Jeilan and farah last 400 split?

Geb was not in the race. Bekele WAS in the race. We don't have to go back to 2005 for Bekele to have been the best runner in the field. A 2009 Bekele would have defeated Farah handily in Daegu.

If this is correct I would spend a lot of time to improve my max speed (mecanical engine) together with the aerobic system.

Both are very determinating in how you preform in a long race.

MAPIV wrote:OK, so now I understand that your definition of the best runner is the one who "expends the most energy"

you must be the only idiot around here who thinks that if that race had been run 10 times that the ethiopian wouda won more than mo

i'd hazard a very prelim, rough estimate that the kid was ~

51.5 / 1'48.4 -> 3'32.5 , 4'48.9 , 7'25.2 , 12'46.8 , 26'41.0

but he expended far less energy; not shuffling up'n'down/too early & herky-jerk kick; & handled weather better as he does his racing over the water in nippon

ventolin^3 wrote:

MAPIV wrote:OK, so now I understand that your definition of the best runner is the one who "expends the most energy"

you must be the only idiot around here who thinks that if that race had been run 10 times that the ethiopian wouda won more than mo

i'd hazard a very prelim, rough estimate that the kid was ~

51.5 / 1'48.4 -> 3'32.5 , 4'48.9 , 7'25.2 , 12'46.8 , 26'41.0

but he expended far less energy; not shuffling up'n'down/too early & herky-jerk kick; & handled weather better as he does his racing over the water in nippon

There is NO WAY that Jeilan is in 12:46 shape. Please stop embarrassing yourself...

You guys argue semantics quite often, it doesn't matter what shape you're in or how fit you are, you can never run faster than you did when you ran your personal best, there is no magical calculator that can claim that either. The human body is not governed by man-made mathematics.

If they re-ran that race 10 times, I'm sure an American would win the most times over, because after 10 straight days of running 10ks you'd find a large group of elite hobby joggers.

MAPIV wrote:There is NO WAY that Jeilan is in 12:46 shape. Please stop embarrassing yourself...

idiot

have you never heard of the :

take 1'00 off 10k time & 1/2 it

rule, as starting point ???

ventolin^3 wrote:

MAPIV wrote:There is NO WAY that Jeilan is in 12:46 shape. Please stop embarrassing yourself...

idiot

have you never heard of the :

take 1'00 off 10k time & 1/2 it

rule, as starting point ???

Some of us may have missed that edition of Runner's World.

ventolin^3 wrote:

MAPIV wrote:There is NO WAY that Jeilan is in 12:46 shape. Please stop embarrassing yourself...

idiot

have you never heard of the :

take 1'00 off 10k time & 1/2 it

rule, as starting point ???

You cannot even do basic arithmetic. That yields a 5000 estimate of 13:01 for Jeilan...

o.O wrote:you can never run faster than you did when you ran your personal best, there is no magical calculator that can claim that either. The human body is not governed by man-made mathematics

eh ???

kip ran 1'41.24wr of 48.3 split

it was much better performance than his ~ low-49 split race of 1'41.11wr soon after

former was worth ~ 1'40.8 off 2s split differential

No way, he can run 3:32 and no way that Farah would medal in the 1500

52.43 wrote:

No way, he can run 3:32 and no way that Farah would medal in the 1500

Of course Farah would not have gotten a medal in the 1500. Ventolin thinks Farah can run 3:30, not merely 3:32.

o.O wrote:

you can never run faster than you did when you ran your personal best

this wasn't a very thought out statement

mo ran 3'33.9 when he had 13'09pb

he may be quicker now over 1500 with a 12'53 with jogging 2'38/2'41 splits & 54s finish inc ?!

the ethiopian beat mo in prolonged finish ( not last 200 or 300 out )

he can't run close to mo's 1500 potential ??

MAPIV wrote:

52.43 wrote:

No way, he can run 3:32 and no way that Farah would medal in the 1500

Of course Farah would not have gotten a medal in the 1500. Ventolin thinks Farah can run 3:30, not merely 3:32.

A 3:32 runner have 47/400 track speed. So put Farah down with 47/400 meter leg speed.

I don't agree with Canova's assertion that many of these 10,000 m runners don't have good speed. I do agree that it is their aerobic ability that allows them to run that fast at the end, but you can't take a Cova all-comers race to show that he could only run 52 for 400, when I saw him run 53 after a gaily fast 9600. I've often seen runners run poorly in these types of meets with nothing on the line. The importance of straight speed with 10,000m runners is speed reserve - the ability to run at a slower pace easier. Of course, speed endurance is also important.

We often find talented runners who already have fairly good speed to be the top distance runners, but I've found it very valuable to work on their speed (under 80m) as most of us coaches aren't given the talent Canova is. Once their speed starts increasing, they run more economically at a slower, given pace.

MAPIV wrote:Of course Farah would not have gotten a medal in the 1500. Ventolin thinks Farah can run 3:30, not merely 3:32.

find a brain

i was set on mo being somewhere along lines of "standard" great african 10k elites of z-man, shinester :

~

51.9 / 1'48.9 -> 3'32.9 , 4'49.1 , 7'24.9 , 12'44.9 , 26'33.6

but, he was was showing too much speed for these guys at the end

he is not a quicker 10k guy than peak z-man or the shinester, but he has so much better speed than them to win slow 10ks

that got me to agree with a brit poster who reckoned mo had 3'30

not a big surprise - geb ran 3'31i off 5k/10k ability

komen ran 3'29 off ?3k/5k training

you think komen can run much faster 400 than mo ?

Coach234 wrote:

I've found it very valuable to work on their speed (under 80m) as most of us coaches aren't given the talent Canova is. Once their speed starts increasing, they run more economically at a slower, given pace.

Yeah the result is they run at a slower pace after your type of training.

May be you don't agree, but facts are against your idea.

I want to give you some data (not opinions) about all my athletes able running under 27' :

Nicholas Kemboi (26'30"03) able to finish last 600m in Bruxelles 2003 in 1'23", almost beating Haile (26'29"87), could run in about 51"5

Ahmed Hassan (26'38" in the same race) NEVER could run faster than 53"5 / 54"

Imane Merga (26'48" this year) able to finish in 53"5 in 5000m last year, can run 400m near 51", not faster

Moses Mosop (26'49") finished last lap in WCh 2005 (bronze medal) faster than Kenenisa and Sileshi (53"4 for him, but was only 5th at the bell). He NEVER can run near 52"

John Korir (26'52") had a speed not better than 54"

Mark Bett (26'52") could run about 51"

Wilson Kiprop (last year winning Kenyan Champs in altitude in 27'26" and the African Champs in 27'32" woth last lap in 55"6, that could easy run under 27' at sea level) became the WCh of HM and NEVER could run under 53"

Now, after Cova, I can tell you that nor Antibo (European Champion of 5000 / 10000 in 1990, and silver medal in 10000 in OG 1988), very fast in the last lap, neither Panetta (27'24" and WCh of 3000 steeple in 1987) could run UNDER 52" (and Antibo was one of the fastest sprinters in the last lap).

When we speak about ladies, we remember last 400m of Defar and Dibaba in the IAAF final of some year ago (56"5 / 56"6). How much do you think was their potentiality in a 400m race ? Not better than 54"5.

Try to understand that a Dibaba able running 53" can easy run the WR of 1500m. Wang Jungxia ran 3'51"9 in 1500m and 2:24 in Marathon, and 8'06" in 3000, and 29'30" with the second half in 14'26", and NEVER could run 400m faster than 55"5 (this was what Dong Li, the WCh in 1500 in 1997, now wife of the head coach of Spain Miguel Landa, explained me when we spoke about the Chinese period of Ma Juren).

This is also the answer for the other poster speaking about the relation between 400m and 10000m (75% of the speed) :

THERE IS NO RELATION BECAUSE THE TWO SPEEDS ARE PRODUCTS OF DIFFERENT PHYSIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS (the first Mechanical / and Lactic System at 90%, the second Aerobic System at 90%, including in this percentage also the lactic resistance, that is connected with the Aerobic System more than with the lactic system).

Try to understand one thing : IF YOU ARE ABLE RUNNING FAST 400 m IS BECAUSE YOU HAVE A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF FAST FIBERS.

IF YOU HAVE A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF FAST FIBERS, NEVER YOU CAN HAVE A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF SLOW FIBERS, SO NEVER YOU CAN BE TALENTED FOR RUNNING LONG DISTANCES.

If a medium level athlete (30' in 10000m) runs 3 km in 10' together with Asafa Powell (supposing Asafa can be able to do it) and after they can have a last 400m free, in a race of 3400m, THE WINNER IS THE SPECIALIST OF 10000m, NOT ASAFA.

Of course, probably is for that over-estimation of the effect of speed that is so difficult to have TODAY in our Countries (from Europe to US) strong specialists in long distances, in any case very far from our specialists of 25-30 years ago (so, don't look at Africans, but at European or American of the period 1970/1990).

I can see your argument. But do you not think that there exceptions to this rule? For example I am sure that you remember Juha Vaatainen who was a sprinter; 10.8 secs for 100m and 48 secs for 400m before moving up in distance. While he was not Usain Bolt, he did manage to eventually win the European champs for 10000m in 1971 beating Bedford and others.