More Impressive:Daniel Komen's 2 mile or Kenenisa Bekele's 5000m WR?

Steeple is only 1288 points. Not sure what assumptions or model they use for the calculations.

i am going to chime in and say

the 1.5, 3 and 5 Km records are pretty much equivalent.

and no one is going to break them without EPO.

the 10k is the softest by far.

a perfect EPO bekele could go close to 26 flat.

and if you don't believe me, ask bekele (leave out the EPO bit).

I tried to look at this in a different way, the % the WR is ahead of 2nd best performer and 10th best performer. Results:

1500: .06%/1.52%

3000: .55%/1.54%

5000: .26%/1.49%

10k: .33%/1.33%

Half: .28%/1.1%

Mar: .05%/.96%

So on both measures the 3k looks most impressive.

1955 wrote:

I tried to look at this in a different way, the % the WR is ahead of 2nd best performer and 10th best performer. Results:

1500: .06%/1.52%

3000: .55%/1.54%

5000: .26%/1.49%

10k: .33%/1.33%

Half: .28%/1.1%

Mar: .05%/.96%

So on both measures the 3k looks most impressive.

Interesting way of looking at it. But of course the 3k is run less than the other events, so likely the difference would be smaller if more commonly run. If it were a marquee event, and El G had taken several big shots at it, he would have been close, but still might not have broken it. And if Bekele had focused on 1500/3k's for a season or two (which he never did), he would have gotten close also. But I still think the record would have stood.

But, I think the people like ventolin who try and downplay the greatness of the 3k are just flat out wrong. It might not be better than 12:37, but it is at least on par with it.

1955 wrote:

I tried to look at this in a different way, the % the WR is ahead of 2nd best performer and 10th best performer. Results:

1500: .06%/1.52%

3000: .55%/1.54%

5000: .26%/1.49%

10k: .33%/1.33%

Half: .28%/1.1%

Mar: .05%/.96%

So on both measures the 3k looks most impressive.

Why are we comparing komens 3k mark instead his 2 mile p.b. I mean correct if I'm wrong but doesn't the o.p say 2 mile. Just a thought.

From a pure statistical standpoint, I would say, KB’s 5k record is superior. In a sport as objectively-based as T&F, that should end the argument; however, that would be like comparing Michael Jordan’s best season to Wilt Chamberlin’s…it comes down to what you personally value most in a performance. Not necessarily picking one performance over the other, but you do have to keep in mind that Komen’s 3k record was run almost a decade before KB’s 5k record. Also, when KB’s ran his 5k record, the T&F world was amazed, when Komen’s ran his 3k record, the T&F world was stunned almost to the level disbelief. The 3k record is so strong that over the last decade it has been tough to get athletes to even discuss it and over 90% of the time when you get the best athletes together, they barely break 7:30.

The 2m is so little run that it's hard to really gauge comparative marks. At least the 3k is often run in Europe, although obviously not at the world championship or Olympic level.

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:But, I think the people like ventolin who try and downplay the greatness of the 3k are just flat out wrong. It might not be better than 12:37, but it is at least on par with it.

no downplaying

he was beat-up coming into rieti ( 13'00 just 2/7 before ) & beat up more by pacer with ridiculous opening lap

it's more like mid-7'19 if rested/even pace

the ? of = to 5k is virtually infathomnable...

?? That doesn't make sense; "I would say" hardly ends anything, no?

I was thinking this the other night . nearly 10 years earlier is a huge difference in sport, esp T&F. Also, when KB broke the 5000m, he did so by 2 seconds. And there had been 2 previous wr's at that distance both under 12:40. Komen broke the 3000m by nearly 5 seconds; a MUCH greater percentage margin. Everyone knows how much records matter/ed to guys like Geb and El G and Bekele - that they so rarely even bother to try to break it, and after one or 2 failed attempts didn't try again, suggests they didn't think they could - even KB suggested how perfect a perfect day would be needed. I'm sure if any of those guys felt they really could break it, they'd have given more than token whirl.

Hence my comment earlier about trying to demarcate which record is better - it's pointless. There is NO "pure statistical standpoint" to be objective from; which statistic do we use? Further, we all (except Ventolin) :) know that sport, and esp T&F is never purely "objective" or "statistical".

On the 2 mile wr - I think part of the importance of that record, whether the distance is run regularly or not, is helped along by the significance of it, relative to the Bannister's one mile < 4 mins. It's impossible to overstate the importance of breaking that barrier; and for Komen, or anyone, to double it years later, carries quite a bit of weight, imo; even if we believe his 3000m or the 5000m times, are "faster".

All that said - man, isn't it simply incredible to watch those guys run!

I think that, in order to break 7:20, a runner would need to be able also to break both 3:30 and 12:45 and have a really good day. There's been four guys, at least, who could run those two times: Komen, ElG, Geb and Bekele. Only Komen had a really good day when he attempted the record.

That said, I'm afraid I have to agree with some posters above. It's not only true that no one really comes within 10 s of the 3000 record anymore, it's also true that no one really comes within 5 seconds of the 15 or within a dozen of the 5. It's probably going to be a few more years before we do again.

Both records are inferior to Rich Froning's Crossfit world championship.

ventolin^3 wrote:

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:But, I think the people like ventolin who try and downplay the greatness of the 3k are just flat out wrong. It might not be better than 12:37, but it is at least on par with it.

no downplaying

he was beat-up coming into rieti ( 13'00 just 2/7 before ) & beat up more by pacer with ridiculous opening lap

it's more like mid-7'19 if rested/even pace

the ? of = to 5k is virtually infathomnable...

CORRECT.

longjack wrote:

i am going to chime in and say

the 1.5, 3 and 5 Km records are pretty much equivalent.

and no one is going to break them without EPO.

the 10k is the softest by far.

a perfect EPO bekele could go close to 26 flat.

and if you don't believe me, ask bekele (leave out the EPO bit).

I don't know why everyone is getting do hot under the collar arguing which of the records is the greatest, when it is so obvious all the WRs from 1500 to 10k are EPO aided. The times are laughable.

ISBN wrote:

longjack wrote:

i am going to chime in and say

the 1.5, 3 and 5 Km records are pretty much equivalent.

and no one is going to break them without EPO.

the 10k is the softest by far.

a perfect EPO bekele could go close to 26 flat.

and if you don't believe me, ask bekele (leave out the EPO bit).

I don't know why everyone is getting do hot under the collar arguing which of the records is the greatest, when it is so obvious all the WRs from 1500 to 10k are EPO aided. The times are laughable.

STFU and go run your 25 min 5k

Does anyone have a link to Komen's 2 mile WR other than this highlight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOP15TyMSIk?

This is an interesting way to break down the records. It's amazing how much of a difference 3 seconds/lap makes.[/quote]

Exactly this

Bad Wigins wrote:

Komen's is better, obviously, because 3000 meters is closer to the ideal race distance of 800 meters.

The further away a race is from 800 meters, the less important it is. Marathon records are worthless.

The real question is, Komen vs Bekele at 800 meters. Who would win that. If you ever want to compare two runners and figure out who is the greater, figure out who would win at 800 meters.

Old thread, but what the heck does his post mean? Why are marathons worthless? Why is the 800 the ideal race distance? Why's 800M better than, say, 30,000M?

5k is better than 10k, 12:37 + 31.5 x 2 = 26:17

He had a 31.5 differential, but top elites can do it in 23-27

Rupp, 12:58 + 24 x 2 = 26:44

I would rank it 3k WR > 5k WR > 10k WR

Komen hitting 29's was just mind blowing, that's averaging under 60 per lap, under 1:29 per 600, under 1:58 per 800, under 2:57 per 1200, under 3:56 per 1600! Komen had 12:39 5k I think, but I think he had potential for a 12:34-12:35... 3k was just his perfect distance, he just new how to max out in that event... I wish the outdoor 3k was a thing...

NOP Skeptic wrote:

5k is better than 10k, 12:37 + 31.5 x 2 = 26:17

He had a 31.5 differential, but top elites can do it in 23-27

Rupp, 12:58 + 24 x 2 = 26:44

I would rank it 3k WR > 5k WR > 10k WR

Komen hitting 29's was just mind blowing, that's averaging under 60 per lap, under 1:29 per 600, under 1:58 per 800, under 2:57 per 1200, under 3:56 per 1600! Komen had 12:39 5k I think, but I think he had potential for a 12:34-12:35... 3k was just his perfect distance, he just new how to max out in that event... I wish the outdoor 3k was a thing...

Agreed. I'd love to see the outdoor 3,000M/2 miles run more often. There's such a big gap between the 1,500 and the 5,000.