I am the OP and I am going to say something you don't here too often around here. I was wrong. Sahlman's PR is not 13:19. It is 13:38. I asked chatgpt and got the wrong answer. I apologize.
Also, I was wrong to say that he could finish within 20 seconds of Samuel in a fast 10K for the reasons others have outlined.
To make the 5K team in '28, Sahlman will need to get his PR down to 13:05 or faster, which I still think he can do. He will likely be even more dangerous in the 1500.
You sound like you’re seeking praise for admitting your factual error (13:19). Dude, please don’t ever ask ChatGPT for an athlete’s PRs again: go to their World Athletics profile (or TFRRS, or athletic.net). Basic AI like ChatGPT are so full of sh1t it’s unreal.
Your last paragraph is sorta nonsensical. 13:05 fitness is arbitrary: is the Trials final a 13:00 race or 13:30 race? What are Hansen, Strand, Langon, Wolfe, Simmons etc. all capable of for 5k at this point?—Never mind Blanks/Young/Hocker. If Sahlman’s only capable of 13:05 all out and more dangerous at 1500, he’s probably not thinking about the 5k much at all.
My fitness estimates for Sahlman right now are ~3:50 / ~7:35 / ~13:16 / ~27:56. Total guesses really, and I’m hoping he runs sub-3:50 indoors in the next few months.
Facts and I’ve noticed AI is particularly bad with athletes’ times/performances. I recommend bookmarking the US 1500m top list from world athletics. Pretty easy to find whatever top athlete you want from there.
My estimates for Sahlman are more like 3:48/7:30/13:10, mostly based on his 16th place and 1:44pb, but you made a good point about the slower pace working in his favor. Hopefully we get a datapoint at BU soon. Martin got 13th last year then ran 3:48/7:36, so your 3:50/7:35 matches up well there. I think Sahlman would be a bit faster is because I don’t think Martin had (or currently has) a 1:44 in him, and I think Sahlman is in the best shape of his life, and he already has a 3:33 pb, which puts him at 3:50 already. Part of me thinks Martin might be better at longer distances too, but my intuition might be off there because I’m not sure we’ve ever seen someone with Sahlman’s range.
You sound like you’re seeking praise for admitting your factual error (13:19). Dude, please don’t ever ask ChatGPT for an athlete’s PRs again: go to their World Athletics profile (or TFRRS, or athletic.net). Basic AI like ChatGPT are so full of sh1t it’s unreal.
Your last paragraph is sorta nonsensical. 13:05 fitness is arbitrary: is the Trials final a 13:00 race or 13:30 race? What are Hansen, Strand, Langon, Wolfe, Simmons etc. all capable of for 5k at this point?—Never mind Blanks/Young/Hocker. If Sahlman’s only capable of 13:05 all out and more dangerous at 1500, he’s probably not thinking about the 5k much at all.
My fitness estimates for Sahlman right now are ~3:50 / ~7:35 / ~13:16 / ~27:56. Total guesses really, and I’m hoping he runs sub-3:50 indoors in the next few months.
Martin might be better at longer distances too, but my intuition might be off there because I’m not sure we’ve ever seen someone with Sahlman’s range.
We have seen others with Sahlman’s range. Of course his career is maybe just getting started. Colin’s range is unusual but not unprecedented.
At BU in the next week or two, I think he’d be ~13:10. There’s a really good chance he could take down the NCAA 3k record too. He is FIT. 3:30 outdoors wouldn’t shock me after Strand did it earlier this year (and could’ve gone faster). Focused on the 800 outdoors and reached a new level, and has now reached a new level of strength based on his XC performance. He is gonna drop something nasty in the next 6 months (and maybe the next week).
13:15-13:18 sounds more reasonable. Yes he has had agood XC season but has not shown anything special at 5000 on the track in college. 16th place at NCAA just isn't 13:10 material. Not saying he won't get there.
13:15-13:18 sounds more reasonable. Yes he has had agood XC season but has not shown anything special at 5000 on the track in college. 16th place at NCAA just isn't 13:10 material. Not saying he won't get there.
Yeah you might be right. Normally 16th place isnt 13:10 material, but normally 16th place isn’t a 1:44 guy. I assume he’ll be significantly better at 5k than 10k XC which is why I said 13:10, but 13:15-20 is definitely reasonable too.
13:15-13:18 sounds more reasonable. Yes he has had agood XC season but has not shown anything special at 5000 on the track in college. 16th place at NCAA just isn't 13:10 material. Not saying he won't get there.
Yeah you might be right. Normally 16th place isnt 13:10 material, but normally 16th place isn’t a 1:44 guy. I assume he’ll be significantly better at 5k than 10k XC which is why I said 13:10, but 13:15-20 is definitely reasonable too.
I see him going sub 13 in a couple years easy. Geordie Beamish was in the 30s and 40s at XC Nationals and is more of a miler than 5k guy too