Ritz is actually healthy!
Ritz is actually healthy!
Please humor me - how much faster given the limited information that was given?
ttyrdyjud wrote:
54.2 at the END of a workout means that he is much faster than 54.2
2069 HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS ran under 26 seconds for 200m last season
great stuff ritz
I remember reading somewhere that Billy Mills PR'ed in the 200 shortly before his victory in Tokyo. But he ran 23-something, if memory serves. Extraordinary that Ritz has so little leg speed. I'll join the chorus and say I'm mildy shocked, quite honestly.
starmiler wrote:
Extraordinary that Ritz has so little leg speed.
Why are you surprised by a slow 400m attempt at the end of a workout?
I didn't say I was surprised by that, just surprised that Ritz isn't very fast.
starmiler wrote:
I remember reading somewhere that Billy Mills PR'ed in the 200 shortly before his victory in Tokyo. But he ran 23-something, if memory serves. Extraordinary that Ritz has so little leg speed. I'll join the chorus and say I'm mildy shocked, quite honestly.
You're right - and I think it was even 23-low. I think we saw evidence of that at the end of the 10,000.
I refuse to believe that if entered in an open 200/400, Ritz could not go sub-24/sub-50 right now.
There is a big difference between running a 54 at the end of a workout and sprinting a 54. Obviously the bits we know by them selves don't tell us very much, but it could be a positive sign for Ritz. As for medals... hehe.
starmiler wrote:
I didn't say I was surprised by that, just surprised that Ritz isn't very fast.
First of all... an open 400 means nothing. Exploding from the blocks or a standing start is a poor determination of speed.
With a 10 meter "flying" start, would could Ritz run? This would be more indicative of his "speed" versus his explosiveness.
I'm quite certain that with a flying start, fresh, Ritz could run 24 high, 52 low.
I doubt he could run that much faster, though.
Ritz won't win in a kick. He might get top 5 based on strength, though.
I'm excited by his fitness and more surprised that he feels he would need a perfect condition/perfect race to run sub 27:00. I would think he would chalk sub 27:00 up to mere formality.
That was more concerning than his 54 at the end of a workout and 26 during a workout.
Did anyone notice it said he ran 13:51 in a tune up race? Shouldn't it be 13:15?
You always need to remember that first we look at their race history and performance in championship races, as well as how they do in different types of races, slow kickers' races and fast races, long drives to the finish, etc., and then we look at how their training and health now compare to previous times. In his best year, 2009, Ritz was introduced by Alberto to 400s in 56, which he said he'd never done before in workouts, and together with the other training he ran 27:22 6th at World's/12:56 3rd behind Bekele/60:00 World Bronze.
He is now running some 400s in 54 and a 200 in 26.0. Neither of those times is what you want to be able to close at World Champs or the Olympics, but relative to Ritz this suggests that he is ready to run a very fast second 5k, and will probably throw down pr's of 12:53/26:54 after the Olympics. It is a great sign. He is a distance runner, not a sprinter, and he would obviously make all the sprinters look pretty damn foolish after 1k and almost all of the middle distance runners look foolish at 5k and up. In fact, with the added speed, you can expect him to destroy his 3k converted from 2M time if he runs it this year.
wrote:
Coach D wrote:That's why he's a distance runner. They're people too slow to do anything else. If he could do 48, he could be mid distance. The times listed are more like high school level. And that's what long distance runners are. They're not athletes. They're the absence of athletes. My oldest stepson, no scholarship opportunities, a walk-on in college, ran a 54 in high school.
Too boring to watch people that slow.
Exactly. If you can't run 100 m in under 10 seconds, why run at all? I think there should only be one running event: the 10 meter dash. Any distance higher than that only caters for the slow, the nonathletes.
This! Then the website could be renamed LetsRunForaFewSeconds.
starmiler wrote:
I remember reading somewhere that Billy Mills PR'ed in the 200 shortly before his victory in Tokyo. But he ran 23-something, if memory serves. Extraordinary that Ritz has so little leg speed. I'll join the chorus and say I'm mildy shocked, quite honestly.
distance guy wrote:
You're right - and I think it was even 23-low. I think we saw evidence of that at the end of the 10,000.
23, 25, what's the difference???
In fact it was 24.3 and the time was posted in T&FN.
What is the point of this thread? To make fun of a marathoner and one of our greatest distance runners easing his way back to speedwork for the first time in years? Lets see how many marathoners can run 26 for 200m...
GO RITZ!
gonchar wrote:
What is the point of this thread? To make fun of a marathoner and one of our greatest distance runners easing his way back to speedwork for the first time in years? Lets see how many marathoners can run 26 for 200m...
GO RITZ!
Surely every elite marathoner can run a 26 second 200m.
Also, you don't run your actual best 400/200 times at the end of a workout. How some of you don't get this, I don't understand.
Mills ran 23+, running start before Tokyo.
On a modern track he was 27:30 shape for sure.
NO, not ever 2:10 marathoner, on marathon training mode, can run 26 for 200m.
Some can, most cannot.
KB can close in 25, so I don't think DR will win Gold.
dsrunner has the day off wrote:
Mills ran 23+, running start before Tokyo.
On a modern track he was 27:30 shape for sure.
running start doesn't count