Nao Kazami breaks 100K World Record 6:09:14

Could have should have but didn't wrote:

Oh Please wrote:

No they wouldn't and they didn't.

If the route is 89km, then yea, maybe on that day David Gatebe could have run another 11k in 41:30 (6:04/mi pace) to do a sub 6. On the up route, there is no way, because the last 11k in 35 minutes is 5:07/mi (after running 5:52/mi).

At any rate, it's clear that the record of 6:09 could be beaten pretty easily if there was money in it. While Shvetsov's up time wouldn't be conducive to a sub 6, it would be reasonable to have done it under 6:09. He would have needed another 11k at 6:26 pace.

This is all BS. You could use the same argument for mentioning great 5000 meter runners who should have had the world record in 10000 meters.

Just because you are good at one distance does not mean you are good at another.

And just because you could run 89k in a certain pace does not mean you can run the same pace for 100k.

The Comrates is very special because it gets huge attention in Southern Africa with a lot of prize money. Funny enough all the great Kenyan runners are not showing up there.

But this is a classic letsrun.com issue: Clueless highschool runners try to make assumptions about ultrarunning.[/quote]

They are Kenyans, not South Africans, and their cultural focus is on running marathons plus the prize money and appearance fees in marathons are still a lot bigger than even the best paid ultra: Comrades;)

It's changing but it will take time...

Could have should have but didn't wrote:

...

This is all BS. You could use the same argument for mentioning great 5000 meter runners who should have had the world record in 10000 meters.

Just because you are good at one distance does not mean you are good at another.

And just because you could run 89k in a certain pace does not mean you can run the same pace for 100k.

The Comrates is very special because it gets huge attention in Southern Africa with a lot of prize money. Funny enough all the great Kenyan runners are not showing up there.

But this is a classic letsrun.com issue: Clueless highschool runners try to make assumptions about ultrarunning.

Let me get this straight, do you think there is a difference between a 90km specialist (those that win Comrades) and those that win a 100km race? That is what you seem to suggest with your non-sense about 5000 and 10000 correlation (which is particularly funny because the last two WR in the 10,000 also held that 5,000 WR!)

Personally, I believe that someone that performs well at 90km would be able to perform similarly at 100km.

To break it down to terms you might be able to understand, it would be like saying a 9,000m specialist would be good at 10,000m.

Oh Please wrote:

Personally, I believe that someone that performs well at 90km would be able to perform similarly at 100km.

To break it down to terms you might be able to understand, it would be like saying a 9,000m specialist would be good at 10,000m.

There is no 9000m specialist.

If it would be so desirable for the Comrades champions they would show up for the 100k races more.

But they don't. Just because they look good on paper for 100k does not make them good 100k runners unless they try it.

Comrades is a huge show with hundred thousands of spectators. A 100k race no matter were is a lot calmer affair.

But the South Africans did do well at this years 100k WC in Croatia.