Athing Mu now running the mile at Millrose - let the predictions begin

So you are biased. At least you are open about it.

I see you don't handle disagreement well.

Curious_Cat wrote:

Jemma got it done wrote:

Recall that Jemma Reekie ran 4:17 in the 2020 Wanamaker. In contention for the win until the final lap when Purrier & Koko pulled away. Did she enter that race on a lark, for over-distance training, or because she wasn't 800m sharp? As far as I can tell, there was no need for her to peak until the summer either. Reekie was training with Laura Muir at the time, but does anyone know how her build up for that race compares to Mu's workouts/workload the past 6-8 weeks? Entering a high profile mile if her training indicates she can't go sub-4:30 doesn't seem likely.

But Reekie is a 800/1500 runner v.s Mu who is capable of a sub-49 400m, world of difference here.

Exactly. Reekie was my favorite to win two years ago after running so strong in the 800m as she was already a 4:02 1500m runner in 2019. It's a totally different situation/type of runner. And that she didn't win shows that people are often misunderstanding the distances. [This race nevertheless remains Reekie's best 1500/mile performance in/outdoors by some margin!]

In a fast 1500/mile race the better 800m runner does not have a better chance against the milers with slower 800m marks. For 1500m runners only capable of 2:01 but in good mile shape the ~2:08 first 800m will feel as "smooth and controlled" as for the 1:55 runner. Otherwise the faster runner in the shorter distance would *always* keep their advantage in longer races. They don't. Otherwise Ingebrigsten would have no chance to usually beat 1:42-43 runners in the 1500m.

This is a similar way of thinking that leads to the absurd ideas of Bolt crushing the 400m WR or Van Niekerk running 1:39 800m or Rudisha 3:24 1500m because they can "jog the first half" and only have to keep going for another x m...

Anyway, I think Mu can run sub 4:30, otherwise she would not enter that race. If she runs 4:25 or faster, she will already be close to the best 400-1500/mile combination of any woman ever (Olizarenko 50.96 and 3:59.48, next is Mutola I think (I got this wrong in another thread).

Good analysis of the difference between the event specialists. I would expect Mu could run 4.30 or better but as others here have also opined, 4.25 may be too much of an ask for a 400/800 type runner.

It's not even true that in a moderate 1500/mile race with a fast finish the best 800m runner has the best chances. Otherwise (disregarding her unfair advantages) Semenya should have won the 2017 London final not finished 3rd. And so on. The best chances has the one who can finish fast AFTER a punishing tempo in the first half or first n laps of the race.

Mu is obviously (from the anatomy alone) a freakish talent and there might be surprises in the future (if not already on saturday) but tbh we have almost no public data (as opposed to some training insiders) except the modest 4:38 with (in 400m) 71 sec laps with a final 64 lap which doesn't tell us much because *of course* this must feel/look slow except for the last 200m for a 1:55 runner. But except for that last 200m it is roughly 5k pace for Purrier and Hull and slower than 5k pace for Koko, it would not have felt fast for any of them either, even if they are 5 or more secs slower in the 800m.

I'm afraid such experiments could end up in disaster. Full field on a small indoor track and Mus super long legs may not work so well together. Getting tripped up and having to cut the season short would be upsetting.

I'm still mad at Van Niekerk for playing in that rugby game.

Maybe Athing Mu took some inspiration from Sifan Hassan? It didn't seem possibe to be world class in the 1500m and the half marathon simulaneously until Sifan Hassan proved it is. It still seems impossible that this also works with the 400m/1500m, and should it be a long-term goal of Athing Mu to prove that it does, then she must start somewhere.

1/2 of the men in the mile are taller.

But there are many boys with 49-1;55-4:19. Why would Mu be different?

Maybe Mu is a distance runner who has never trained.

everyone's dad wrote:

But there are many boys with 49-1;55-4:19. Why would Mu be different?

Because she's not a boy numbskull

moo moo wrote:

1/2 of the men in the mile are taller.

Except she's not competing against the men half wit

Lollys Master wrote:

I'm afraid such experiments could end up in disaster. Full field on a small indoor track and Mus super long legs may not work so well together. Getting tripped up and having to cut the season short would be upsetting.

I'm still mad at Van Niekerk for playing in that rugby game.

It comes with the territory. She'll just have to be a smart racer

everyone's dad wrote:

But there are many boys with 49-1;55-4:19. Why would Mu be different?

Because no woman (escept Semenya who is bio-male) has come close. The closest is ca. 51 3:59, see above.

And if you you adopt the times to male world class times (like sub 45 + sub 3:33 or so nowadays) , it's the same. It's close to physiologically impossible because of the energy systems used in the respective events. A 49 sec 400 is MUCH better for a woman than for a 16 yo male. That's also why the comparison with a broad range of mostly aerobic events 1500-HM is misleading.

If Mu does it eventually, she is not a generational talent but a millenial talent. She might do it but it would take a few years and maybe she would lose a bit of her 400m speed.

So women who are slower in the 400 are faster in the mile? You made no point by merely being insulting. Fast boys are fast at multiple distances just like fast women are fast at multiple distances. These are basic facts that every human except you seems aware of.

1/2 of the men's field is taller. She isn't competing against them. The point was that if people think her long legs will trip her up, that means 1/2 of the men's field should also get tripped up from being taller. They have even more risk because there are people around them taking longer strides also than thebwomen's field. I will be eagerly awaiting to b watch this catastrophe.

moo moo wrote:

1/2 of the men's field is taller. She isn't competing against them. The point was that if people think her long legs will trip her up, that means 1/2 of the men's field should also get tripped up from being taller. They have even more risk because there are people around them taking longer strides also than thebwomen's field. I will be eagerly awaiting to b watch this catastrophe.

Half the men being taller is an immaterial matter. The relevant variable is racing tactics. Heck, a Wanamaker full of midgets could have catastrophe if they are smart with their tactics

I just don't see why she would be different than a guy running those times. Forget other women and just imagine if we placed her in decent D3 school with their mid D group that has a handful of guys who have PRs around 49-1:55-4:20. Would they drop her on workouts? Which workouts? And she would be even with them in races of 400, 600, 800, 1000 but then you think they would run 4:00 for 1500 while she runs 4:10? I just don't see it.

brisquet wrote:

moo moo wrote:

1/2 of the men's field is taller. She isn't competing against them. The point was that if people think her long legs will trip her up, that means 1/2 of the men's field should also get tripped up from being taller. They have even more risk because there are people around them taking longer strides also than thebwomen's field. I will be eagerly awaiting to b watch this catastrophe.

Half the men being taller is an immaterial matter. The relevant variable is racing tactics. Heck, a Wanamaker full of midgets could have catastrophe if they aren't smart with their tactics

Fixed