Centrowitz/Sowinski target 1000m AR

You do recall Sowinski was 2nd at Millrose 1k last year with a negative split 2:18 behind Bosse of France, beating the likes of Symmonds, Rutt, Andrews last year right? Can't concentrate too much on his 1:47.60 split opener last week. 50.4/1:17.8 were a touch aggressive for an opener running solo.

ventolin^3 wrote:

nilotnev wrote:Ngeny has not run 6+m extra, which was told you many times before

yes he did which you have been told many times

Which seems to be beyond your imagination, is that when running on a tangent to the circle, someone runs no extra meters

only if they get into lane 1 quickly

he never got into lane 1 the whole bend

Regardless on which lane he starts

clearly you have no clue about geometry

Please check to see what's a tangent. What do you mean:

only if they get into lane 1 quickly? You can't find a shorter way then on the tangent. And the tangent is fixed. Please tell me any way from A to B which is shorter than on the straight line between A and B. The tangent is a straight line from the starting point to the point where it reaches the circle. You will not find any shorter way then on this line. Did you get it now?

why? don't centro and torrance both have 1:45 800 PRs? sowinski has a better 800 but lacks the 1500 endurance of torrance & centro.torrance's run last year was pretty damn impressive, will seem even more so if these guys can't match it. it actually might be his ideal distance as he has never had the 1:44-1:43 800 breakthrough, or the ability to close the deal in a fast 1500/mile.

wineturtle wrote:

dudeskis wrote:

I have trouble believing that a fit Centro and Sowinski can't run a 1000m faster than Torrence. The real question is if it will be paced.

Agree

While I do not believe 1000m is an ideal distance for either.2;16.x should be with-in reach for both of them in a race with agreeable splits and tactics.

NN is in the outer part of lane one during the running of the bend in the first 200m of his 2:11 1000m. Here is the video. He does not lose 6m in the first 200m. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nvUH3X0Wv2c

ilotnevn wrote:Please check to see what's a tangent. What do you mean:

only if they get into lane 1 quickly? You can't find a shorter way then on the tangent. And the tangent is fixed. Please tell me any way from A to B which is shorter than on the straight line between A and B. The tangent is a straight line from the starting point to the point where it reaches the circle. You will not find any shorter way then on this line. Did you get it now?

drivelling on about tangents doesn't show any great insight

it's a waterfall start, apparently the involute of a circle solvable by a pair of parametric equations

you solve those & give "cut in" point to inner lane 1, then you have something to offer

careful examination & tangent-drawing on blown up diagram of the standard iaaf track marking plan indicates the "cut in" point to inner lane 1 for anyone other than in inner lane -1 from the start is exactly the distance between the 2 waterfall starts for split 1k fields when huge number of guys in the race

that distance is exactly the distance of the 5th lane staggered start of a 200m or

15.017m

noah had to be in inner lane 1 by that far into the race in order to run 1000m precisely

OK, now I got a new insight: when running on the tangent to the circle (or - to be more precisly - tangent to some 30cm outside the circle) Noah Ngeny could have spared some distance and could have run less than 1000m - correct? Good to have a genious like vent here to clarify things.

But to be honest, it's little bit surprising - even when knowing the very low level of your math skills - that you don't understand the concept of a straight line being shortest connection between two points.

Maybe Kenenisa Bekele in fact has run well under 5000m in his 12:37.35? And how many meters Komen has just run in 7:20.67? And what about 26:17.53, 3:43.13 or 4:44.79? Maybe you should check this again and the times will not be any more that impressive.

Ventolin, your 6 meter estimate was based on your false assumption that NN never got into lane one in the first 200m. You mention several times that NN was in lane 2 and he ran wide for over 100m. Go back and read your posts. They're totally incorrect. The video clearly shows NN running in lane one for most of that first bend. After seeing the video and realizing you're wrong, you change your stance, saying he needs to be on the inside of lane one.

This is why no one agrees with anything you say. You think you know everything when you clearly don't.

I don't think they will get the record. Centro takes it in 2:17-18. I think for mid-distance events BU is much faster than Reggie.

utter nonsense

now you show you have no clue about maths whatsoever

the tangent wouda required noah to reach inner lane 1 by 15m

if he cut in to lane 1 earlier, almost immediately, he wouda probably run about 2m further for 17m

it appears you have no clue about isosceles triangles & use of sine rule

certainly not that, but not as you have shown, inept at geometry

still proferring your 3rd grade maths i see

what part of 15m to inner lane is the tangent & shortest possible route ???

it was highly impressive how you showed the board that 15m was the cut-in distance

errr...

i suggest you go watch the full races

if they did any wide running on bends, they are perfectly entitled to quicker times based on extra distance run

no

the 6m+ was 1st figure i mentioned here & important one

i had not checked the vid for some months & didn't recall if he dipped into lane 1

the extra distance if not going inside lane 2 but at most on lane 2 line at end was ~ 6.75m

for the vid, where he looks to just dip into lane 1 at 12+ s in is ~ 6.25 - 6.5m

the estimate is not wrong, my recollection of vid is

that is not wrong

i have

my vid description off long time ago viewing was incorrect, but the relevant number of 6+m extra was not

not the main fact required - extra distance

no

you can't see his feet relative to lane line

only at 12+s in can you see his foot just inside line

no

the difference between outside lane 2 & inside lane 2 is a small amount, ~ 0.5m compared to the overall number of 6+m

learn to read

the 6+m extra is correct even with noah just inside lane 1 by 12+s

ventolin^ 3 wrote:

lotnevni wrote:OK, now I got a new insight: when running on the tangent to the circle (or - to be more precisly - tangent to some 30cm outside the circle) Noah Ngeny could have spared some distance and could have run less than 1000m - correct?

utter nonsense

now you show you have no clue about maths whatsoever

the tangent wouda required noah to reach inner lane 1 by 15m

if he cut in to lane 1 earlier, almost immediately, he wouda probably run about 2m further for 17m

When running on the tangent to the line 30cm outside the circle, he should reach this line after around 30m+ into the race. For sure this depends on his starting position which I don't know exactly, but probably was around lane 5. Maybe 1 meter short of 30m, but more likely 32m inside the race. What is absolutely clear, is that he would not reach that line after 15m, that's 100%. I know you would not accept this fact, even if it was proved by Euler, Gauss, Riemann and Perelman combined.

It's definitely an interesting mathematical question, to find the exact point where he reaches that inner line dependant from the starting position. Maybe I try to do it. But from a grafic of an standard track it's clear to see it's around 30m.

He did go out faster than he needed to. In fact, his final 800m was 1:47:xx (52/55), whereas his first 800m was 1:44.xx. The first 400m was 50 or possibly just under (pacer was 49.6x) and he was just behind. But as for extra distance, there was just not that much. He was on the outside of lane 1 in the video for one turn. In lane 2 for an entire lap, you run 6.8m extra, or 3.4m for one turn. He was inside of that, probably losing just under 3m. I have no idea what the calculation to the bend would be on the waterfall start because it's just not visible on the video I saw. The conclusion: he could have run as much as a second faster with a slower start but the extra distance was insignificant compared to other races, with no bumping and a clear path plus a pacer to draft off the whole way.

yea but you've gotta start fast at those levels. all those guys were coming to the line lit. epo needs to be blown through, improves efficacy

dudeskis wrote:

I have trouble believing that a fit Centro and Sowinski can't run a 1000m faster than Torrence. The real question is if it will be paced.

Torrence has run 1:45.14 with few attempts and 3:33.23

Sowinksi's has run 1:44.58 as his specialty has nothing to show in the 1500.

Cebtro is only two seconds faster than Torrence at the 1500 with a 1:45.86 800 PR, (.7s slower)

So it makes sense that Torrence would be better at the 1000 than both of them.

That being said, I think Centro can get the record, but I think Torrence could also run faster.

Yes, it is going down, although I can only see Centro breaking it. The 2:16 AR is somewhat soft compared to the 2:11 WR; the AR should be around 2:14. Centro is not the prefect candidate either having only average elite 800m credentials, but then again that can be said for David Torrence the current record holder as well. The only problem for Centro is, you can't race your way to a record, you have run for the record, which not Centro's MO. To have a chance Cento will have to get after it from the gun and hit the 800m at least 1:49 mid to have a shot. Sowinski and Loxsom in my opinion are barely 800m runners; their best distance is probably the 600m.

letsbang wrote:

I don't think they will get the record. Centro takes it in 2:17-18. I think for mid-distance events BU is much faster than Reggie.

BUs banks are a good deal steeper, which is probably why.

1000m

World Indoor Record: 2:14.96

American Indoor Record: 2:16.76

World Outdoor Record: 2:11.96

American Outdoor Record: 2:13.9

DT fan wrote:

why? don't centro and torrance both have 1:45 800 PRs? sowinski has a better 800 but lacks the 1500 endurance of torrance & centro.

torrance's run last year was pretty damn impressive, will seem even more so if these guys can't match it. it actually might be his ideal distance as he has never had the 1:44-1:43 800 breakthrough, or the ability to close the deal in a fast 1500/mile.

wineturtle wrote:

Agree

While I do not believe 1000m is an ideal distance for either.2;16.x should be with-in reach for both of them in a race with agreeable splits and tactics. no matter if a designated pacer, another athlete in the race or they themselves make the pace and tactics useful

Since Torrence will not be in this race I take the question to be (see bold above) : can either Centrowitz or Erik break his record in this race?

that is nonsense

i've have extrapolated the tangents from a blown-up diagram of the iaaf track plan & all the tangents from outside lane 1 converge 15m into the race for 1st waterfall start

it is not coincindence that the difference in distance between the 2 waterfall starts according to the exact iaaf markings is

15 m

no

this shows you have no grasp of maths

any tangent of the waterfall start from outter lane 1 to outtermost lane meets inner lane 1 at 15m

again no grasp of maths

do the diagramatic work

it is 15m

again you fail to do any maths or work

go look at previous 2 wrs

in both, coe reaches lane 1 in 2 or 3 secs

in his 2'13, he is in outter lane like noah, but still gets into lane 1 in something like 2 or 3 sec

quoting those names helps you in no way

they aren't doing the calculations/graphical work

impress me

work out the "cut in" distance ???

then offer it

go on

no

try again

it's 15m