I doubt Sahlman will run the 3K, don't most people? He would go mile first and mile final to 3K in today's world? ehh?I also doubt Martin will run the 3K and possibly not DMR. The spacing for these double backs , unless you are clearly a dominant monster ala Cheserek..Rupp at the time? There are too many guys that are way too good, for an athlete to be compromised, in my opinion by getting softened up with multiple races in one day. I could be wrong, but there are killers out there right now.
I doubt Sahlman will run the 3K, don't most people? He would go mile first and mile final to 3K in today's world? ehh?I also doubt Martin will run the 3K and possibly not DMR. The spacing for these double backs , unless you are clearly a dominant monster ala Cheserek..Rupp at the time? There are too many guys that are way too good, for an athlete to be compromised, in my opinion by getting softened up with multiple races in one day. I could be wrong, but there are killers out there right now.
Killers leaving crime scenes and the depth is to much to even blink. I've never seen a month like this in track with records falling right and left and especially with Americans. It kind of reminds me of the Bejing Games in swimming and those suits that were eventually banned. Every race seems to have a WR with 3-4 place also beating the old record. But suppose Sahlman does run the mile. What if he doesn't make the final? I'm just saying.
In a field cluttered with guys up to under 3:54 flat, anything can happen in a pre lim. It's interesting because most of these miles were run in set ups on speedways, and off the back of them. Very few if any were run without some form of "controls" to make it go absurdly fast.
Again, the conversion is FAR too generous for people who live at altitude. Kipsang isn't a 3:25 1500 runner
I remember when Sahlman ran 4:03 on NAU's track and everyone said the 3:54 conversion was too generous. Fast forward a couple weeks and he ran 3:53.1 at sea level.
He just ran 1:46 then doubled back for 7:40 at sea level (7:40 in a race with a big kick).
The conversion isn't generous, at least not for Sahlman. He's in 7:37 shape, or better.
You're assuming that this was the absolute best he could have done at altitude. He probably could have run 7:45, and yes, he's in high 7:30s shape.
The number of performances NCAA conversion suggests would be NRs, ARs, WRs is ridiculous.
The longer the event, the more aerobic it is, and the more altitude affects your pace. But, you're not giving up 7 s per k at that altitude unless you're doing something like a marathon.
I remember when Sahlman ran 4:03 on NAU's track and everyone said the 3:54 conversion was too generous. Fast forward a couple weeks and he ran 3:53.1 at sea level.
He just ran 1:46 then doubled back for 7:40 at sea level (7:40 in a race with a big kick).
The conversion isn't generous, at least not for Sahlman. He's in 7:37 shape, or better.
You're assuming that this was the absolute best he could have done at altitude. He probably could have run 7:45, and yes, he's in high 7:30s shape.
The number of performances NCAA conversion suggests would be NRs, ARs, WRs is ridiculous.
The longer the event, the more aerobic it is, and the more altitude affects your pace. But, you're not giving up 7 s per k at that altitude unless you're doing something like a marathon.
Interesting, as I was going to add something like this to my post. I figured, he and Bosley running together essentially and most likely not all out. So , low 7:50's's all out to low 7:30's converted to? I don't know if he is that kind of guy. He certainly is not a Murphy at 3K or 5, and only 2 better at a mile on BU track vs UPenn. I think people also make too many assumptions off a 7:40 at UW, chasing that, but folks say the pace was not fast enough? So, run faster.
Because he wants them to race the best and hit top times in a real meet? This was a smart plan B.
Every coach tries to game the system, that's why so many efforts are at BU, ND, UW, jdl flat track, etc. If coaches thought running at altitude was easier, they would take their runners to altitude meets.
This debate raged a few years ago around unknown Christian Soratos and his altitude conversion times. Like Sahlman, he came down to sea level and ran the converted time, shutting up the haters.
Ah yes, that's why we've seen Kipsang run 3:25.9 in the 1500! (using the NCAA conversion from Nairobi, 3:31)
The conversion is too generous and everyone knows it, including Mike Smith. Why do you with a healthy budget and plenty of meets at BU & UW (which they have been going to), Mike Smith decides to run them all-out in the Dome? Because he knows it's softer for them. Bosley ran 7:41 at BU and couldn't get in the same way as everyone else. He will finish outside the top 10. Pathetic.
The conversion is too generous and everyone knows it, including Mike Smith. Why do you with a healthy budget and plenty of meets at BU & UW (which they have been going to), Mike Smith decides to run them all-out in the Dome? Because he knows it's softer for them. Bosley ran 7:41 at BU and couldn't get in the same way as everyone else. He will finish outside the top 10. Pathetic.
Not a healthy budget. Look up the budget cuts that hit all AZ state schools this year. NAU doesn't have much travel money to work with at all. Running at the dome with Nico pacing was the best option.
Athletes that train at altitude are best adapted to race at altitude. You still get the benefits of training high and racing low when you drop down to sea level but these athletes are primed to race well at altitude given their living/training situations; much different than trying to say a Florida athlete with the same sea level time would run a race at altitude with the same conversion, that'd be highly unlikely. Also they raced at sea level and didn't run fast enough to crack the top 16, or at least some didn't, now they get to bump up because of a conversion? The system may be "fair" but it's definitely flawed.
The argument over if it’s 17s or 20s, although seemingly splitting hairs, is a valid one because it’s the difference between them getting into to NCAAs and not. I stand by my statement that they’ll finish below where they are ranked (outside of the top 8 All American spots).
No All American finishes for Bosley or Sahlman. The conversions were bogus.
The argument over if it’s 17s or 20s, although seemingly splitting hairs, is a valid one because it’s the difference between them getting into to NCAAs and not. I stand by my statement that they’ll finish below where they are ranked (outside of the top 8 All American spots).
No All American finishes for Bosley or Sahlman. The conversions were bogus.
They have really not looked great all season. I think the altitude conversions are probably okay in general but they’re too generous for guys like those two who live and train at altitude.