Given that there would be a bit of slowdown when going from 8 km to 10 km, Neely's time for 10 appears to be about 32:03, still very good (not my table's, but Daniel's). Sure hope she has the marathon talents of her Dad!
Given that there would be a bit of slowdown when going from 8 km to 10 km, Neely's time for 10 appears to be about 32:03, still very good (not my table's, but Daniel's). Sure hope she has the marathon talents of her Dad!
She is running a 10,000 in Australia the first week of December. So we will find out soon enough what she is capable of. Is the A standard for worlds still 31:45? That seems a bit of a stretch but if she gains fitness over the next few weeks anything is possible based on her few races this fall.
I'm pretty sure Steve was MUCH faster in his mid 40s. I remember him running sub 24:00 for 8k maybe 5 years ago or so.
spencermatic wrote:
I'm pretty sure Steve was MUCH faster in his mid 40s. I remember him running sub 24:00 for 8k maybe 5 years ago or so.
His sub-24:00 was more than five years ago. And for men especially, the years between 45 and 50 typically produce a sharp decline in running performance particularly in the mile to 10K range. Try it, you won't like it!
Shooooooot... Didn't realize she was right behind me...
I'll kill myself if I don't beat her time in my 8k this weekend.
RuKiddingMe!!! wrote:
if she runs 6 minutes for the last 1.2 for the 10k distance that's around 31:22....that's pretty fast.
This post is subtly ridiculous. Nice work.
The course is a ridiculous downhill...Not legit.
short course. has to be.
reality 1 wrote:
short course. has to be.
It might be a little short but besides that it is one of the easiest courses i have ever ran. You run on a basically flat slight uphill for 2 milesis straight then turn left and run back down another straight street the end is below the start too. Look at the mens times their crazy fast.
Nice!
I hope to do something like this with my daughters and/or sons, although my speed will likely not be Steve's unless somebody finds a breakthrough in treating spina bifida occulta - a condition I have that puts a cap on my speed and economy. My life time PRs are 2:23:57 in St. George and 2:30:32 on a loop sea-level course (St. Jude). I am 39, ran 2:34 twice this year on aided, but not St. George quality aided courses at altitude (Deseret News and Top of Utah). I have seven children with 8th on the way. Fortunately my children do not seem to have my condition and run with a normal form. My oldest is 13, he has already broken 5:00 in the mile. I will race him on Thanksgiving in a 4 miler, this will be his first realistic chance to beat his dad in long race.
I know how it feels to have fast children. Just a few weeks ago I was pacing my son in a 1.5 mile time trial. I took him through the mile in 5:13 and he says - Daddy, don't speed up. I told my wife about it, and she says - isn't it cute that you have a kid that can run 5:13 that still calls you Daddy? BTW, he ended up with 7:52 for 1.5. It will not be long before I will be pleading with him not to speed up when he is pacing me.
What a wonderful experience it must have been for Steve and Neely to race each other as a family like that both achieving excellent times. Steve and Neely have set a great example for us. We need more of that - doing things together in families and trying to improve the talents that the Lord has given us.
Yeah the guys times were fast but considering who was running it isn't all that crazy. Ryan Hill is the AR for the indoor 3k at 7:43 and Jake Reilly is a 28:08 runner. Yes the course is fast and a net downhill only for the last 600 meters where they lose 132 ft of elevation which they gain about 10-15 seconds on. Look at the map posted on the site it gives elevation markers. Add about 10-15 seconds to their times and you get 25:30's for Neely and 22:50's for the guys. They are still amazing times for these young runners but not out of this world.
You are confusing Magill's time that was run on the track at age 49. Magill does not currently hold the AR for 5k road 50 plus. Nolan Shaheed does.
Is Magill laying low after the SoCal EPO/HGH shake up? Did he train with Hesch?
wfrd wrote:
You are confusing Magill's time that was run on the track at age 49. Magill does not currently hold the AR for 5k road 50 plus. Nolan Shaheed does.
Sorry. I did specify that I was comparing Neely's time to the AR on the track, meant to do the same for Steve.
Magill ran 14:45 on the track at 49. 15:11 on the track at 50.
Comparing Steve's run to Shaheed's would be comparing apples to oranges because the course are so different.
So Neely and Steve both ran the same 8K course, and I compared it to the respective 5K track ARs to avoid any debate over differences in courses.
Hope that clears it up for you.
Then you wouldn't want to compare his 5000 meter track time to a road 8k. Apples to oranges there. Track is faster than a legitimate non-aided road time.
I don't know if they trained together. He did run a decent 1/2 recently at a rock and roll series.
You pr%ck. Magill has been training for longer distances and just ran a 1:10 low HM in San Diego. That's probably about 20 minutes faster that you can run.
I am comparing Steve Spence to Neely Spence.
I am using their times in relation to the American records on the track for the 5k as a basis for that comparison.
Since Steve Spence and Neely Spence each ran an 8k on the same course, and the women's American record 5k and the American 50+ 5k were each ran on 400m ovals, the comparison is about a legit as I can possibly imagine.
You are suggesting that I compare Steve's time to a road 5k, which would only work if the women's AR for a road 5k was run on the same course. If that is the case, I will admit I was ignorant to that fact.
I don't know if there is a better way to explain it to you. Some courses are harder, hillier, turnier, even longer than others. Tracks, however, are standard to a degree that we can use them as consistent venues for comparison.