Did Lindgren Run 27:11 for 6 miles as a junior?

qucassidy wrote:

I can't believe anyone hasn't yet identified

this obvious fact....

Rupp was 26:04 at 23 laps...correct?

His last lap in the "10k was 64 seconds...correct?

That would make 27:10 at 6 miles...wouldn't it?

Q

Imagine how much better he could have been in today's running world with altitude tents, olympian coaches, mondo tracks, and oversized shoes.

-Soup

.2 is actually 322 meters (.1 of 1609 is 160.9), it is very likely he would have ran it in 50 seconds or so. I'll say 28:03.

jsquire wrote:

4:02.4* John Zishka Lancaster 1980

4:04.5* Ron Addison Clev. Rhodes 1972

4:05.13 Bob Kennedy Westerville North 1988

4:04.6* Jeff See Middletown 2003

4:06.0* Mason Ward unattached (Cincinatti) 2000

4:07.1* Reggie McAfee Cin. Courter Tech 1969

4:07.1* Darrell Hughes Galloway Westland 1991

4:07.7 Mike Hallabrin Mans. Malabar 1980

4:08.03 Scott Fry Sandusky Perkins 1985

4:08.2* Alan Scharsu Yng. Austintown-Fitch 1978

4:08.4* Tom Rapp Trotwood-Madison 1977

4:08.6* Todd Saul Clayton Northmont 1981

All those asterisks are conversions from a mile to 1600.

Ok I am nitpicky here. How is Kennedy's 4:05.13 superior to See's 4:04.6? (I am assuming the asterisked times have alrady been converted)

And wow - Gerry himself posted on this thread!!

27:11.6 = 1631.6 seconds

6 miles = 9656.064 meters

Lindgren's last lap was 58 seconds.

1631.6 - 58 = 1579.6 seconds were run with 400m to go, before he started his kick.

So the average pace before his kick was 68.262 per 400m, at 9600m this would put him at 1638.29 seconds, plus a 58.0 second last lap and you have a 10000 finish time of 28:16.29

Galen Rupp ran 28:15.5, so yeah.

Earth to GerrytheJogger wrote:

YES, you were a junior. Being a college coach now you should know these things......

Back off, schmuck. The confusion is understandable. The term "junior" could refer to a high-school junior, or it could refer to someone 19 years of age or younger.

Show a little respect.

i think Gerry and Galen should go to hayward , and settle this once and for all...

Gerry, it is cool to see you posting on the boards. These guys who bash you are wankers. I hope to read your book soon. Good luck with your program.

Canadian runner wrote:

These guys who bash you are wankers.

Really?:

dk46 wrote:

because 9600 and 10000 meters are almost the same distance. it's like saying there are two world records in the sprints, one for the 100m and one for the 104m. it's absurd.

There is a 100 yard record and a 100 meter record.

Hello, my fellow WANKERS. Because there is so much riding on the math between 6 miles and 10,000 meters, I will carry you through what I was thinking during that race. If you divide the 10K by 6 miles and carry the four, you will see clearly that the difference between 6 miles and 10K has nothing to do with the 334 yards in your posts. the 6 mile is MUCH more difficult because the four you have to carry is so heavy. You don't have to carry the four if you run 10K. Carrying that four during the race I kept thinking maybe I could swing the %^@#$ thing at Billy and knock him off the track. Just as I started to do so, Billy had the same thought and swung his four at me. The fours must have collided five or six times after that. By the end of the race the fours we were carrying were so beat up there were only 332 yards difference between 6 miles and 10K. Am I a real WANKER now?

Track & Field News always includes Gerry's 6-mile mark in its lists accordingly.

They have given conversions of 28:10.2 and 28:09.8, respectively.

Billy thinks they would have broken 28:00, which I think is silly. But at the time, the 27:11.6 was universally considered as superior to the existing 10,000 WR of 28:14.