hoooo huuum wrote:
Big deal. Wake me up when he runs the equivalent of 1:41 800m at age 18 like GOAT Nijel Amos.
And never ran faster. Probably collecting his pension now
hoooo huuum wrote:
Big deal. Wake me up when he runs the equivalent of 1:41 800m at age 18 like GOAT Nijel Amos.
And never ran faster. Probably collecting his pension now
ukathleticscoach wrote:
hoooo huuum wrote:Big deal. Wake me up when he runs the equivalent of 1:41 800m at age 18 like GOAT Nijel Amos.
And never ran faster. Probably collecting his pension now
He might as well be retired. It would at least save him some grief and frustration- meaning, he is now training with otc.
four laps is four laps wrote:
Halviking wrote:I really do not get why anyone has the 1600m distance. Either run 1609m or 1500m.
I really do not get why anyone has the 1609m or 1500m distances. Run 1600m.
All western cultures respect numbers like 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 25. I agree. Just do the 1600.
Stats nazi wrote:
To be a sub-4:00 mile there has to be
(a) an official finish time for a race that was at least one mile long; or, an official split at a distance of one mile or later in the race; and,
(b) that time has to be less than 4:00.
...
Point (b) means that even if a mile split was taken, if the 4:57 was the result of a 57.0 final 391 meters (about 58.5 for 400 - completely possible) it would not count as a sub-4:00 mile.
Sure it would, as long as the first 391 meters was not faster than 55. Then you'd have the middle 1218 meters no slower than 4:02, followed by a 57. Who opens a 2000 in 55?
It's difficult but not impossible to run a race greater than 1 mile but less than 2 miles at an overall sub 4 pace without running an actual sub 4 along some mile subinterval of the distance. At 2 miles it is impossible, after 3 miles it's again possible. I think I posted a proof of this some time back.
That wasn't the question. If you want to offer a different answer to the question that was asked
yeah, the question didn't say "official finish time" or "official split" I think.
Didn't Kipchirchir run 3.36 at 17 back in about 2004
Exactly. Why no one wants to know how fast anyone can run 1600 or 3200m. 1 mile and two mile on the other hand.....
Does anyone know who the youngest person was to break 3:48 for the 1500?
Cram fan wrote:
Does anyone know who the youngest person was to break 3:48 for the 1500?
Jakob Ingebrigtsen ran 3:48.37 at age 14. And 3:42 the year after.
[quote]1600
Bad Wigins wrote:
It's difficult but not impossible to run a race greater than 1 mile but less than 2 miles at an overall sub 4 pace without running an actual sub 4 along some mile subinterval of the distance. At 2 miles it is impossible, after 3 miles it's again possible. I think I posted a proof of this some time back.
This seems correct, but I'm not sure what you mean by at 2 miles and after 3 miles? The proof is basically trivial. In the case of an n-mile race, if miles 1,2,...,n are all over 4-minute pace then you've got a contradiction. In the case of an n.x mile race, then either the n-mile race from 0 to n or 0.x to n.x is sub-4 pace and just use the same proof.
Actually that last part isn't quite right - can you give a counter example of a 2.x mile race that violates this? 0.75 miles really slow, 0.6 miles fast, 0.75 miles really slow? What paces? After 3 miles it's easy to show.
talent q wrote:
Gotta bee wrote:I would assume so maybe someone can find splits
I found them. He split 3:56.5 at the one mile point.
Post a link or it's total BS. You easily (and probably) could have just made that up.
four laps is four laps wrote:
Halviking wrote:I really do not get why anyone has the 1600m distance. Either run 1609m or 1500m.
I really do not get why anyone has the 1609m or 1500m distances. Run 1600m.
Let's abolish the Marathon while we're at it and replace it with the 46k run.
A link to the past wrote:
four laps is four laps wrote:I really do not get why anyone has the 1609m or 1500m distances. Run 1600m.
All western cultures respect numbers like 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 25. I agree. Just do the 1600.
16 is not in your list of respected numbers.
Ingebrigsten probably could have broken 4 last year if he actually ran a mile race, given the 3:42. I'm more than confident that he'll be under 4, and could even take some scalps. It'd also be great if he did so that people would stop talking about Jim Ryun already.
coeovettcramelliott wrote:
four laps is four laps wrote:I really do not get why anyone has the 1609m or 1500m distances. Run 1600m.
Let's abolish the Marathon while we're at it and replace it with the 46k run.
The marathon was 40k until the queen of England decided the event had to end at her royal box. True story.
kartelite wrote:
Actually that last part isn't quite right - can you give a counter example of a 2.x mile race that violates this? 0.75 miles really slow, 0.6 miles fast, 0.75 miles really slow? What paces? After 3 miles it's easy to show.
This is an interesting problem has is more complicated than I expected:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.00871http://www.math.hawaii.edu/~tom/mathfiles/runners-latex.pdfIt's rather surprising that the average-pace must have a subinterval at that pace ONLY if the race is an integer multiple of the subinterval.
Gotta bee wrote:
Gruppy wrote:All African claims have an asterisk. I discount them.
so a kid from Norway can break 4 but a kenyan cant? lol
Didn't say no under-17 African could do it. The asterisk is because one of the variables (age) is pretty much unknowable, and there is incentive to lie.
Norway's Jakob Ingebrigtsen, kind of looks like
Magnus Carlsen's brother.