Which set of results is better, an Olympic gold, two Worlds silvers and no world records in middle distance or a world record, an Olympic gold and two Worlds golds in long distance? Why is he a middle distance runner and not a long distance runner when he's having much more success in long distance?
You never heard of middle distance runners? I wonder why he is routinely compared here with El G as well as Coe, Cram, Ovett, Aouita, Morceli, Ngeny and so on? He has done nothing at any distance longer than the great md runners ran.
Which set of results is better, an Olympic gold, two Worlds silvers and no world records in middle distance or a world record, an Olympic gold and two Worlds golds in long distance? Why is he a middle distance runner and not a long distance runner when he's having much more success in long distance?
He is a 1500/5k runner. That makes him md in my books. He isn't a 5k/10k and maybe HM/marathon runner, which is a distance runner. If this kind of thread is suggesting he is going to become one of the best 5k/10 runners - as he is over shorter distances - I don't see that happening. His best is in the 2k-2mile pocket.
You can't follow a discussion. Farah has won enough championship titles to make him a great runner. Those in contention for being the very best usually break records as well as win championship titles. It is the only thing that qualifies what Farah achieved. There are however great runners who are still well ahead of Ingebrigtsen by either or both measures.
You contradict yourself in any 2nd post.
According to you, great runners set world records in championship distances. Farah hasn’t and therefore for you isn't a great runner.
Which set of results is better, an Olympic gold, two Worlds silvers and no world records in middle distance or a world record, an Olympic gold and two Worlds golds in long distance? Why is he a middle distance runner and not a long distance runner when he's having much more success in long distance?
He is a 1500/5k runner. That makes him md in my books. He isn't a 5k/10k and maybe HM/marathon runner, which is a distance runner. If this kind of thread is suggesting he is going to become one of the best 5k/10 runners - as he is over shorter distances - I don't see that happening. His best is in the 2k-2mile pocket.
In your books? You have ever seen something like a book?
What a irrelevant point, which sort of runner type he should be called. On the circuit he races mainly 1500m (middle-distance). He is world record holder at 3000m and multiple Gold medalist at 5000m (both long distance). Fine if this constitutes a high jumper for you. Fact is, he achieved great success in long distances.
Which set of results is better, an Olympic gold, two Worlds silvers and no world records in middle distance or a world record, an Olympic gold and two Worlds golds in long distance? Why is he a middle distance runner and not a long distance runner when he's having much more success in long distance?
He is a 1500/5k runner. That makes him md in my books. He isn't a 5k/10k and maybe HM/marathon runner, which is a distance runner. If this kind of thread is suggesting he is going to become one of the best 5k/10 runners - as he is over shorter distances - I don't see that happening. His best is in the 2k-2mile pocket.
3000 and 5000 is long distance. He's set the best world record outside of the marathon in middle distance and up in the 3000, a long distance event, and he's never lost a 5000m final since he started competing as a senior. Being a better long distance runner than middle distance runner makes him a long distance runner.
Jakob hasn't run for times either so why do you think that comparison between Cheptegei and Jakob is relevant if it isn't relevant for Jakob and Farah, despite both of them not having run for times and Jakob still being faster than Farah?
There are different measures for a judgement of merit that include championship titles and world records. Ingebrigtsen is exceeded in both by two different runners (and others), by Farah (championship titles) and Cheptegei (world records). The reason I use those two measures as that each of those runners excelled at them in a way Ingebrigtsen has yet to do. That you say Ingebrigtsen "hasn't run for times" brings him no closer to what Cheptegei has achieved, and however much he wants championship titles he is still nowhere near Farah. In my view, they remain ahead of him from 5k up. But so of course does Bekele.
You didn't answer the question. Why is it relevant to compare the PR of one runner who's run for time and one who hasn't, but it's not relevant to compare the PR between two runners who both haven't run for times?
He is a 1500/5k runner. That makes him md in my books. He isn't a 5k/10k and maybe HM/marathon runner, which is a distance runner. If this kind of thread is suggesting he is going to become one of the best 5k/10 runners - as he is over shorter distances - I don't see that happening. His best is in the 2k-2mile pocket.
Being a better long distance runner than middle distance runner makes him a long distance runner.
I would not say he is a better long distance runner than middle distance runner. And if he is, I would not say this makes him a long distance runner.
So far on the track he has raced on world level the distances from1500m to 5000m. So he doesn't belong to the classic middle distance category (Coe, Snell) and also not to the classic long distance category (Bekele, Viren).
He manages the much more difficult 1500-5000 combo at highest level, call him a middle- and long distance runner.
But isn't it completely irrelevant how we call him?
Armstronglives just tries to put his 5000m (and 3000m/2 Miles) success as part of middle distance (which it isn't) because he can't say the easy sentence: Ingebrigtsen has had great success in long distance running. He seems to be allergic to it - some genetic issue?
You can't follow a discussion. Farah has won enough championship titles to make him a great runner. Those in contention for being the very best usually break records as well as win championship titles. It is the only thing that qualifies what Farah achieved. There are however great runners who are still well ahead of Ingebrigtsen by either or both measures.
You contradict yourself in any 2nd post.
According to you, great runners set world records in championship distances. Farah hasn’t and therefore for you isn't a great runner.
Farah is a great runner, for the reasons I have given, but as I have also explained, that he wasn't a world record-holder qualifies an argument that would put him at the very top. But his championship performances still put him ahead of Ingebrigtsen. Subtlety is beyond you.
He is a 1500/5k runner. That makes him md in my books. He isn't a 5k/10k and maybe HM/marathon runner, which is a distance runner. If this kind of thread is suggesting he is going to become one of the best 5k/10 runners - as he is over shorter distances - I don't see that happening. His best is in the 2k-2mile pocket.
In your books? You have ever seen something like a book?
What a irrelevant point, which sort of runner type he should be called. On the circuit he races mainly 1500m (middle-distance). He is world record holder at 3000m and multiple Gold medalist at 5000m (both long distance). Fine if this constitutes a high jumper for you. Fact is, he achieved great success in long distances.
It doesn't matter what you choose to define as distance running; there is nothing that puts him amongst the very best - yet - at 5k and nothing that indicates he will be a great 5k/10k runner or above, which is what is being suggested. To argue he will is mere speculation.
He is a 1500/5k runner. That makes him md in my books. He isn't a 5k/10k and maybe HM/marathon runner, which is a distance runner. If this kind of thread is suggesting he is going to become one of the best 5k/10 runners - as he is over shorter distances - I don't see that happening. His best is in the 2k-2mile pocket.
3000 and 5000 is long distance. He's set the best world record outside of the marathon in middle distance and up in the 3000, a long distance event, and he's never lost a 5000m final since he started competing as a senior. Being a better long distance runner than middle distance runner makes him a long distance runner.
We disagree about what constitutes a distance runner; he isn't - even if he runs a HM. I also don't agree that he is better at the longer distances. His "pocket" is 2k-2mile.
Of course you are only as good as your last race, but he ran 7:17 for 3000m and 7.54 for 2 miles. Of course he has the potential to break the 5000m WR. Longer than that? Who knows, and he may not be able to get the 5000m WR, but he's in the conversation for sure.
There are different measures for a judgement of merit that include championship titles and world records. Ingebrigtsen is exceeded in both by two different runners (and others), by Farah (championship titles) and Cheptegei (world records). The reason I use those two measures as that each of those runners excelled at them in a way Ingebrigtsen has yet to do. That you say Ingebrigtsen "hasn't run for times" brings him no closer to what Cheptegei has achieved, and however much he wants championship titles he is still nowhere near Farah. In my view, they remain ahead of him from 5k up. But so of course does Bekele.
You didn't answer the question. Why is it relevant to compare the PR of one runner who's run for time and one who hasn't, but it's not relevant to compare the PR between two runners who both haven't run for times?
I'm not interested in the question. It doesn't address whether Ingebrigtsen has shown that he can be the fastest in the 5k - I don't think he can be - or succeed over 10k - I don't think he will.
Being a better long distance runner than middle distance runner makes him a long distance runner.
I would not say he is a better long distance runner than middle distance runner. And if he is, I would not say this makes him a long distance runner.
So far on the track he has raced on world level the distances from1500m to 5000m. So he doesn't belong to the classic middle distance category (Coe, Snell) and also not to the classic long distance category (Bekele, Viren).
He manages the much more difficult 1500-5000 combo at highest level, call him a middle- and long distance runner.
But isn't it completely irrelevant how we call him?
Armstronglives just tries to put his 5000m (and 3000m/2 Miles) success as part of middle distance (which it isn't) because he can't say the easy sentence: Ingebrigtsen has had great success in long distance running. He seems to be allergic to it - some genetic issue?
I am saying that in modern times 1500/5k can be considered md, as El G was, and it isn't confined to 800/1500 runners, as it was in the past. My main point is quite simple: I don't believe he will ever be a great 5k/10k and above runner.
Of course you are only as good as your last race, but he ran 7:17 for 3000m and 7.54 for 2 miles. Of course he has the potential to break the 5000m WR. Longer than that? Who knows, and he may not be able to get the 5000m WR, but he's in the conversation for sure.
You think he has the potential for the world 5k mark; I am sceptical. That is the difference between me and others who think like you on this thread.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.