cool. thanks.
cool. thanks.
The Scot wrote:
Hawkins wins in 60.21 OMG!
This lad reminds me of Ritz - no great speed, tough as nails, tendency to work his way back to groups when he looks dropped. With the support GB gives their athletes, he could be a serious 2:07 or below contender.
come all sufferers wrote:
The Scot wrote:Hawkins wins in 60.21 OMG!
This lad reminds me of Ritz - no great speed, tough as nails, tendency to work his way back to groups when he looks dropped. With the support GB gives their athletes, he could be a serious 2:07 or below contender.
What amazes me is that he is almost a full half minute faster than Steve Jones who I have the utmost respect for.
Minor places
4 Chris Thompson 61.58
5 Tewolde Mengisteab 64.23
6 Andrew Lemoncello 65.49
Bump this thread to the front Rojos.... Guy did something truly SPECIAL
Forgot to mention he has also broken Haile's course record which was 61.09.
wow, this was a pretty awesome run by this young guy - congrats!
Destroyed*
Brief write up from Scottish Athletics
http://www.scottishathletics.org.uk/local-hero-hawkins-ends-33-year-wait/
Did this today and lots of guys reporting .1 short as the course was different to last year. Can anyone else confirm?
The course was altered this year to avoid going round Festival Park. They entered Pollok Park further South to make up the distance.
However, everyone's STRAVA accounts of the race give distances ranging from 20.7-21.0km (most are 20.9) Compare this to last year when the distances ranged from 20.0-21.2km (most were 20.1km)
Now I realize GPS is pretty inaccurate, particularly over the half marathon distance however they have definitely changed the course this year and I'd question if they had a chance to measure the course properly.
Not to take away from Hawkins incredible run, I just thought I'd point out the course has been altered.
Both the Scottish 10 (Strathclyde) and the Scottish Masters HM (Kirkintilloch) are officially certified full distance but show up 'digitally short'. In the former case they remeasured it due to protests and reconfirmed it was correct.
If I was a race organiser I would just add a bit on, I'd rather be slightly long. In this day and age we all want Strava pbs!
The Scot wrote:
If I was a race organiser I would just add a bit on, I'd rather be slightly long. In this day and age we all want Strava pbs!
Well yes, that's how it works, organisers add in a "short course prevention factor" (normally 0.1%? I think) beyond the distance they have measured for the course to ensure the full race distance is being covered.
Today my manual mile laps were showing up as significantly faster than my garmin pace, last few miles especially. On the official splits my last 5k was 9 seconds a mile faster, and it certainly did not feel that way. Heard from 4 other finishers they had it down as short.
As with other poster, not trying to take away from Hawkins amazing run but would be a shame for his record time to be struck off later.
Wonder how much time .1 would be, he would have still broke 61 I think.
abraham chebii wrote:
The Scot wrote:If I was a race organiser I would just add a bit on, I'd rather be slightly long. In this day and age we all want Strava pbs!
Well yes, that's how it works, organisers add in a "short course prevention factor" (normally 0.1%? I think) beyond the distance they have measured for the course to ensure the full race distance is being covered.
Yes but I was more thinking of a bit more on top on subsequent years if say almost everyone comes up short GPS wise. Even if the measuring technique they use is superior as I'm sure it is, this is the digital age and I want to do races where I can upload them in the confidence it will show the full distance. Next weekend the HM I have planned registers as 12.9 miles on Strava.
Shrotcourse wrote:
Today my manual mile laps were showing up as significantly faster than my garmin pace, last few miles especially. On the official splits my last 5k was 9 seconds a mile faster, and it certainly did not feel that way. Heard from 4 other finishers they had it down as short.
As with other poster, not trying to take away from Hawkins amazing run but would be a shame for his record time to be struck off later.
Hawkins 10k split is 29:17 - this would mean he ran the last 11.0975km at 28:02 pace - very fast, but outside 59 min HM pace. Plausible for a top 10 finisher in the Olympic marathon.
Track speed is overrated, he only has PR's of 8:07, 14:03 and 28:49 on the track
His official 15k split was 00:43:31. So If you assume even pacing over 13.1 miles that would give a finish time of 1:01:09.
Apparently, Helah Kiprop was also there and came second. Wasn't Tirunesh Dibaba supposed to run it? https://twitter.com/tirudibaba/status/779644329795129344
course_was_altered wrote:
His official 15k split was 00:43:31. So If you assume even pacing over 13.1 miles that would give a finish time of 1:01:09.
He definitely ran faster in the second half to break Kipsiro, however it's looking from GPS tracks coming in that a section of the measured course between 12 and 13 miles was missed, so there will be no Scottish record for Hawkins. More like a 61 min run - still a good effort but not exactly knocking on the door of sub 60.