hold the phone wrote:
cicvi wrote: The logic isn't that difficult. The people running the 10k in the past 2-3 years are significantly lesser runners. It's not at all as competitive nor as fast. No one even breaks 27 anymore.Actually, there were six sub-27 runners in the field today.
Clearly, there weren't. One of them couldn't make it past 8k at 27:30 pace.
Nice try at ducking the issue :)
The funny thing is I kind of agree with you, I think the distance is less competitive than the mid-late-2000s (losing arguably the greatest runner the distance has ever seen will do that), but you just overreached in trying to demonstrate it.
cicvi wrote:
Clearly, there weren't. One of them couldn't make it past 8k at 27:30 pace.
Hey there bro, need any help moving those goalposts?
Nope. I am only claiming that a field including the likes of the defending world champion, has to be considered a "strong field." Was there a better 10K out there today that I missed? or did the best distance runners in the world today peak for THIS race?
hold the phone wrote: Actually, there were six sub-27 runners in the field today.
cicvi wrote: Clearly, there weren't. One of them couldn't make it past 8k at 27:30 pace.
Sigh. I'm really looking forward to the thread after the 1500 final where you complain that "no one runs under 3:35 anymore."
break it up wrote:
Rupp ran another historic race. You have to know history and witnessed 10k Americans over decades to realize how great this guy is.
Or how Lanced he is.
yyy wrote:
with a level playing field, the USA will be competitive in a few years. Europe is lost though.
Yes when NOP athletes finish 1-2-3-4 instead of a mere 1,4, we will truly know we have a level playing field.
As soon as it was clear Gebremeskel wasn't going to be competitive, the race was over.
Props to the medalists.
LabTech wrote:
Nope. I am only claiming that a field including the likes of the defending world champion, has to be considered a "strong field." Was there a better 10K out there today that I missed? or did the best distance runners in the world today peak for THIS race?
That's the problem here. You think that just because they are the best current 10k runners in the world that that somehow automatically makes them a strong field. That is not true. Have you never heard of a down year? The 10k is not a strong event anymore.
There are only a few decent 10k runners in the world right now and only 1 of them regularly performs well. And while he wins well, I'm not certain that he is actually that fast anymore at 10k. He hasn't run a fast 10k in at least a year.
Bearcat wrote:
cicvi wrote:Clearly, there weren't. One of them couldn't make it past 8k at 27:30 pace.
Hey there bro, need any help moving those goalposts?
How am I moving goalposts? I don't know exactly when he dropped out of contention but 8k is a reasonable guess for the purposes of this discussion. No?
hold the phone wrote:
hold the phone wrote: Actually, there were six sub-27 runners in the field today.cicvi wrote: Clearly, there weren't. One of them couldn't make it past 8k at 27:30 pace.
Sigh. I'm really looking forward to the thread after the 1500 final where you complain that "no one runs under 3:35 anymore."
Why would I complain that no one runs under 3:35 anymore? People run under 3:35 all the time. Didn't a whole bunch of guys run between 3:27 and 3:35 just a few weeks ago?
I don't think fast times interest Farah at the moment. He's not going to be breaking any world records any time soon, and he doesn't need them to win titles, so what's the point in potentially missing a shot at a medal just to move him a few places up the all time list?
I think his focus is on reaping as many global track titles as he can while he's in his prime before stepping up to the marathon for Rio.
it kinda obvious farah on the sauce
i mean cmon guys
i enjoyed watchin the 10000 like i always do
but the mo story is just too good to be true
i aint buyin it
i been burned too many times on this
sorry
how much does mo bring back per year?
heywhatsthis wrote:
it kinda obvious farah on the sauce
i mean cmon guys
i enjoyed watchin the 10000 like i always do
but the mo story is just too good to be true
i aint buyin it
i been burned too many times on this
sorry
How many times you posted this bs today?
We've been burned too many times by your jealous poor sport bs.
A Duck wrote:
ritzrupp wrote:Nice run by Rupp. Really thought one of those guys would come back to him on the straight away
The only way Rupp was going to medal in this race was if he/they moved with a mile out -- not 800 meters over.
He's chance for a medal was over with 800 to go.
Alberto's got to educate him better.
I don't think he's peaked, there's more to come from Rupp.
You're right he hasn't peaked this year yet but you're wrong that his best chance to medal is to go with 800 left, since he medaled last year by going with 300 left.
Couldn't you say the same about the 1500 and 5000?. None of the world records are being attempted this year. But the fields are not weak. They just don't have the best ever in the event.
cicvi wrote:
LabTech wrote:Nope. I am only claiming that a field including the likes of the defending world champion, has to be considered a "strong field." Was there a better 10K out there today that I missed? or did the best distance runners in the world today peak for THIS race?
That's the problem here. You think that just because they are the best current 10k runners in the world that that somehow automatically makes them a strong field. That is not true. Have you never heard of a down year? The 10k is not a strong event anymore.
There are only a few decent 10k runners in the world right now and only 1 of them regularly performs well. And while he wins well, I'm not certain that he is actually that fast anymore at 10k. He hasn't run a fast 10k in at least a year.
Thanks, yupyup; you said more clearly what I am getting at. Seriously, I thought someone might object to my use of the verb "toy" in my original post (which might have been an interesting discussion), but I frankly never dreamed someone would object to my calling the World Championships field "strong." Is it the strongest ever? No. Is it as strong as the last couple of WC fields? Arguably not. Is there a stronger field out there that they could have put together? THAT might be worth discussion, but apparently that's not what everyone wants to debate.