ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ wrote:
And don't bring your childish "12:48" again.
He will. He hs nothing else.
-
60
-
only as good as your pbs wrote:
Correct. What Cheptegei did would be equivalent to if the 5000 came first and Jakob opted out of the 1500 because he felt a bit tired.
Not defending his title and the chance to replicate the double means he will always be inferior to Bekele.
It’s a little more complicated than that -in Tokyo Olympics Jakob skipped the 5000m because it came before and too close to the 1500m. -Totally logical in my view, and not a result of him fearing anyone in the 5000m field. And a couple of years before Paris OG he said he would double, if the schedule didn’t put the 5000m before the 1500m (in a way that influenced the latter negatively)…
Cheptegei is the WR holder in both the 5 and the 10000m. -Totally logical that he enters the first scheduled distance (the 10), and prioritises that since it’s the first. Because he knows with some luck he can run both. But things happens -a demanding fast race in hot weather conditions made it difficult to double. Fisher chose to do it anyway -but he was surprised by his bronze after feeling reduced (because of the 10). Well, I’m sure Cheptegei and also Kiplimo would have run the 5000m if he/they didn’t thought he/they were too reduce to have a chance. Or didn’t fear injuries… I think it’s unlikely that skipping races because of the competition is the athletes’ first thought!
43 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
LarsL11 wrote:
So what you are saying is that it is only Cheptegei who is a natural 5000 runner? Shouldn't being "natural" rather point to achieving a fast time in young age, when you have yet been able to work hard for so long time?
Jakob is at 26th place on the u20 list in 5000. Bekele is at 91th with 13:13 in that case...
Maybe it isn't so much use in saying that people are this or that early in a career.
So "natural" is now defined to mean being good at an early age - just in case he won't be the best later.
No, not at all, I asked you if that might be more sensible than just looking at their PR, but it seems you ignored everything about that to try to score a cheap point rather than to have a proper discussion.
41 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
LarsL11 wrote:
Ok, so why are you then using Cheptegei and Bekeles times to determine what Jakob can do in the 5k?
I'm not using their times to determine what he may do; I am pointing out he is far from matching them. He may never. In the distance events, I don't think he will.
No, you specifically used their times to show that he was not a natural 5000 runner, which in turn would limit his progress. That goes against what you said about comparing athletes.
50 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
LarsL11 wrote:
Not at all, since I am clearly saying I will not speculate about a WR. I hope he runs a time trial because I am curious about his time. I think any runner that beat the world record holder and the world number two obviously is pretty strong in the distance, but I also think its not really interesting to speculate untill they actually run time trials.
I am speculating about the 5k wr and suggesting Ingebrigtsen won't achieve it, so if you are disputing what I say then you are similarly engaged in that speculation. If he doesn't break the wr or even get near it, does that not reduce any assessment of where he stands in that event (with the same question being asked of where he would rate as a 10k runner)? You might prefer to say "time will tell", once he has run a few time trials, but I suggest what he has shown already is that he won't excel as others have over those distances. I don't think he will get those records. But that is of course a very unpopular view here.
No, I don't think the fixation upon trying to predict a world record (or a lack of a world record) is as interesting, to be honest. As I said, I think his results indicates that he is pretty strong in the distance. What his PR will be when all is said and done will depend on his potential, but also how much he focuses on the 5k, how lucky he is with his meets, his pacers, his competition, his tactics. Too many factors to accurately predict. But I agree if you only look at the time in itself there is a long list of people that are "closer" to the world record.
What I do think is that its not so likely that any runner have the same PR in the 5k over 4 years, while every distances below gets better and while they hold a high (regional) level in xc and distances above. So I absolutely think he could lower his PR substantially by going to a fast, rabbited race and not just championships. If his ceiling is lowering his PR by 2 seconds then it is at the level of Kipchoge, if its by 5 its at the level of Barega, 8 seconds its at the level of Kiplimo, etc, which is not that bad in that case.
However I think the world is more nuanced than either world record or not. He is already at top 20 PR's all time, having a medal count that puts him in front of a lot of those ahead of him there. Chances are that he can win more medals and/or lower his PR (or not), time will tell, its best to summarize careers when they are done.
50 -
LarsL11 wrote:
You shouldn't feel disrespected just because I pointed out your logical flaws. For instance where you don’t see the obvious in that J.I would prioritize an olympic final over a HM 1.5 days into his offseason, but rather think that both are an equal representation of his ability.
Anyone can dream up scenarios. They are not exactly a proof or even a noteworthy argument to make. I can see the following situation: I run in to a 12:15, Geb (or some other stellar African) runs 12:33 and Jakob can only do 12:55, and possibly also a WC/dl/og loss (why is it possibly, in your scenario Geb is running 7 seconds faster, how is it not a loss?).
Ofcourse Geb or anyone else can run faster than Jakob.
By the way, I proposed to Armstronglivs that he was trying to make the point that his PR hadn't gone down, but he denied it. Maybe you should learn to read as well?
Lol -I don’t feel disrespected at all! But you have to admit you tried -in one post you called me “dense”, and in another too unintelligent to be able to tie my shoes…
I don’t think posters (with long posts) on this forum are generally dense -I think the reason we sometimes think others here are hilarious (or we cringe) is that we all are very caught up in our own perspectives and backgrounds. -It’s hard to understand posters that are too different… So when I think some of your arguments aren’t too smart I don’t think at all that this is because you are unintelligent. But I think you just are being honest when some of your first thoughts are that I must be dense, and that you didn’t realise that choosing words like that as your main argument weakens your case…
Really smart people can be dense in some situations (and I certainly) -Einstein was dense in some of the communication with Bohr, and philosophers like Plato and Aristotle and Schopenhauer and Nietzsche have written really cringy things in between their point on analysis, and psychologists like Freud also, of course…
You seem to think that people have dense point of views because of IQ problems (you post about people who can’t tie their shoes) -well, I have worked a whole work life with people who can’t tie their shoes. And yes, there may be cognitive problems, but interestingly quite a few people can’t tie their shoes, but still have way above average IQ and understanding. -Aside of the obvious group of (only) physically handicappers there are the ones who have suffered a stroke that permanently or only for a period has given the brain damage apraxia without any damage of the reasoning. Result: One loses the ability to tie one’s shoes, but not to post excellent on Lrc…
Posters that make you cringe don’t have to be dense -they might only be outliers like me that want to make outlier comments. So you should confront the substance in these arguments, and not the poster’s IQ…
I personally can’t defend my IQ by giving you a score. But I don’t think posters on Lrc, who produce lengthy posts, in a language that isn’t their native, generally are dumb… By the way, I took an exam once in logic at the University - a little above 3000 took that particular exam that semester I think, and with a number grading 1.0 (best) to 6.0 (worst; one flunked at 4.1) 10 students got a grade sub 2.0 -I was one of them, and my grade was 0.1 worse than the best of the 10 mentioned students…
So to the running point here: As a Jakob fan I have lately concentrated at the challenges he seems to have rather than his strengths, that are obvious. Because from his sayings I’m not totally convinced that he has training insight and relevant experience when it comes to the longer distances (above 5k). Euros 10 xc or a National 10k roads aren’t the same as global experience. But this experience also seems to lack training wise -Jakob claims he never has trained specifically for the 10k/HM aside of the double threshold, that he seems to think is sufficient. But is it..?!
So to your paragraphs: 1. I know there’s a difference in the preparations to a Olympic race and a “random” HM. So I wouldn’t criticise the lack of a win or a WR in the HM. But nearly 6 minutes behind..?!
2. “Dream up scenarios”: I took a scenario I thought could happen since Gebrhiwet isn’t a random guy, but has run 12.36.
3. This last paragraph is beyond me -something about Armstronglivs, and learn to read..?
This post was edited 6 minutes after it was posted.07 -
Pretty sure I never mentioned IQ, and never talked about people who cant tie their shoes - but people who never learn to tie their shoes. There is a difference, and I never mentioned you or anyone that post. Sorry for calling you dense, though. Thats uncalled for.
Either way, someone following the brothers Ingebrigtsen closely might know that they have been experimenting and testing training for the HM for a little while now, so it is interesting to see if its just to gain coaching experience or if they want to use that themselves. I hope there are a lot of 1500, 5000, 10 000 etc in their future before that.
40 -
LarsL11 wrote:
Pretty sure I never mentioned IQ, and never talked about people who cant tie their shoes - but people who never learn to tie their shoes. There is a difference, and I never mentioned you or anyone that post. Sorry for calling you dense, though. Thats uncalled for.
Either way, someone following the brothers Ingebrigtsen closely might know that they have been experimenting and testing training for the HM for a little while now, so it is interesting to see if its just to gain coaching experience or if they want to use that themselves. I hope there are a lot of 1500, 5000, 10 000 etc in their future before that.
No offence, and let’s not quarrel about the wording. But as I said, in my work life I have worked with people who have lost their ability to tie their shoes or never have learnt it. But I have also worked with grown ups with quite low IQs (on tests) that were able to learn how to properly tie their shoes. And I, for instance, tie my sneakers every day…
I feel a little bad after criticising you, because after the “dense” post you have had a lot of detailed ones, where you confront my arguments, and I think that’s admirable. And I too hope there’s something positive going on in the Ingebrigtsen camp when it comes to the distance events. To me Jakob is a huge joy, and I really admire a lot of what he is doing and sharing..!
02 -
justanothercuriousdude wrote:
only as good as your pbs wrote:
Correct. What Cheptegei did would be equivalent to if the 5000 came first and Jakob opted out of the 1500 because he felt a bit tired.
Not defending his title and the chance to replicate the double means he will always be inferior to Bekele.
It’s a little more complicated than that -in Tokyo Olympics Jakob skipped the 5000m because it came before and too close to the 1500m. -Totally logical in my view, and not a result of him fearing anyone in the 5000m field. And a couple of years before Paris OG he said he would double, if the schedule didn’t put the 5000m before the 1500m (in a way that influenced the latter negatively)…
Cheptegei is the WR holder in both the 5 and the 10000m. -Totally logical that he enters the first scheduled distance (the 10), and prioritises that since it’s the first. Because he knows with some luck he can run both. But things happens -a demanding fast race in hot weather conditions made it difficult to double. Fisher chose to do it anyway -but he was surprised by his bronze after feeling reduced (because of the 10). Well, I’m sure Cheptegei and also Kiplimo would have run the 5000m if he/they didn’t thought he/they were too reduce to have a chance. Or didn’t fear injuries… I think it’s unlikely that skipping races because of the competition is the athletes’ first thought!
Love Cheptegei but he should have been in that race. And in Budapest. We got robbed of some classics
50 -
triplethreshold wrote:
Love Cheptegei but he should have been in that race. And in Budapest. We got robbed of some classics
As I said, things are often a little more complicated -athletes run when they are sick or injured or not fully rested, but sometimes they must be allowed to let these things matter in their decisions…
02 -
Koltrast wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Of course I pick and choose which metrics to apply; we all do - because not all metrics are equally valid in all cases. Cheptegei's best 5k remains way ahead of anything Ingebrigtsen has done. That's a significant metric. Farah remains way ahead of Ingebrigtsen in championship distance titles; that's another.
Yes, that's the point, you choose which metrics are valid when they favor the runner you want to claim is better than Jakob. Both Farah and Cheptegei can't be better than Jakob if you're going to argue a faster PB but fewer titles makes Cheptegei better than Jakob and a slower PB but more titles makes Farah better than Jakob.
I choose the metrics that are relevant. It appears you can't follow that.
03 -
Yes, I like Jakob was pretty average in the Hm and Fm as well and most likely
with the benefit of PED which is even more telling of his horrendous
failed experiment into those distances.03 -
..fd. wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I understand geography better than you do. They aren't part of Europe. They also have the best distance runners.
I understand geography and athletics better than you do. You have never heard of naturalisation. Glad to educate an arrogant buffoon like yourself.
Naturalisation doesn't enable the best Africans from African countries to compete in the European championships. That is why the Euros don't match the Olympics or WC. You haven't caught up with that.
13 -
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
We simply disagree on your last sentence. I can imagine he might run in the lower 12:40's but I don't see him beating 12:35. We are both speculating. One of us may in time be right.
Unrealistic? For the by far fastest in history over both 3000m and 2 Miles it's unrealistic that he also might break the 5000m world record? For the guy who has won the last three global titles?
And don't bring your childish "12:48" again.
We can't know if he ever will break the 5000m world record or even just comes close to it - but it's definitely not unrealistic that he get's the record.
Yes, it is unrealistic. It is a bare possibility, at best.
13 -
..fd. wrote:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ wrote:
And don't bring your childish "12:48" again.
He will. He hs nothing else.
I don't think Jakob thinks 12:48 is childish. It's the fastest he has ever run.
04 -
LarsL11 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
So "natural" is now defined to mean being good at an early age - just in case he won't be the best later.
No, not at all, I asked you if that might be more sensible than just looking at their PR, but it seems you ignored everything about that to try to score a cheap point rather than to have a proper discussion.
My main point is that Jakob isn't as good a distance runner as many argue here. We aren't going to agree on that, so there isn't much to discuss.
05 -
LarsL11 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I'm not using their times to determine what he may do; I am pointing out he is far from matching them. He may never. In the distance events, I don't think he will.
No, you specifically used their times to show that he was not a natural 5000 runner, which in turn would limit his progress. That goes against what you said about comparing athletes.
The word "natural" was being used to suggest that Ingebrigtsen is as good as anyone who has run the distance. He isn't. He hasn't shown that yet. There are quite a few who have shown they are faster than him over the distance. Until he matches or exceeds them he doesn't have their talent as a distance runner.
04 -
LarsL11 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I am speculating about the 5k wr and suggesting Ingebrigtsen won't achieve it, so if you are disputing what I say then you are similarly engaged in that speculation. If he doesn't break the wr or even get near it, does that not reduce any assessment of where he stands in that event (with the same question being asked of where he would rate as a 10k runner)? You might prefer to say "time will tell", once he has run a few time trials, but I suggest what he has shown already is that he won't excel as others have over those distances. I don't think he will get those records. But that is of course a very unpopular view here.
No, I don't think the fixation upon trying to predict a world record (or a lack of a world record) is as interesting, to be honest. As I said, I think his results indicates that he is pretty strong in the distance. What his PR will be when all is said and done will depend on his potential, but also how much he focuses on the 5k, how lucky he is with his meets, his pacers, his competition, his tactics. Too many factors to accurately predict. But I agree if you only look at the time in itself there is a long list of people that are "closer" to the world record.
What I do think is that its not so likely that any runner have the same PR in the 5k over 4 years, while every distances below gets better and while they hold a high (regional) level in xc and distances above. So I absolutely think he could lower his PR substantially by going to a fast, rabbited race and not just championships. If his ceiling is lowering his PR by 2 seconds then it is at the level of Kipchoge, if its by 5 its at the level of Barega, 8 seconds its at the level of Kiplimo, etc, which is not that bad in that case.
However I think the world is more nuanced than either world record or not. He is already at top 20 PR's all time, having a medal count that puts him in front of a lot of those ahead of him there. Chances are that he can win more medals and/or lower his PR (or not), time will tell, its best to summarize careers when they are done.
The discussion isn't about whether he is "pretty strong" over the distance - that point isn't in contention - but whether he can be the very best. His times show so far he isn't. He may never be.
This post was edited 24 seconds after it was posted.04 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
Koltrast wrote:
Yes, that's the point, you choose which metrics are valid when they favor the runner you want to claim is better than Jakob. Both Farah and Cheptegei can't be better than Jakob if you're going to argue a faster PB but fewer titles makes Cheptegei better than Jakob and a slower PB but more titles makes Farah better than Jakob.
I choose the metrics that are relevant. It appears you can't follow that.
It appears you can't follow that you don't get to pick what metrics are relevant.
30 -
It was a tactical race.
30
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.