed Endurance is to extend the durantion of a speed of 14"4 every 100m (28"8 in 200, 43"2 in 300, 57"6 in 400, 1'12" in 500, 1'26"4 in 600, 1'55"2 for 800, 2'24" for 1000m). To develop a high volume of km in one session (for example 12/14 km) using these type of speed, mixing the distances, is an example of SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE for a specialist, like when we run 7x3000m in 8'30" for a marathon runner able running 2:04:00 this is a workout of SPECIFIC MARATHON SPEED ENDURANCE.
So, stop looking at SPEED like an ABSOLUTE CONCEPTION, but start to look at speed like something RELATED WITH THE SPECIFIC SPEED OF THE RACE.
You must understand that, in middle and long distances, there is an INTERACTION between volume and intensity, and the first effect in increasing SPECIFIC VOLUME is to increase the BASIC SPEED OF THE EVENT (not the max speed !).
For example, if I'm able to run 10x400m in 60" with 60" of recovery, and I finish this training with 15 mml of lactate, when I becoma able to run 13x400 in 60" with 60" of recovery finishing at the same level (15 mml), obviously I have more SPECIFIC ENDURANCE, because I'm able to last longer at the same speed (so, this is a training of ENDURANCE). But this 2 workouts (possible for example to improve from 10 till 13 times in one month), if at the end produce the same level of lactate, are carried on AT THE SAME INTERNAL LOAD.
So, when I'm able to run 13 times instead 10 times in 60", at the same internal load, I can try to run again 10 times only, finishing at the level of 15 mml, AND I DISCOVER THAT I CAN RUN IN 58"5 INSTEAD 60".
This means that, using a training of Endurance, I AM ABLE TO INCREASE MY BASIC SPECIFIC SPEED.
This is the reason because we speak about the FINAL OF AEROBIC ATHLETES. You need to think that EVERY COMPETITION IS A COMPETITION OF SPEED, because at the end ALWAYS the winner is the fastest ON ALL THE DISTANCE. But the winner can only be the fastest AMONG ALL THE ATHLETES HAVING THE SAME LEVEL OF ENDURANCE, so the priority is ALWAYS to look for increasing the SPECIFIC ENDURANCE.
At least, what can you do with all your speed when you are not able to arrive in the last lap with the leaders ?
I'm sorry . . . I'm sure this is useful information, but the way you present it is so convoluted and confusing that I have a hard time figuring out how it relates to Farah being outkicked by Jeilan.
Dypu- He don't have a clue on what speed or speed endurance.
J.R. wrote:
Jeilan was 5 or 10 meters back with a lap to go.
Bekele has done 52 off a faster pace.
That last lap was as fast as any of the ones I can recall Bekele ever running, although KB has probably done it off of a faster pace. Bekele is short and is usually pulling away from the competition, which makes his last laps look much faster.
Anything under a minute is a fast last lap for a 10K; 52/53 is insane. That is a fast last lap for a world class mile.
mo did that sprint from 450+ out & it was herky-jerky
he lost, but he was the best guy in the race & that overlong finish indicates he really has to be quick over 1500
i can't really comment on the ethiopian, but i'm getting drawn to a current line of fit for mo of :
50.8 / 1'47.2 -> 3'30.6 , 4'46.6 , 7'22.1 , 12'42.6 , 26'35.1
he couda been a 1500 medallist here
his best distance though, looks to be 3k, which unfortunately there is no proper medal for, although he coud also be 4th quickest 5k guy ever behind the 3 legends - but i doubt he'll go to rieti after these games
Aren't a lot of 5 and 10k races closed quicker than 1500's though? Kicking a 52 having already run 3 55's is probably harder than after running 11 laps at a much more aerobic pace. As said before, elite 10k guys are aerobic machines and can run pretty close to all out for their last 300m. Only a handful of them could probably run under 50. Geb and Bekele are the two main choices, other than that I guess most would be 51-54 with someone like Tadese probably 56 or so as that guy is a diesel.
TrackCoach wrote:
[quote]J.R. wrote:
Jeilan was 5 or 10 meters back with a lap to go.
Bekele has done 52 off a faster pace.
That last lap was as fast as any of the ones I can recall Bekele ever running, although KB has probably done it off of a faster pace. Bekele is short and is usually pulling away from the competition, which makes his last laps look much faster.
Anything under a minute is a fast last lap for a 10K; 52/53 is insane. That is a fast last lap for a world class mile.[/quote What will be a 10k workout, to run 52/400 at the end?
150000 wrote:
Aren't a lot of 5 and 10k races closed quicker than 1500's though?
Idk . . . If I remember correctly the 2004 Oly 1500 was closed in 51.x
150000 wrote:
Kicking a 52 having already run 3 55's is probably harder than after running 11 laps at a much more aerobic pace.
No runner has ever been capable of those splits . . . that would be a 3:37 1600.
I would think many top 1500 guys can close in 52 off a typical championship 1500 pace.
ventolin^3 wrote:
mo did that sprint from 450+ out & it was herky-jerky
he lost, but he was the best guy in the race & that overlong finish indicates he really has to be quick over 1500
i can't really comment on the ethiopian, but i'm getting drawn to a current line of fit for mo of :
50.8 / 1'47.2 -> 3'30.6 , 4'46.6 , 7'22.1 , 12'42.6 , 26'35.1
Farah was NOT the best guy in the race. He was second best. Furthermore, you now think he could be faster at 3000 meters than Geb, Bekele, and ElG. This is absurd.
MAPIV wrote:
Farah was NOT the best guy in the race. He was second best. Furthermore, you now think he could be faster at 3000 meters than Geb, Bekele, and ElG. This is absurd.
Do you seriously not understand what he meant by that? And that the whole line of fit thing is a speculative projection, not meant to be the final word on what an athlete is capable of?
150000 wrote:
Aren't a lot of 5 and 10k races closed quicker than 1500's though? Kicking a 52 having already run 3 55's is probably harder than after running 11 laps at a much more aerobic pace. As said before, elite 10k guys are aerobic machines and can run pretty close to all out for their last 300m. Only a handful of them could probably run under 50. Geb and Bekele are the two main choices, other than that I guess most would be 51-54 with someone like Tadese probably 56 or so as that guy is a diesel.
STOP guessing!!
Wheeeeeeeeeeee!!! wrote:
MAPIV wrote:Farah was NOT the best guy in the race. He was second best. Furthermore, you now think he could be faster at 3000 meters than Geb, Bekele, and ElG. This is absurd.
Do you seriously not understand what he meant by that? And that the whole line of fit thing is a speculative projection, not meant to be the final word on what an athlete is capable of?
Yeah, I understood what he meant by that, and he WAS wrong. The speculative projection is utter b.s. Kenenisa Bekele WAS the best guy in the race in the manner of absolute potential and Ibrahim Jeilan was in terms of results. Farah was in no way the best guy in the race.
He probably meant that Farah was the FITTEST guy in the race, and the guy who would have one more times than not (i.e. if you re-ran the race 10 times). I do agree with you, however, that Ventolin is a pretentious twat.
get a cluefarah by far expended most energy in the fieldhe went from towards the back to the front on coupla occasions, took lead briefly, slowed it down, then kicking 450 out with uneven sprintthe ethiopian ran a relatively even race thruoutas for :
you now think he could be faster at 3000 meters than Geb, Bekele, and ElG. This is absurd
you clearly didn't watch their races
- hicham's 7'23 was possibly worst paced race i ever saw - he was shoooing on the pacer at one stage because of his tepidity - he was in 7'20 shape that day
- geb never got faster than a 4'56 pacer in any of his attempts - in fact, he ran a 7'25 of a 5'00+
- kennster only run a couple & one being a 7'26 on a miserable day, with again nothing more than ~ 5'00
go watch them & then come back here & give your reassessment with "perfect pace/weather"
ventolin^3 wrote:
get a clue
farah by far expended most energy in the field
he went from towards the back to the front on coupla occasions, took lead briefly, slowed it down, then kicking 450 out with uneven sprint
OK, so now I understand that your definition of the best runner is the one who "expends the most energy" and ostensibly shows that he is not a smart racer. That is enlightening...
MAPIV wrote:Kenenisa Bekele WAS the best guy in the race in the manner of absolute potential
eh ?
if this was '04/'05 then you have have correct answer with maybe :
51.6 / 1'48.1 -> 3'31.1 , 4'46.5 , 7'20.5 , 12'36.6 , 26'14.5
& you can have one for geb '98 :
51.0 / 1'47.2 -> 3'29.9 , 4'45.2 , 7'19.2 , 12'36.0 , 26'16.9
& you have a 3k figure for them there with "perfect etc, etc"
& you got bonus of their relative merits -
geb woud outkick kennster in any slow race with significant quicker 400 ability
he woud also beat him upto 5k by a fraction
only at 10k woud kennster eke out the win