You have a strange view of "wild speculation". I base my views on what he has so far run, not what some here imagine he might run, given x,y, or z factors that may or may not apply.
You can think that a runner will run his absolute best in his one yearly meet despite the weather, despite not tapering, despite focusing on a different distance, nobody stops you.
I didn't say that but I don't expect you to grasp that. But while he has yet to beat 1.46.4 over the 800 he remains slow over the distance for a top 1500 man. Your speculation hasn't produced a faster time. And it may not.
Snell ran 100mpw, and was a 1 44.3 guy on grass in '62. It isn't the training that makes Jakob slow.
We have data in regard to proper training for 800m. One-hundred-twenty miles per week is no longer included for proper 800m training. Now I question if you were ever a T&F athlete. I have raced many events, 200m to Marathon. No one is going to race Marathon at their optimum on 200m training; no one is going to sprint 200m at their optimum on Marathon training. I stand by my original post. J.I. could have been a sub-1:46 800m man if he trained for 800m from age 12. As Peter Coe said, "Clydesdale training," J.I. is not breaking 1:46 800m.
Your point only stands if a runner only does 120mpw training or only speed work. Snell did both. He didn't do the aerobic base all year round but only as a 3 month conditioning phase. I would expect Jakob's high mileage phase to be much the same. But coaches like Lydiard found that high mileage work benefited md athletes. Snell proved him right.
The last man to do Clydesdale training and earn an 800m Oympic gold medal, Steve Ovett, 1980 Olympics. It was not S. Ovett's fault that at least 40% of the world's nations boycotted said Olympics. It is not S. Ovett's fault that S. Coe allowed Ovett to be over 10m ahead with 325m to go. That said, P. Snell wouldn't make it to an Olympic 800m final training like that today if Snell were in his early twenties today. Are you trying to tell readers of let'srun J.I. possesses the same 200m speed as Peter Snell? Snell's 200m speed allowed him to overcome improper training for an 800m man.
If improper training allowed Snell to destroy world records on grass sixty years ago I would take that over your methods any day. And so would he.
We have data in regard to proper training for 800m. One-hundred-twenty miles per week is no longer included for proper 800m training. Now I question if you were ever a T&F athlete. I have raced many events, 200m to Marathon. No one is going to race Marathon at their optimum on 200m training; no one is going to sprint 200m at their optimum on Marathon training. I stand by my original post. J.I. could have been a sub-1:46 800m man if he trained for 800m from age 12. As Peter Coe said, "Clydesdale training," J.I. is not breaking 1:46 800m.
Your point only stands if a runner only does 120mpw training or only speed work. Snell did both. He didn't do the aerobic base all year round but only as a 3 month conditioning phase. I would expect Jakob's high mileage phase to be much the same. But coaches like Lydiard found that high mileage work benefited md athletes. Snell proved him right.
Snell didn't prove him right if he was a 1:42 runner who "only" ran 1:44
And I am a student of Lydiard.
Oh and well-kempt grass tracks are almost as fast as modern tracks.
Remind me of the many other occasions that he has run faster than 1.47 (when he has ran just two 800m races in the last four seasons)
Let me know when Jakob runs 1.45. It could be a while. Maybe even forever
He may be able to run sub-1.46 at some point
If you say 1.45-high I might agree,
There is nothing in Jakob's performances to suggest he could get near 1.45.
If I realise that I was wrong on something I just agree to it (nothing bad about that, just normal in discussions). But you just squirm like an eel. But you have acted much worse in many other threads, so I can see some improvement on your side here.
Btw: How do you pronounce "Cheryuiot"?
I see you avoided my question about your "humility" but just doubled down on your accusation of arrogance. It seems you know quite a lot about what it is to be arrogant.
I admit when wrong (different to you).
I accept arguments which disprove my initial points (different to you).
You can think that a runner will run his absolute best in his one yearly meet despite the weather, despite not tapering, despite focusing on a different distance, nobody stops you.
I didn't say that but I don't expect you to grasp that.
It's the basis of your argumentaItion. I have not seen just one comment from you to the conditions in Bergen. Do you think the runners were close to their potential at this meeting?
Your point only stands if a runner only does 120mpw training or only speed work. Snell did both. He didn't do the aerobic base all year round but only as a 3 month conditioning phase. I would expect Jakob's high mileage phase to be much the same. But coaches like Lydiard found that high mileage work benefited md athletes. Snell proved him right.
Snell didn't prove him right if he was a 1:42 runner who "only" ran 1:44
And I am a student of Lydiard.
Oh and well-kempt grass tracks are almost as fast as modern tracks.
You may be a "student" of Lydiard but you are poorly-informed. Lydiard said that Snell's 1.44 on grass was worth up to 2 seconds on modern tracks. (Snell carved 1.4 secs off the then 800m world record and 1.6secs off the then 880y record). It has somehow escaped you that in 1962 Snell wasn't running on modern tracks. If grass was as fast as modern tracks we would still be running on them. We aren't.
I didn't say that but I don't expect you to grasp that.
It's the basis of your argumentaItion. I have not seen just one comment from you to the conditions in Bergen. Do you think the runners were close to their potential at this meeting?
Jakob was. He hasn't run much faster. I would say it would be a feat for him to go below 1.46. There are some here who have agreed with that.
I see you avoided my question about your "humility" but just doubled down on your accusation of arrogance. It seems you know quite a lot about what it is to be arrogant.
I admit when wrong (different to you).
I accept arguments which disprove my initial points (different to you).
Again: How do you pronounce "Cheryuiot"?
I have had those who disagree with me. That is ok but it doesn't necessarily mean I am wrong. After all, we are all speculating. The subject is how fast can Jakob run the 800. Some of you think he can be a lot faster than his present level, while I think not very much. We both can be right - or wrong. Only time will tell - literally.
The spelling is admittedly dodgy but the pronunciation is "cherry-it".
It's the basis of your argumentaItion. I have not seen just one comment from you to the conditions in Bergen. Do you think the runners were close to their potential at this meeting?
Jakob was. He hasn't run much faster. I would say it would be a feat for him to go below 1.46. There are some here who have agreed with that.
1:47.22 is not close to his potential.
He hasn't run much faster? He has run 1:46.44 in his only other race over the distance in the last four seasons. In an empty stadium.
What can he do over 800m?
Nobody here can know the answer. I would estimate something like 1:45.5
Olympics 1500 metre silver medalist Timothy Cheruiyot was today promoted from the rank of Chief inspector to senior superintendent of prisons by the commissi...
You can think that a runner will run his absolute best in his one yearly meet despite the weather, despite not tapering, despite focusing on a different distance, nobody stops you.
I didn't say that but I don't expect you to grasp that. But while he has yet to beat 1.46.4 over the 800 he remains slow over the distance for a top 1500 man. Your speculation hasn't produced a faster time. And it may not.
"While he has yet to beat.." you know he is a 1500 runner with no interest in investing energy in the 800? Its not like he is trying.
A good 800 time wouldn't even be a Cherry-it on the top of his career.
You are very wrong in saying "only time will tell" btw, he will never realize his potential in the 800m, lol. I'm quite shocked how you can believe that. Olympics in '24 and '28 and then focus on the 800? Maybe that is next for Cherry It as well?
I pronounce it the way I have heard commentators say it. But so what. You know who I'm talking about. I don't know what your interest is in any of this discussion, apart from infantile interjections such as above and taking offence at arguments you don't agree with.
You are very wrong in saying "only time will tell" btw, he will never realize his potential in the 800m, lol. I'm quite shocked how you can believe that. Olympics in '24 and '28 and then focus on the 800? Maybe that is next for Cherry It as well?
You don't grasp the point very easily, do you? We won't know whether Jakob can run much faster over the 800 until he runs it. He may but any predictions made now remain in the realm of speculation if not fantasy. You are surely a fantasist if you think he can be competitive over the 800. There is no way he runs 1.43 - as Tim has. He simply isn't a fast enough runner, which is obvious and has been obvious for years. His best alternate to the 1500 is the 5k.
I didn't say that but I don't expect you to grasp that. But while he has yet to beat 1.46.4 over the 800 he remains slow over the distance for a top 1500 man. Your speculation hasn't produced a faster time. And it may not.
"While he has yet to beat.." you know he is a 1500 runner with no interest in investing energy in the 800? Its not like he is trying.
A good 800 time wouldn't even be a Cherry-it on the top of his career.
So what is your point? That he is capable of running a fast time over the 800 but that he won't do it, because he isn't interested in the distance? That's a great argument. However it does nothing to counter my point that he will never be fast over the 800 because he isn't fast - and that is why he doesn't focus on the event. Nor does it address my earlier point, which is how does a runner who clearly lacks the 800 speed of the top milers over half a century ago run up to 8 seconds faster than them over the longer distance.
Jakob was. He hasn't run much faster. I would say it would be a feat for him to go below 1.46. There are some here who have agreed with that.
1:47.22 is not close to his potential.
He hasn't run much faster? He has run 1:46.44 in his only other race over the distance in the last four seasons. In an empty stadium.
What can he do over 800m?
Nobody here can know the answer. I would estimate something like 1:45.5
With proper training maybe 1:45.0
I suggest he is unlikely to get much below 1.46 unless he focuses on the event. I doubt that he will do that. Walker had faster top end speed than Jakob (22.7 over the 200) but never ran faster than the 1.44.9 he achieved early in his career. Jakob is the "slowest" athlete to dominate the 1500 that I have seen in fifty odd years. It is his astonishing endurance that enables him to win.
Do you really think a random Kenyan news channel and a random news speaker know how to write and pronounce Kenyan names?
Cheruiyot and CHERUIYOT?
Please!
Cheryuiot and CHERRYIT is correct.
Good to have real experts in letsrun.
Are you sure you are experts? I was asked how his name was "promounced", which neither you nor the poster picked up. Perhaps you are both better with Kenyan names than common English.