past times wrote:
woulda coulda shoulda wrote:
Times like 13:15, 27:40, and 2:09 don't indicate sub-60 potential.
Maybe you should pull up some times from the past..... Or maybe you think the Robertsons shouldn't be running 60 or better either.
Too bad they did run sub 60. That's not an opinion, it's a result. Their endurance is far better than the athletes mentioned. Sorry that bothers you.
Don't think so.
The total number of American runners in history under 60 minutes: 1.
YMMV wrote:
The total number of American runners in history under 60 minutes: 1.
You still can't believe the size of that handful, eh?
I'm sure every distance runner worth their salt really wants the half to be their strongest event.
Back in the day guys would agonize over winning medals or running a sweet half. Actually, no they wouldn't.
YMMV wrote:
a bunch of nonsense wrote:
.
As noted " essentially". Apart from their half times, all of their other times are average at best.
The half was not a very popular distance years ago but certainly all of those 70s and 80s guys running the 5 and 10 faster than the Robertsons were capable of a 60 half.
60:00 = 27:27 and 2:08:18.
Not a "whole bunch" of white guys in the '70s and '80s running these times. A handful a best, and that is with lax drug testing and wide-open blood doping as an option.
The last sentence is a nonsensical point. The Robertsons spent most of their running career hiding on a CONTINENT that has extremely lax drug testing. I know the people around here have a hard time believing that white runners dope, but if there are ANY white runners routinely drugging themselves up, it's them.
Also Schildauer and Kunze were faster than the Robertsons. Dopers? Almost certainly but we're just talking performances.
Giant hands wrote:
Also Schildauer and Kunze were faster than the Robertsons. Dopers? Almost certainly but we're just talking performances.
Could they run a half-marathon under an hour? No.
woulda coulda shoulda wrote:
Giant hands wrote:
Also Schildauer and Kunze were faster than the Robertsons. Dopers? Almost certainly but we're just talking performances.
Could they run a half-marathon under an hour? No.
The problem with comparing a current half marathon time with performances from upwards of thirty years ago is that the half marathon is that the half marathon is raced seriously and frequently today and was raced infrequently if at all and not taken seriously then. You simply cannot say that some of the guys from that era with track times equal to or better than the Robertsons could not have run a half marathon faster than the Robertsons did, just that they didn't.
woulda coulda shoulda wrote:
Giant hands wrote:
Also Schildauer and Kunze were faster than the Robertsons. Dopers? Almost certainly but we're just talking performances.
Could they run a half-marathon under an hour? No.
Not now since they are around 60 but back in the day if the half was contested more frequently, sure.
Maybe you should ponder why the Robertsons can't seem to master the 5 and 10 with their superior endurance AND speed.
The twins are faster over 5K than Pre, Dixon, Walker, Coghlan, Coe, Ovett, one second off of Quax. Faster over 10000 than all of them and also Dick Tayler. The only guy decisively faster was Moorcroft, and for only a brief time over 5000. The 5000 is the lower end of their pwerformance curve but they leave at least the '70s guys behind.
And of course they are much faster the longer they go. At least one of them should be successful in the marathon, around 2:06-7, i.e. faster than anyone in the '80s.
What they have done is remarkable when you consider the drought in NZ before them.
They are faster at the half because there are more to race and they are taken more seriously now.
The twins would likely have faster 10k PRs if there were 10ks to run more often and the event was taken more seriously these days compared to the past.
YMMV wrote:
The twins are faster over 5K than Pre, Dixon, Walker, Coghlan, Coe, Ovett, one second off of Quax. Faster over 10000 than all of them and also Dick Tayler. The only guy decisively faster was Moorcroft, and for only a brief time over 5000. The 5000 is the lower end of their pwerformance curve but they leave at least the '70s guys behind.
And of course they are much faster the longer they go. At least one of them should be successful in the marathon, around 2:06-7, i.e. faster than anyone in the '80s.
What they have done is remarkable when you consider the drought in NZ before them.
So now you're scrambling to compare them to a few select guys who were actual World and Olympic medallists, many over shorter distances?
Yeah, Walker, Coghlan, Coe and Ovett are all broken up about their lousy 10ks.
The Robertsons don't leave any of those 70s guys behind over 5k. Compare their championship races with those guys from the past. You can't find them with a search warrant.
Blincoe is the NZ record holder.
Faster than ANYONE in the 80s?
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
They are faster at the half because there are more to race and they are taken more seriously now.
The twins would likely have faster 10k PRs if there were 10ks to run more often and the event was taken more seriously these days compared to the past.
Zane ran 59:47 on his first try. Didn't need frequent races, he only needed one. They did run the one-hour run on the track and nobody broke 21k.
You'd almost swear Zane is on here blowing his own horn.
coulda woulda shoulda wrote:
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
They are faster at the half because there are more to race and they are taken more seriously now.
The twins would likely have faster 10k PRs if there were 10ks to run more often and the event was taken more seriously these days compared to the past.
Zane ran 59:47 on his first try. Didn't need frequent races, he only needed one. They did run the one-hour run on the track and nobody broke 21k.
Yes. He ran great. But he ran it seriously. Hardly anyone in the 70s did that for the distance . That one try may be more than a lot of guys from the 70s ever ran at the distance.
coulda woulda shoulda wrote:
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
They are faster at the half because there are more to race and they are taken more seriously now.
The twins would likely have faster 10k PRs if there were 10ks to run more often and the event was taken more seriously these days compared to the past.
Zane ran 59:47 on his first try. Didn't need frequent races, he only needed one. They did run the one-hour run on the track and nobody broke 21k.
Um, ever hear of Arturo Barrios?
Stumbling through the Barrio wrote:
coulda woulda shoulda wrote:
Zane ran 59:47 on his first try. Didn't need frequent races, he only needed one. They did run the one-hour run on the track and nobody broke 21k.
Um, ever hear of Arturo Barrios?
What did he run in the 70s?
Stumbling through the Barrio wrote:
coulda woulda shoulda wrote:
Zane ran 59:47 on his first try. Didn't need frequent races, he only needed one. They did run the one-hour run on the track and nobody broke 21k.
Um, ever hear of Arturo Barrios?
Arturo Barrios was born, raised, and trained at altitude.
Why did this become a thread comparing the Robertsons to ‘70s and ‘80s guys? Who cares?
They’re moderately competitive with the guys they actually run against, and it’s probably a good bet that the training environment and/or altitude have helped get them there.
I do think that it’s pretty lame to trumpet a half marathon time as evidence of someone’s supposed greatness. The half is a good race, but a really marginal event.
Renato Canova wrote:
Not exactly. If they didn't decide to move Kenya and Ethiopia, never could achieve the results they were able to achieve till now.
Two examples : during the World Cross Country Championships (Juniors) 2007, Jake finished in position 46, 2'39" after the winner Asbel Kiprop.
And, if we look at WCCCh 2011 (won by Imane Merga in 33'50"), Jake was number 59 in 36'41" (2'51" slower), and Zane number 91 in 38'08" (4'18" slower). After living and training in high altitude with continuity, their PB in 10000m became very much closer to the PB of the best in the World, and in HM both of them ran around 1 hour (59'47" Zane, 60'01" Jake).
Without continuity in altitude, there is no way athletes of sea level can run fast as Kenyans and Ethiopians.
Galen Rupp trains in Portland which is basically sea level (Elevation 50 feet) and he has run 26:44 for 10000 and while he has not run a fast marathon yet, he has placed high or won on all 4 occasions and has beaten many with much faster times, maybe he is an exception to the rule, but lots of Women have shown they can run fast marathons including the World Record holder Paula Radcliffe (In a mixed race, paced by a man Simon Lopuyet, she ran 2:15).