Better bet over next 5 years: Hedengren or Valby?

Wrong and wrong.

Closing out a championship 5000 with a fast kick does require good fitness. It also requires having a fast kick. See Valby, US Oly Trials, 2024.

There are plenty of runners who are phenomenal from 5000-HM who underperform at 26.2. Not at all the same.

I'd think Jane has the more productive next 5 years, especially if she can continue to compete in college under this hypothetical 5 year contract Could just having access to run in meets like NCAAs give her more value even if she runs a little slower than Valby?

I'm assuming if I have a $5 million contract to give out I'm probably a shoe or running apparel company. In that case, like it or not, I'm betting on getting a better return on my money going with Valby regardless of who ends up the better runner.

If I had to bet $5m on who will be the better runner? I'll probably take Hedengren. I like speed.

It's always risky trying to predict the future of a high school phenom, especially over the course of the following 4 years in college. Although I don't think Jane will run 4 years of college (probably 1-2), she definitely is in a good spot training group wise with the BYU crew and Diljeet being her coach. Coming from Provo, UT she's already prepared to transition into BYU with little adjustment needed. She will be surrounded by family and friends and should easily adapt. I think the key advantage Jane has over Parker is that she will be in a stable highly competitive environment with BYU, and with Diljeet overseeing her development she has no where to go but up. I can see Diljeet building a pro group around her in the coming years leading into L.A. 2028. If Parker and her dad don't settle into a consistent training program which includes coach and location she will find herself bouncing around from group to group and never really dialing in on her training and racing, which will no doubt put a lot of pressure on her mentally and physically which in turn will lead to a rash of injuries.

I'm a fan of both, but will give the nod to Jane as I feel her situation is much more stable and will allow her to thrive and improve over the coming years. Parker's talent is undeniable, but there is too much baggage right now, and until she gets herself dialed in she's too risky to hedge a bet on her.

Valby ran a 67 last lap in the 10000m which is mediocre and a slow 71 in the 5000m which terrible compared to 62 for St Pierre. Valby will never be able to improve her leg speed, and anll other things being equal, she’ll always be out kicked. Like Salazar she doesn’t have the middle distance speed to win with a kick.

There have countless 5/10 runners that have been just as good in the marathon, including Ryan Hall, Salazar, Mantz, Carlos Lopes, Kipchoge, Bekele, Shorter, and Steve Jones.

With her metronome stride, Hedengren could be very good in the marathon.

She outkicked Schweizer. So your comment "always" is incorrect already.

While I don't agree that she has trained like a pro since age 4, keep in mind that Jane has the body and biomechanics showing that she can handle training like a pro - Valby does not.

These really boils down to two things.

1) Valby's inability to train at a high level while staying healthy.

2) Hedengren's age. Have people forgot that neither Mary Cain or Alexa Efraimson ran faster than they did in HS? Now they were more 800/mile. Tuohy did improve.

Valby's weakness is offset by the fact she hasn't done altitude training.

Here is a nice article on Jane's start in the sport with her dad's help:

milesplit.com

A Utah Dad's Challenge Has Led To Daughter's Career Pursuit

Ashley Tysiac

Jane Hedengren is an up-and-coming young distance star in Utah. But she\'s not the only Hedengren family member that shares a love for running.

Open link

I said “all other things being equal” and obviously Valby had more left in the tank than Schweizer. If they run 31:00 pace. Schweizer will outkick her every time.

Hedengren, because...

I don't think Valby will ever finish higher than she already has in the Olympics (which I will admit was an awesome finish, but I think its her peak).

Valby does have a history of injury issues.

Hedengren has better speed, and ultimately you have to have speed to win the important medals and make podiums.

However, as was pointed out, the five-year window gives you Hedengren at an awfully young age, and I think her best years would be after that.

Dumb thread. Everyone knows that Valby has been plagued by injuries and has relied on cross training to a degree never seen in pro running before. Her achievements are stunning given the challenges she has faced. But everyone knows that the transition to a professional runner for her is going to be a big challenge.

And while Hedengren is a huge talent and even possibly a once in a generation talent, there is a fairly long list of HS prodigies who did not pan out in college and pro running. Improvement in running is never linear. Jane may just be getting started or may not have much room left to improve. And there are plenty of great runners who needed the years of competing in college and as a pro before they realized their full potential (Josette Andrews being the most recent example).

So, there is really no point in trying to compare these two.

All things were equal. They ran the same race. They were dead even. Valby outkicked her. You are incorrect as usual.

But you said all someone needs is better fitness. So why is this an absolute?

You also said that 5/10/marathon genes are all the same, and your supporting evidence is people who are good in all 3? Have you ever heard of confirmation bias?

There is no Tuohy, there is no Valby. There is only Jane Hedengren.

Parker has the best PRs.

Jane has the 2nd best PRs but she is 4 years younger.

Tuohy sort of sucks now.

I see Valby as having a similar profile to Shalane Flanagan: dominant cross-country runners in college who didn't have good kicks but made up for it by hammering from the front and pounding their opponents into submission. As a pro, Flanagan won five U.S. national championships on the track that way, and she was able to win an Olympic medal in the 10k in a fast race. Valby was better than Flanagan in college, and I think she has the potential to have similar track achievements that Flanagan had as a pro.

As for Hedengren, here's a thought exercise: make a list of the top 10 American high school distance running girls in history before this year. Then make a list of the top 10 American professional distance running women in history. How many runners appear on both lists?

I think Hedengren is better suited for the 5000 rather than the marathon; she has a ton of speed in the mile. I see her as having a strong track future. With 4:23 mile speed, she's got a stronger chance of developing a killer kick as a pro.

Valby could do really well at the marathon, given her endurance. Only problem for her is staying injury-free, obviously. The marathon is joke.

It's true that *some* junior women flame out. But the best of the best were usually pretty good at 18. Kipyegon, Dibaba, Chebet, and Gidey were all world junior or U20 champions. Being a young champion doesn't mean you're not likely to succeed later. There's just more variance in terms of future performance among junior female prodigies than males.

But to me, Hedengren looks like she was born to be a distance runner in the same way Yaroslava Mahuchikh looks like she was born to high jump. She seems like a natural in a way that seems sustainable.

I don’t think you get it. All things being equal is that they have the same amount left in the tank. There is no scenario where Valby outkicks Schweizer in a 1500m which is because the pace will take more out of Valby than Schweizer, which will be compounded by Schweizer’s leg speed advantage. If they are dead even with a 400 to in a 1500m Schweizer will beat her by at least 5 seconds.

Valby is in the same category as Salazar, Bedford, Lopes, Clarke and Shorter who all needed to have a gap to win a championship race on the track. They were all legendary runners so it’s not criticism of Valby to say she’ll never be a kicker.

I wouldn’t invest 5 million in either of them. Both a years away from their prime. Both have an injury history, as well. One is already an Olympian. Jane has been training like a pro for quite some time, so there may not be as much upside as some think. Only time will tell, and I won’t buy into the hype until I see sustained improvement over a number of years.