Humidity and altitude are similar concepts in terms of effect on performance, as I have experience running in both. The degree of difficulty is similar but I do not agree with a humidity conversion or an altitude conversion either.
Altitude conversions aren’t real
College Running
D1
-
13
-
Stanfordstud1 wrote:
Seriously don’t get this BS, 9 seconds for a conversion shouldn’t be real. 3:57 is impressive on any track but hyping up Nico’s race is pathetic. Come down to sea level and run a 3:48, he can’t.
Says the guy who has never raced at altitude. It's science.
14 -
Yes, conversions are real. But, altitude impacts more negatively the longer and more aerobic an event gets.
Nico is a 3:56 flat miler, and based on his 1500, he could run about a 3:55 flat. Brojos have, over the years, been consistently clueless about altitude conversions, and LRC's claim that this 3:57 is worth 3:49 is wildly inaccurate. Nico is still, at best, a 3:55 flat runner, and this 3:57 converts to 3:55-3:56. For someone who is well adapted to altitude, there just isn't that much disadvantage to run a race this low at altitude.
Does anyone recall when a couple b-tier, unknown Kenyans ran low 3:30s for 1500 at 8000'+ the better part of a decade ago and the brojos claimed that the times were unprecedented and worth several seconds better than the world record when converted? Spoiler alert: those guys never broke 3:30.ALTITUDE IS A HUGE FACTOR IN VERY LONG DISTANCES LIKE THE MARATHON. IT MATTERS LESS IN THINGS LIKE 5K/10K. FOR SOMEONE ADAPTED, IT DOESN'T MATTER MUCH IN THE MILE.
22 -
Mexico City 1968 observer wrote:
So what are we to make of the results from the Olympics in 1968?
Kip Keino 3:34.91
Jim Ryun 3:37.89
Bodo Tümmler 3:39.08The stadium is at 2200 m (7200 ft), BTW.
I mean, all that this tells us is that the NCAA conversions are laughably wrong. Keino never ran faster than this 3:34.91, and the WR at the time was 3:33.1 The NCAA conversion would give Keino a 3:27.x, and if that were accurate, he would have been better than all who followed after him until Morceli, possibly even El G.
Here's how I interpret it: the Runworks Calculator, which would give him a ~1 second benefit and an equivalent performance of 3:33 high for this time, is more accurate. Keino would be within 1 second of the world record at the time. He never broke 3:35 elsewhere and never ran a definitively better time at any distance than this 3:34.91 (saying that his 7:39.6 3000 in 1965 is more or less equivalent to 3:34.91 for 1500). For someone at this level (or even well below this level), you don't suddenly run one race that is worth 7 seconds better than your lifetime PB and then never come close to sniffing that level of performance again.NCAA conversions are laughably wrong, and that's all there is to it. Keino wasn't worth anywhere close to 3:27 for the 1500 and Young isn't worth anywhere close to 3:49 for the mile.
11 -
babaganosh wrote:
It may not be exact, particularly for athletes living at altitude, but I've been on these boards long enough to remember an identical thread in 2015 after a then-unknown Sorratos ran 4:05 at altitude with the conversion of 3:55 seeming laughable. He went on to run 3:55 that year ago sea level.
Or maybe it's just that when you're winning a race by 11 seconds, you didn't need to go all out? The dude had already run 3:43 in 1500 a year prior, so he had been in 4:00.x shape already. Going from 4:00 to 3:55 in one year of good training isn't that unbelievable for a top collegiate athlete. He wasn't pushed and led the entire way. In his 3:55, he was rabbited through 1000 and had genuine competition, not breaking from the pack until 200 to go. Very, very different scenarios. Dude could have easily broken 4:00 on that day in Bozeman with competition.
00 -
userloser wrote:
any conversion isn't real. I learned recently that kids say their converted time as their pr , ie I ran 158 (though I really ran 201 flat track) indoors.... I'm not sure if this is the conversion but you get it
if it were real, you wouldn't hear so many people say this. They would go do it on a normal track at sea level.
11 -
Yes they are, but anyone who thinks that the conversion is 9 sec wrote:
Yes, conversions are real. But, altitude impacts more negatively the longer and more aerobic an event gets.
Nico is a 3:56 flat miler, and based on his 1500, he could run about a 3:55 flat. Brojos have, over the years, been consistently clueless about altitude conversions, and LRC's claim that this 3:57 is worth 3:49 is wildly inaccurate. Nico is still, at best, a 3:55 flat runner, and this 3:57 converts to 3:55-3:56. For someone who is well adapted to altitude, there just isn't that much disadvantage to run a race this low at altitude.
Does anyone recall when a couple b-tier, unknown Kenyans ran low 3:30s for 1500 at 8000'+ the better part of a decade ago and the brojos claimed that the times were unprecedented and worth several seconds better than the world record when converted? Spoiler alert: those guys never broke 3:30.
ALTITUDE IS A HUGE FACTOR IN VERY LONG DISTANCES LIKE THE MARATHON. IT MATTERS LESS IN THINGS LIKE 5K/10K. FOR SOMEONE ADAPTED, IT DOESN'T MATTER MUCH IN THE MILE.
i recall a few running around 3:30.xx in Nairobi, where the track is at about 5300' yes, but where did this happen at 8000'+?!
i'm quite positive you are absolutely full of ish
00 -
Dont believe in altitude? Looks like another flat-earther
11 -
altitude is definitely real but not 9 seconds for a conversion in the mile
10 -
altitude expertia wrote:
Yes they are, but anyone who thinks that the conversion is 9 sec wrote:
Yes, conversions are real. But, altitude impacts more negatively the longer and more aerobic an event gets.
Nico is a 3:56 flat miler, and based on his 1500, he could run about a 3:55 flat. Brojos have, over the years, been consistently clueless about altitude conversions, and LRC's claim that this 3:57 is worth 3:49 is wildly inaccurate. Nico is still, at best, a 3:55 flat runner, and this 3:57 converts to 3:55-3:56. For someone who is well adapted to altitude, there just isn't that much disadvantage to run a race this low at altitude.
Does anyone recall when a couple b-tier, unknown Kenyans ran low 3:30s for 1500 at 8000'+ the better part of a decade ago and the brojos claimed that the times were unprecedented and worth several seconds better than the world record when converted? Spoiler alert: those guys never broke 3:30.
ALTITUDE IS A HUGE FACTOR IN VERY LONG DISTANCES LIKE THE MARATHON. IT MATTERS LESS IN THINGS LIKE 5K/10K. FOR SOMEONE ADAPTED, IT DOESN'T MATTER MUCH IN THE MILE.
i recall a few running around 3:30.xx in Nairobi, where the track is at about 5300' yes, but where did this happen at 8000'+?!
i'm quite positive you are absolutely full of ish
That post wasn't right for a few reasons (Cheruiyot was A tier, and the others, while B tier, did break 3:30 with 3:28 high). Also, it was in Nairobi as you mentioned, not at 8000+. However, the sentiment was correct that the NCAA conversion suggested that Ronald Kwemoi (a guy who never ran faster than 3:28.81) to be in far better shape than the world record and capable of 3:24.90 in the 1500.
Kwemoi's 3:28.81 was the single time in a long career that he ever ran faster than 3:30.43, and that was on a very fast track (Monaco), getting dragged along by Silas Kiplagat and Asbel Kiprop. Further, it was 3 years removed from this run in Nairobi. On all other days of his life, he was never better than 3:30 mid, and he ran 3:30 high in Nairobi, which was a season's best despite being at altitude. He was never worth in the same universe as 3:24.9, and even the brojos acknowledge that the NCAA conversion isn't accurate. The 3:30 high was worth 3:29 high and arguably the second best 1500 of his career.
Despite the fact that they have publicly acknowledged that the NCAA conversion charts are wrong, they now insist on applying it to Nico and crediting him with a completely unrealistic conversion that he's not even close to. Nico is currently a 3:55 flat guy at best based on his mile and 1500 times, and even though he is still improving, it is a virtual guarantee that he will not break 3:53 (or 3:36) in 2024.01 -
rbtrackfan wrote:
Something in the air yesterday? Maggi Congdon 4:40 (4:30) to go to No 1 in NCAA W mile.
Maybe Young's mile conversion is legit. Congdon just ran a 4:30.24 at BU and her altitude conversion was 4:30.16
30 -
That’s the NCAA’s conversion, not Letsrun. And if you go look at tfrrs today you’ll see that all the horses from NAU and BYU and UNM etc. have about half their best marks at altitude and about half from the one or two tries they get at sea level at BU or UW. Young and Sahlman? I guess they made the point pretty clear.
01 -
one more reason indoor is stupid wrote:
userloser wrote:
any conversion isn't real. I learned recently that kids say their converted time as their pr , ie I ran 158 (though I really ran 201 flat track) indoors.... I'm not sure if this is the conversion but you get it
if it were real, you wouldn't hear so many people say this. They would go do it on a normal track at sea level.
You mean like Congdon, Sahlman, Young, Bons and Quax just did?
20 -
allo!
Da scheint dieTierliebe deines Bruders ja echt groß zu sein, wenn er sogar das Studium auf das Speil setzt, hoffe er wird es später nicht bereuen.
Du könntest ihm ja deine Hilfe anbieten und vielleicht ein paar Tierheimbesuche für ihn übernehmen, somit wüsste er, dass jemand nach den Tieren schaut und könnte beruhigt sich an die Bachelorarbeit dransetzen.
Oder er holt sich Hilfe. Man kann z.B. von einem Ghostwriter die Arbeit schreiben lassen. Es gibt Fachautoren, die sich mit der verschiedene Thematik auskennen, weil sie selbst eine Laufbahn mit hervorragendem Abschluss beendet und sich somit mit dem Erstellen einer Bachelorarbeit bestens auskennt. Nähere Informationen und Preise, findest du hier: .
Dein Bruder muss sich ja nicht direkt die gesamte Arbeit schreiben lassen, sondern sich dort unterstützen lassen, wo er selbst nicht weiterkommt.02
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.