Why am I so happy that Farah lost today?

Dachstein wrote:

Look, without getting too caught up in the semantics of all this, you said "..he was never in good distance shape this year" and when challenged on it, referenced 2 times that he's run a good deal faster than this season. THAT was my point.

You and I have a different definition of 'jog' then. I assure you I can't run within 2 minutes of my HM best in a jog, and I doubt anyone can. And if it's so easy, have a look on the IAAF lists at all these sub-27 10,000m runners and see how many have HM bests slower than an hour. It's not the given you're making out to be, not even close

It's not semantics. They are entirely different statements and points:

--these times show bad endurance

--these times do not show good endurance

What times did he run a great deal faster than? As far as I can recall, he only ran one 10k this year. So what faster 10k did he run this year a great deal faster than that one? Regarding the 5k, yes he ran faster. You are correct.

But that isn't the point. Someone brought up his WC times (not his other season times) specifically to show that he is in great endurance shape. Based on those WC times ALONE, don't you agree that it is not clear whether or not he was in good endurance shape? That was my point.

But his 60:10 yesterday did indicate his endurance shape. It's not as good as some of you thought. A 26:xx guy should run 60:10 with ease. Jog was an exxageration that I thought wpdidnt need explaining. Jog was meant to mean a tempo effort or a little bit slower. For a 26:xx guy, a 60:10 would certainly fall into that category. Seeing how he lost and looking at his closing splits, it's clear that he's not in that kind of shape.

ksksk wrote:

Of course a sub 60 will be a jog for someone sometime. You're really telling me that a 58 minute runner would have trouble running sub 60?

Why don't you look at some of the most recent results of 58 minute runners and see if sub-60 is really a jog?

424 60:31 Zersenay Tadese ERI 08.02.82 1 Gifu 19.05.2013

211 60:02 Mathew Kisorio KEN 16.05.89 1 Marugame 05.02.2012

676 60:54 Martin Irungu Mathathi KEN 25.12.85 2 Gifu 19.05.2013

784 61:02 Wilson Kipsang Kiprotich KEN 15.03.82 1 New York City 17.03.2013

You'd think a "58 minute runner" would have jogged a 2 hour marathon by now? I'm sure you could get some guys on RunnersWorld to agree.

ksksk wrote:

But his 60:10 yesterday did indicate his endurance shape. It's not as good as some of you thought. A 26:xx guy should run 60:10 with ease.

There's this little thing called weather conditions you know, and yesterday it was cold, windy and partially rainy.

Also, I didn't see any rabbits - and when elite guys race each other, moving around for position with their brains tuned in to tactic first and to speed second, they always loose a percent or two on the clock even if it's not obvious to us spectators.

Hardloper wrote:

Why don't you look at some of the most recent results of 58 minute runners and see if sub-60 is really a jog?

424 60:31 Zersenay Tadese ERI 08.02.82 1 Gifu 19.05.2013

211 60:02 Mathew Kisorio KEN 16.05.89 1 Marugame 05.02.2012

676 60:54 Martin Irungu Mathathi KEN 25.12.85 2 Gifu 19.05.2013

784 61:02 Wilson Kipsang Kiprotich KEN 15.03.82 1 New York City 17.03.2013

You'd think a "58 minute runner" would have jogged a 2 hour marathon by now? I'm sure you could get some guys on RunnersWorld to agree.

Did you even think before you posted all of that? Running 2 minutes off your current fitness should be no problem at all. Your 2 hr marathon comments don't make any sense.

If you think that 60 for a 58 minute runner is hard, then you also think that 4:12 is hard for a 4:00 miler. Do you? No.

Peter Andersson wrote:

ksksk wrote:

But his 60:10 yesterday did indicate his endurance shape. It's not as good as some of you thought. A 26:xx guy should run 60:10 with ease.

There's this little thing called weather conditions you know, and yesterday it was cold, windy and partially rainy.

Also, I didn't see any rabbits - and when elite guys race each other, moving around for position with their brains tuned in to tactic first and to speed second, they always loose a percent or two on the clock even if it's not obvious to us spectators.

Weather wasn't a problem. Did you see how fast the women ran???

Your second point makes some sense, but is proven wrong by how slow the finishing kick was. This was a near max effort for Farah.

ksksk wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

Why don't you look at some of the most recent results of 58 minute runners and see if sub-60 is really a jog?

424 60:31 Zersenay Tadese ERI 08.02.82 1 Gifu 19.05.2013

211 60:02 Mathew Kisorio KEN 16.05.89 1 Marugame 05.02.2012

676 60:54 Martin Irungu Mathathi KEN 25.12.85 2 Gifu 19.05.2013

784 61:02 Wilson Kipsang Kiprotich KEN 15.03.82 1 New York City 17.03.2013

You'd think a "58 minute runner" would have jogged a 2 hour marathon by now? I'm sure you could get some guys on RunnersWorld to agree.

Did you even think before you posted all of that? Running 2 minutes off your current fitness should be no problem at all. Your 2 hr marathon comments don't make any sense.

If you think that 60 for a 58 minute runner is hard, then you also think that 4:12 is hard for a 4:00 miler. Do you? No.

You know you've found a troll when he's going 4 different ways at once and still believes it's only one way. A bit like a compulsive liar who tells so many lies they can't remember what they've said and keep going.

Some people get on the bandwagon with athletes because the athletes are winners; other people resent others for being successful. Human psychology makes little rational sense.

ksksk wrote:

But his 60:10 yesterday did indicate his endurance shape. It's not as good as some of you thought. A 26:xx guy should run 60:10 with ease. Jog was an exxageration that I thought wpdidnt need explaining. Jog was meant to mean a tempo effort or a little bit slower. For a 26:xx guy, a 60:10 would certainly fall into that category. Seeing how he lost and looking at his closing splits, it's clear that he's not in that kind of shape.

He's maybe a little tired at the end of his season?

I think it was good for the sport that Bekele won but Farah was close.

We want to see competition where the result is in doubt.

Farah was competitive against Kiprop over 1500m and now raced Bekele to the line in a half marathon.

He got out kicked in the 5000 at Pre.

That's three second place finishes for him this year at a wide range of distances.

This result makes the sport more interesting and let's us look forward to the next battle between the two.

If Farah won, there would be less suspense about the next race, whenever that may be.

And seeing Bekele, Farah and Geb all gracious at the finish was great.

They all know that was good for their sport.

Guppy wrote:

Though Bekele has always been impressive, I've never been a big fan or anything, but during that video, I was yelling at my computer, "Come on, Kenny! Go Kenny!" I desperately wanted Mo to lose.

It was an exciting race regardless.

REAL. RACE. Exactly. The point of fact for this day two men in the HEAT of a RACE were in it to win it. We all knew it. When people start screaming at screens and adrenaline starts pumping watching and having one athlete who has not seen "world class" in a while vs. an athlete who had a Long "champion" season.

Regardless... both wanted to win and it was on.

Face the facts though: Only a special athlete can just "drop off a pace" then roar back up and pass them as a tactic, that's ridiculous at that level. Kenny B can. (Remember Bekele's shoe tie in mid World Crosscountry?) And finally, the Mobot is going to look REALLY stupid if he pulls that when he loses again.

Same ages, Bekele isn't going anywhere.

Because I am coach d, and I know everything.

Joplas wrote:

The race itself was a travesty. These are not the best half marathoners in the world. There are a number of other runners who if invited would have beaten Kenny and Mo. Indeed its true that this race was tailor made to enhance the celebrity of Mo. They figured Bekele has not been in good shape of late and Geb is way over the hill. Had Mo beaten both, the Brits would have hyped it to high heaven. Never mind the fact that neither Kenny nor Geb are in their peak.

+1

Why are so many people on this board finding it so hard to understand what a sham that race was?

They didn't even offer meaningful prize money to give a hungry outsider a reason to show up. Just disgraceful.

Might as well pay Geb, KB and Mo to run a tempo together then race for beers at the end, which is what this amounted to.

ksksk wrote:

Did you see how fast the women ran???

I did see how fast ONE woman ran!

Performance of the day if you ask me. Jeptoo used Dibaba/Defar as rabbits, when the two of them went into tactics-over-speed mode after 2/3 of the race she continued to go for speed alone - Dibaba almost gave up immediatelly, obviously hadn't expected that, Defar fast-grew some cojones and tried to make it back for a while, kudos to her for that, but she couldn't make it alone without Dibaba.

Just another proof that when elites run for the race alone they give up a percent or two on speed - to bad you can't see that was the same for all three men in their race.

Another aspect about Farah is how he's been transmogrified into a symbol of Rule Britannia that goes beyond track & field into deluded nationalist realms. Listen to the commentator on yesterday's video who cites the narrowness of the finish area as a factor in Farah's defeat. It completely discounts the greatness of Kenenisa Bekele. The British press are feeding the public a feelgood "myth of Mo." He's a "charging, splashing, British Hero" in the words of Ian Chadband of The Telegraph. So what does that make Bekele? Just someone who is much faster than Farah over Farah's chosen distances. But nevermind that. When Farah loses, the British press make excuses and maintain the myth. That's insulting not only to T&F, but to basic intelligence.

Takes one, to know one.

Relax people. Nobody peaks for this race in mid September. Especially Farah, Defar, and Dibaba who all were world champions this year.

And for the idiot who thinks double Gold medalist and 3:28 1500m runner, Farah is not fit, go back to your comic books.

Yesterday we couldn't stop chatting about this race in my running group. And EVERYBODY was happy to see Bekele win AND Mo lose.

Reasons? Ranging from suspiciousness about Mo's recent achievements (11" improvement in one year in 1500, then winning 5000 and 10000 World Championships in a row, then running a half in 60') to the gladness about seeing Bekele back and fit.

For Haile there were only good words and good wishes.

Lets run logic

Farah wins and runs fast he's on drugs

Farah Loses he has no endurance (even though he ran 60:10 in bad conditions, in a tactical race with no pace makers on a rolling course that is not that fast even if there is a net drop in elevation)

Farah wins two world champs and it is his fault the races are slow and lets run readers think they were boring

Farah is gracious in defeat and therefore he is a phony

Farah has not approached Bekeles 10k or 5k times even though he is has a range of 3:28 to 60:10 and he is on drugs but Bekele was not when he ran his world records.

Farah is subject to UK drug testing which is widely acknowledged to be one of the most comprehensive drugs programs. He has to give his location for 1 hour every day 5 days a week and drugs testers turn up at random yet he is on drugs while Ethiopia and Kenyans have a virtually non existent out of comp drug test regime and they are all clean

Let's Run Dot Com™