Confirmed: Joshua Cheptegei WILL go for Komen's legendary 7:20.67 on Wednesday!!

Using rekrunner's argument that Cheptegei is using the shorter distances as "pacing" for longer events it is quite obvious that he wasn't concerned sbout the 3k record after all - he was practicing for the 5k.

I can't wait to hear that he runs 13min for 5k. Practicing for the 10k, of course.

Armstronglivs wrote:

5679 wrote:

Waiting for the kiwi ignoramus to come in and tell us he knew all along that Joshua wouldn't do it.

Obviously he will ignore the fact that Joshua himself said yesterday that he wasn't even thinking of getting the WR.

Actually I quoted Cheptegei in an earlier post of mine in which conceded he wouldn't take the record but you don't read very well so you didn't get it. But I didn't need to take his word for it - I knew it wasn't going to happen. So - only 13 seconds to go. But not bad for a runner who has yet to beat 3.37 for the 1500. Wrong part of his cycle, I guess.

He only needs to "extend" his 1500 pace to 3000 meter...

Well,, wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Actually I quoted Cheptegei in an earlier post of mine in which conceded he wouldn't take the record but you don't read very well so you didn't get it. But I didn't need to take his word for it - I knew it wasn't going to happen. So - only 13 seconds to go. But not bad for a runner who has yet to beat 3.37 for the 1500. Wrong part of his cycle, I guess.

He only needs to "extend" his 1500 pace to 3000 meter...

"Modern training" should see to that. (I wonder if he's lately reverted to old-fashioned training? Like no ped's.)

Armstronglivs wrote:

You stupid piece of cr*p, I said Cheptegei could not be expected to put two 3.40's together "if he can't manage much faster than that for one". I did not say that 3.37 is his limit, even though he has yet to surpass that time.

But 7.33! So much for 7.20 being a "soft" world mark. But not bad for a 3.37 runner. Go back to your "tables". "7.11-14" is as ridiculous as all your other vacuous claims. Enjoy your loss.

This explanation still falls far short of addressing any point. First you say "if he can't manage", and then, with every subsequent response, argue vehemently that he "can manage", and that you've said so all along -- essentially agreeing with and affirming all of my responses to your initial "if he can't manage". We all knew, even you apparently, that "can't manage" was an imaginary hypothetical that has nothing to do with the realities of Cheptegei.

It must make your blood boil to argue my points so passionately, and agree with me so strongly, while calling me stupid, because you slowly realize that agreeing with me so wholeheartedly makes you just as stupid as you think I am. Or maybe you haven't realized it yet because of your emotional fog, clouding your perception.

What loss? He won that race, and by a lot. We know from Cheptegei's press statements that the WR was a stretch goal. 7:33.24 -- it is hard to get a pace that is more SPECIFIC to the 7:33.22 predicted by his WR 5000m target race pace. It was an excellent training run preparation for the Olympics. What remains now, over the next 10-11 weeks of training, is to EXTEND that SPECIFIC pace to 5000m. Remember, we train to race, we don't race to train.

With respect to 7:11-7:14, these were predictions for last year, in August and October 2020, and not mid-May 2021. Predictions are based on theoretical models that simplify real world complexity, and must be interpreted with caution, understanding the limitations of the models. My speed/endurance model predicts a 1500m time of 3:30.90 and a 3000m time of 7:19.89, based on the slowdown between 5000m and 10000m world records. Based on this model, the chances of breaking the record, even at his peak last year, was slim.

rekrunner wrote:

7:33.24

Worth 7:40 without the super spikes and lights.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You stupid piece of cr*p, I said Cheptegei could not be expected to put two 3.40's together "if he can't manage much faster than that for one". I did not say that 3.37 is his limit, even though he has yet to surpass that time.

But 7.33! So much for 7.20 being a "soft" world mark. But not bad for a 3.37 runner. Go back to your "tables". "7.11-14" is as ridiculous as all your other vacuous claims. Enjoy your loss.

This explanation still falls far short of addressing any point. First you say "if he can't manage", and then, with every subsequent response, argue vehemently that he "can manage", and that you've

bla bla bla

All those words can´t hide the fact that you were wrong. BTW: nobody uses an international race as a training run.

Well,, wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

This explanation still falls far short of addressing any point. First you say "if he can't manage", and then, with every subsequent response, argue vehemently that he "can manage", and that you've

bla bla bla

All those words can´t hide the fact that you were wrong. BTW: nobody uses an international race as a training run.

None of your words shows that your alleged fact is really a fact.

Wrong about what, exactly?

Despite his fabricated tone, Armstronglivs hasn't contradicted me.

On the contrary, he only re-affirms my responses that questioned the applicability of his use of "can't manage".

In order to be considered wrong, you would have to demonstrate a contradiction.

3:37 for 1500m is SPECIFIC.

7:33 for 3000m is both SPECIFIC, and an EXTENSION .

So I'm still right about these things.

Is there anything I said that has now been contradicted by Cheptegei going out at record pace, being on target for 2000m, and then slowing down after losing the last pacemaker, in an early season race, in another off-event, that is nearly three months away from the Tokyo Olympics, that he himself said would be a very difficult target?

Nobody uses international races as training runs? I think most every international athletes does.

These off-event 1500m and 3000m track races this far away from the Olympics can only be seen as under-distance time trials that form part of the evolution of his training.

Another common example: many marathon runner uses international half-marathon races as a final preparation training run, 2-3 weeks before, running far below their predicted half-marathon ability, as if they are running their marathon pace.

An attempt was made.

Aw shucks. Well at least Chepte can rest assured he is a bit faster than Talem Franco. Not quite Eric Avila level but can definitely beat Franco.

Although, I dunno. I think Talem is using all of his races as training runs. I think he could be a 3:28 runner if he wanted to.

You really do need to wipe your backside better - it's finding its way on to the page.

-Cheptegei missed a record that you said was "soft" by a huge margin.

- He was over 20 secs slower than your fastest estimate of what you think he is capable of, based on a table you referred to.

- His previous 1500m time did not show that he was practicing for putting two of them together at 3.40 to beat the 3k record - as you claimed. He blew up after 4 laps.

- He did not demonstrate that "modern training" would enable him to break the record - he got nowhere near it.

- "Modern training", as you have described it, failed.

You were wrong about everything.

- I said he wasn't fast enough to break the 3k record and that he wouldn't break it or get near it. I was right. It is conclusive that he "couldn't manage it" - since you are so fixated on that phrase.

Nothing you can say changes any of that. But you do need to wash your hands.

"Any time less than 7:33 will be a win, and a good training, and the attempt just becomes good publicity. Even if he fails the record, we could reasonably expect 7:23-7:25, placing him in the top-5 or top-10 all time".[/quote]

This aged well. He didn't beat 7.33, so he didn't have a "win" by your definition, and you were out by 8-10 seconds with your estimate of what "we could reasonably expect". Got any other useful predictions?

It must be really bizarre to perceive reality through a kaleidescope.

Sadly, these things you think I got wrong are either not wrong, or simply not what I said.

- It's true that Cheptegei missed the record. Missing the record, even by 13 seconds, contradicts nothing I said.

- I did not say the record was "soft" -- that was you.

- I did not say the Purdy and VDOT estimates were "what I think he is capable of". That again is you.

- When I shared my thoughts based on these estimates, the thought was that I wouldn't rule a world record out.

- His previous 1500m time did not show what? I don't recognize your phrase as anything I said. I claimed that SPECIFIC paces were important; that faster than 3:36 is no longer SPECIFIC; and that the distances he would run SPECIFIC paces would progressively be EXTENDED, i.e. 1500m, then 3000m, then eventually 5000m/10000m. These claims remain true.

- Watching the race, it looked like he was on pace for 5 laps, and didn't really blow up, but just slowed.

- I did not say ""modern training" would enable him to break the record". That again was you.

- Therefore "modern training" has not failed, by virtue of not getting the record.

- I did say that world record pace is SPECIFIC. So is 7:33.

Like the 3:37 for the 1500m, we shouldn't place too much significance on 7:33. It is still SPECIFIC 5000m PACE, and there are 10-11 weeks of training before the important races.

He ran 1/4th of a second slower than my "win" range. I wouldn't call this small margin of a fraction of a second a clear loss. It is still a good training, and highly SPECIFIC. By the way, anything faster than 7:56 would still be SPECIFIC.

"reasonably expect" means there are expectations with reasons behind them. Being "out by 8-10 seconds" does not erase these reasons.

I have a lot of useful predictions besides Purdy and VDOT and my speed/endurance model: IAAF scoring tables, McMillan tables, Horwill's 4-second rule, Mercier calculator, Hungarian tables, Portuguese tables, just to name a few.

John Scott wrote:

An attempt was made.

Indeed. A bummer that he didn't make it. Watched this video:

"The Runner" seems to make a point that this is a season opener. Not very often that a world record attempt is not very hyped up. Missed by a decent margin.

It's hard to know where to begin with so many evasive falsehoods (Cheptegei just "slowed"? like for no reason? That I have have argued the record was "soft", and not you! Sheesh. That you said we could expect 7.23 but he is capable of 7.11. Spare me!) but I might reiterate my previous advice that you need to improve aspects of your personal hygiene. We see the results on the page.

Read this thread earlier, haven't been following but now checking in and as always there is some drama.

Number one takeaway here from last night? - 7.20.67 is THE toughest record in the books, hands down. I don't care about the "Hungarian scoring tables" suggesting that the newly set 5 and 10'000m records are superior - because they aren't. The 3000m is just a stupid mark and I doubt whether I will live to see it broken, I really believe that. For the record I thought with a perfect race he might be able to run between 7.23.5 and 7.24.5.

It's not just the pure performance it's the how it lines up vs the other performances in the history of the event. I've written about this before, but this performance it such an outlier vs the second best performance which in itself is an outlier from a grouping of performances set by some of the most decorated and greatest distance runners mankind has ever seen - I often question how it can possibly be real (even though I've heard plenty of rumors of the state of Komens blood chemistry and of course the legend of the old Rieti track).

Cheptegei wasn't at his best yesterday but despite advancement in footwear and an even bigger help in lights circulating the track at the perfect pace recommendation, he was absolutely way off and this is the guy who obliterated the 5 and 10 records. I think in order to even entertain the notion that this guy could run even remotely close to 7.20, I think we need to see a 3.47 high/3.48 mile from him. Your two outliers at the top of the alltime list have 3.43/12.50 (and honestly El G would have run 12.46-48 if he had run more than just one of them) and 3.46/12.39 portfolios. The 3000m is such a great and special distance and the speed endurance of a stud miler is more important than the aerobic endurance of stud distance runner even though we intuitively lump the 3000m and 5000 more closely together than we do the mile/3000m.

So it's all pretty simple to me - when I see JC drop a world class mile well under 3.50, then I will entertain the possibility he can even approach 7.20. Until then, ZERO chance.

And also, did I skim over a comment insinuating that it was plausible Cheptegei could run 7.11-14? Okay five words to that - Get. The. F--k. Outta. Here. That might go number one on my "most idiotic things I've ever read on these boards" list.

Armstronglivs wrote:

It's hard to know where to begin with so many evasive falsehoods (Cheptegei just "slowed"? like for no reason? That I have have argued the record was "soft", and not you! Sheesh. That you said we could expect 7.23 but he is capable of 7.11. Spare me!) but I might reiterate my previous advice that you need to improve aspects of your personal hygiene. We see the results on the page.

It's uncanny how often you express my sentiments. Addressing your many falsehoods is why many of my responses are so lengthy.

But for you, it's actually not that hard to know where to begin.

These forums record everything, and make it easy to navigate the pages, and you can find back exactly what I said and use my exact words to express what I said.

It's as easy as clicking on numbers and searching for my moniker, a basic skill that any computer user can master.

But if you had done that, your conversation would be finished before it even started.

You don't need to decide where to begin, but you should decide not to begin at all, if not knowing where means fabricating your own original ideas.

For example, rather than the absolute judgement, "soft", I said "comparatively weak", in a statement that began with your magic word "if".

In other words, as hard as Komen's record may be, both of Cheptegei's records are harder, "if" Purdy and VDOT are anything to go by.

I used Purdy and VDOT, which are both flawed in their own way, hence the "if", but the latest official IAAF scoring tables say the same thing.

What I said was a relative comparison of the strength of world records based on two independent models.

By substituting my words, with your word "soft", you turned this into an out-of-context absolute judgement that I did not make.

This transformation, solely attributable to you, is what creates the falsehood, and now you attempt to pawn your created falsehood off as mine.

But I understand you need to use these deceptive tactics to dispute me. You create the dispute, by saying something ridiculous, then pretending I said it, and call it ridiculous. This is called a strawman.

What's worse is that this shifts the conversation from something uncontestable -- my reference to entries recorded in a table -- into several iterations of arguing which ideas are actually mine, and which are fabricated by you. This unnecessary argument can be settled objectively, or completely avoided, by navigating back in this forum, rather than relying on your faulty paraphrased recollection of what you misunderstood.

Another example is 7:11. It is uncontestable that VDOT equates 7:11.32 for 3000m from a 26:11 for 10000m.

Purdy equates it to 7:13.75.

But, I did not say "he is capable of 7.11" -- these are your words and thoughts solely attributable to you.

What I said is that I would not rule out a record (sub-7:20.67).

This is the third time I've corrected you -- another demonstration of your integrity, or reading comprehension.

Did Cheptegei "slow", or did he "blow up", "for no reason".

The reason is obvious to anyone who has ever raced and started out too fast.

Looking at Cheptegei's splits, his first 4 laps averaged 58.7, then his next 2.5 laps were about 2.5s slower at 61.3s, with a last lap of 65s.

With this data, I'll leave the question of if and when he "blew up" up to the readers.

These are fair arguments. Someone ("THOUGHTSLEADER"?) said earlier, it would be more interesting to see this attempt after the Olympics, when he is in better shape.

If you don't care about Hungarian tables, favoring your own method, that certainly drives your thinking. Similarly 7:11 and 7:14 come from tables, so it is consistent that you would reject them too. These are theoretical values from a model, so any conclusions must keep that in mind. No one said or insinuated it was plausible (besides Armstronglivs when building a strawman). I said that I wouldn't rule out a world record (sub-7:20.67).

Using your approach of comparing to other fastest performances, it makes sense to dig a little deeper to see what shape the athletes were in when achieving their 3000m times, and other factors, like incentives, pacing, weather, number of opportunities, etc. and compare these results to the conditions of 5000m and 10000m.

Actually 7.33 is bad for Cheptegei since it's his 5k WR pace. Back in August he could go 2 more k at this pace.

Was there any video of this world record attempt?