like you said, it's exaggerated, not even a little bit. That would be more akin to Rio 1500 than what Jakob did in his 5k. For what Jakob did in 5k, it would be more like 5:30 5:30 and a 4:40.
People often cite Jakob as running 3:54, 2:21, but guess what, Gebrhiwet, the 5th place finisher, also ran 3:54 (he was actually a few meters behind Jakob at that point, coming through 3400m in 9:21), 2:23, and he's the one who actually initiated the long kick and and got drafted! And Hocker is just so much better in the speed endurance department than Gebrhiwet has ever been with his 3:27, because dude is making a living running 13 secs per 100m for 3 and 3/4 laps, while I doubt Gebriwet could've run sub 3:30 to save his life, at least not on the day he ran the 5k.
In comparison, In Tokyo, there is no one closing within 1 sec of Hocker in a 400m. (52.61 v.s 54.06 by Kimeli, nevermind the traffic) Also, for someone who can run a 3:44 in a full mile (3:27 converted), 3:54, or 2:21 1k is gonna be very easy, unless the first 3k-4k has been so quick he was already gassed out. But in Tokyo, apparently a 7:51 didn't kill him, so he could throw down a 52 last lap on outer lane a mile later. A 8:14 is gonna be chilling pace for him. Using the 16:00 analogy, that would be like a 16:00 guy with a 4:20-25 PR running the last mile in 4;40 after he's chilling at 5:30 for the first 2 miles.
And let's not forget since the race is fast the last 1k, the field would be easily drawn out comes the bell, providing a much clean lane for Hocker. If anything, he would be even more likely to win in this scenario. Let's face it, his positioning was god awful.
The only reliable way is to make the Tokyo race even faster by running both 7:51, and sub4 1600m, sub 2:25 last 1k, essentially making it a 12:50 race, but then Jakob would have to take it out himself, which means Hocker will get to sit on him the whole time and enjoy the drafting benefit and again he wouldn't need to navigate through traffic because there wouldn't be as many people when the bell comes. And given the disastrous results for the ones pushing for the first 3k. (Gebrhiwet literally made the worst placing in his whole senior career, Fisher and Young didn't do that well either). It may well revert back to 13:00-13:10 races from now on. There's a reason why a sub 13 championship race has only happened like 4 times in history.
edit: btw, there's a reason why Mo Farah was so unbeatable in the 5k and why Katir was the closest guy to Jakob in the 5k. As 3:28 guys, they could run 2:21 last 1k and 13:00 couldn't kill them either because they're 12:40ish guy minimum.(most likely sub 12:40 for Farah, if he got to run a truly max-out 5k with Wavelight)
What are you even trying to argue. You’re example in Gebriwhet doesn’t make sense because he ran 12:42 that season and beat a lot of loaded guys in Monaco. So your argument stems on “Oh Hocker is way better than Gebriwhet so he would easily match Jakob’s splits.” No, he wouldn’t. What a weak argument.
“ 3:54, or 2:21 1k is gonna be very easy, unless the first 3k-4k has been so quick he was already gassed out. But in Tokyo, apparently a 7:51 didn't kill him, so he could throw down a 52 last lap on outer lane a mile later. A 8:14 is gonna be chilling pace for him. Using the 16:00 analogy, that would be like a 16:00 guy with a 4:20-25 PR running the last mile in 4;40 after he's chilling at 5:30 for the first 2 miles.“
What a load of nonsense. If it was so easy, why has nobody ever done it before. Let me make it clear, the difference between 7:52 and 8:14 just isn’t significant enough. Both were at an even pace. That isn’t damaging the top guys or even the B tier guys. What really matters is the pressure being handed to everyone in the last k, 2k, and 3k. If you’ve ever ran competitively you would know this. Jakob can do this to perfection. Hocker, I highly doubt it.
I have been away for a while but since this thread still has some life I would like to make a post supporting the OP´s main points by providing some numbers as proof. Everything is based on a Jakob at his best as in Paris or Silesia last year.
But initially I would say that since Jakob is a significant stronger runner AEROBICALLY than Hocker it seems quite certain that he also would have been able to go sub 53 in Tokyo after a 4000m in 12:32 and a final 1000m in "only" 2:25.
--------------
And here come some numbers!
Why am I certain about that? Because Jakob has run a 3000m WR in 4:55 low for the first 2000m and this 2000m is equal to around 12:24 for 4000m when extrapolating from IAAF´s ranking points.
Jakob closed his 3000m WR race in 2:22 low for the last 1000m and he would of course have been able to close faster if his first 2000m has been equal to a 4000m in 12:32 (Hocker ran 12:32:99) as they ran in Tokyo. 4000m in 12:32 is equal to a 2000m in around 4:58 high.
So either Jakob could have finished the Tokyo 5000m with a 2:20 to 2:21 last 1000m which Hocker couldn´t have handled OR...
Jakob could have "jogged" from 4000m to 4600m in 1:33 (as he did) and then finished in a 52 last lap or faster.
Why do I assume that Jakob can finish at least as fast as Hocker after a "pedestrian" first 600m of the last 1000m? Because Jakob has run both a faster 1000m AND a faster last lap in comparable races:
Jakob finished his WR 3000m in 2:22 low for the last 1000m and a 55 last lap after a 2000m in 4:55 low.
Hocker finished his Millrose 3000m in 2:24 low for the last 1000m and 56.75 last lap after a 2000m in 4:58 low.
Because he was undertrained. You are beyond stupid.
Always the excuses. At his peak he still would have likely been beaten. The Paris 1500 showed that and there's no way he would have matched Hocker's finish in the 5k in the worlds.
All Army will do is give you some version of “I know you are but what am I?” or scream about being off topic, which is literally his forte.
You called it! He’s even pulled out the “off topic” card just like you said he would. LOL. On the other hand Armstronglivs is obviously mentally ill so he’s an easy target. I really do hope he gets help.
Jakob is the one who needs help. Sad result at the world's.
Because he was undertrained. You are beyond stupid.
Always the excuses. At his peak he still would have likely been beaten. The Paris 1500 showed that and there's no way he would have matched Hocker's finish in the 5k in the worlds.
likely....so deep down you even admitted he stood a chance in peak form, otherwise you wouldn't say "likely" which implied uncertainty with your statement.
Because he was undertrained. You are beyond stupid.
Always the excuses.
I don't know if you are dishonest or stupid... Wait! I do know. You are both.
You have been going on for days about how an Achilles injury can end Jakob's career but you seem to dismiss its seriousness calling it an excuse when someone points out he was undertrained.
The only good thing about this is knowing you are miserable, or you wouldn't be spending hours of your days, every day, posting the same things on Letsrun. 😊
Always the excuses. At his peak he still would have likely been beaten. The Paris 1500 showed that and there's no way he would have matched Hocker's finish in the 5k in the worlds.
likely....so deep down you even admitted he stood a chance in peak form, otherwise you wouldn't say "likely" which implied uncertainty with your statement.
A chance? Yes - if those in front broke a leg. That's how "uncertain" I am. You're pretty dim. But the point is that at the world's he wasn't even in the form he was in Paris, when he failed to place, and he may never be at that level again with his Achilles injuries. He can't get new tendons.
I don't know if you are dishonest or stupid... Wait! I do know. You are both.
You have been going on for days about how an Achilles injury can end Jakob's career but you seem to dismiss its seriousness calling it an excuse when someone points out he was undertrained.
The only good thing about this is knowing you are miserable, or you wouldn't be spending hours of your days, every day, posting the same things on Letsrun. 😊
The only misery I see is of those obsessed with what I post. Like you. You do nothing but follow me from thread to thread.
likely....so deep down you even admitted he stood a chance in peak form, otherwise you wouldn't say "likely" which implied uncertainty with your statement.
A chance? Yes - if those in front broke a leg. That's how "uncertain" I am. You're pretty dim. But the point is that at the world's he wasn't even in the form he was in Paris, when he failed to place, and he may never be at that level again with his Achilles injuries. He can't get new tendons.
Could you see any reason why he wasn't in the form from last year?
A chance? Yes - if those in front broke a leg. That's how "uncertain" I am. You're pretty dim. But the point is that at the world's he wasn't even in the form he was in Paris, when he failed to place, and he may never be at that level again with his Achilles injuries. He can't get new tendons.
Could you see any reason why he wasn't in the form from last year?
The point is that even in his peak form last year he couldn't place in his main event. With his recurring Achilles injuries since then he will never be in that form again. So it's basically over for him.
This post was edited 23 seconds after it was posted.