I actually know Clarke and we have talked a wee bit about these sorts of things. He pretty much ate like normal people eat but always tried to steer clear of desserts and alcohol. That's not what most people would consider a crap diet. If you want me to believe that you know more about what he ate and how it affected him than he does you'll need to come up with more than an unsupported belief.
I'm not quite sure how Lydiard fits into a discussion about Ron Clarke, But let's look at this idea of his athletes losing in championships. His original group was Halberg, Baillie, Snell, Magee, Davies, Julian, Puckett and Bill Rodger. Half of those guys won Olympic medals. Magee also won the Fukuoka Marathon when it was more or less the de facto world marathon championship and almost twenty years later he coached Paul Ballinger to a win there. Of course most of his athletes did not win Olympic medals but that's true of any coach except maybe for Peter Coe who really just coached one athlete.
Lydiard may or may not have known about the benefits of altitude training. Communication then was nowhere near what it is now. The first time athletes really paid attention to the effects of altitude training was in 1969 when many athletes who had trained at altitude the year before on preparation for Mexico began running very well. Lydiard was never sold on the idea that altitude training was helpful for anything other than racing at altitude.
But whether he was right, wrong, or ignorant about the benefits of altitude is a totally moot point. It was never going to happen for his original group even if he was convinced altitude training was useful. They all had full time jobs and limited incomes. None of them, including Arthur, would have been able to afford to spend time training at altitude.
HRE wrote:
He pretty much ate like normal people eat but always tried to steer clear of desserts and alcohol. If you want me to believe that you know more about what he ate and how it affected him than he does you'll need to come up with more than an unsupported belief.
Omg he ate like normal people! Well that certainly proves what I said.
J.R. wrote:
HRE wrote:He pretty much ate like normal people eat but always tried to steer clear of desserts and alcohol. If you want me to believe that you know more about what he ate and how it affected him than he does you'll need to come up with more than an unsupported belief.
Omg he ate like normal people! Well that certainly proves what I said.
Far from it. But this does explain a bit about you. Thanks.
J.R. wrote:
HRE wrote:He pretty much ate like normal people eat but always tried to steer clear of desserts and alcohol. If you want me to believe that you know more about what he ate and how it affected him than he does you'll need to come up with more than an unsupported belief.
Omg he ate like normal people! Well that certainly proves what I said.
Explain Ric Sayre.
J.R. wrote:
Omg he ate like normal people! Well that certainly proves what I said.
HRE wrote:
Far from it. But this does explain a bit about you. Thanks.
Oh no, it explains more about you, Mr. Gary HRE Oldman Troll.
HRE wrote:
It was never going to happen for his original group even if he was convinced altitude training was useful. They all had full time jobs and limited incomes. None of them, including Arthur, would have been able to afford to spend time training at altitude.
Both Halberg and Lydiard spent time training at altitude.
J.R. wrote:
J.R. wrote:Omg he ate like normal people! Well that certainly proves what I said.
HRE wrote:
Far from it. But this does explain a bit about you. Thanks.
Oh no, it explains more about you, Mr. Gary HRE Oldman Troll.
You actually think we are the same person.... the madness runs very deep.
J.R. wrote:
HRE wrote:He pretty much ate like normal people eat but always tried to steer clear of desserts and alcohol. If you want me to believe that you know more about what he ate and how it affected him than he does you'll need to come up with more than an unsupported belief.
Omg he ate like normal people! Well that certainly proves what I said.
I eat ice cream and chips all day long, and I'm healthy.
ventolin^3,
1st Q:)
Couldn't you use your calculator to estimate what 1500m time he was capable of when Keino ran a WR 7:39 and WR 13:24?
I suppose we could discuss for the rest of our lives about what he might have been capable of VS. what he actually did, but here is an athlete at the peak of his abilities who won the Gold Medal and then set multiple WRs ... it seems like a perfect opportunity to use your calculator to estimate what he could run?
2nd Q:)
I remember (just off the top of my head) Jack Buckner running (I think) 3:35, 3:51y, 7:40 and 13:10 and they seem like times remarkably close to Keino's actual marks.
He never thought about running 3:26. What do you think he could have run for 5000m?
Although, the 7:40 and 13:10 came in '86 and the 1500/mile were in 1984. He had remarkable consistency over 5000m over many years. Because I was curious, I looked up the exact results.
5k in chrono order --
13:21.06 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 3 Eugene 01.06.1985
13:26.08 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 London 21.06.1986
13:25.87 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 Edinburgh 31.07.1986
13:16.49 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 5 Zürich 13.08.1986
13:28.92 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 3h2 Stuttgart 28.08.1986
13:10.15 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 Stuttgart 31.08.1986
13:25.02 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 London 02.08.1987
13:10.48 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 Zürich 19.08.1987
13:24.56 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 5h2 Roma 04.09.1987
13:27.74 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 3 Roma 05.09.1987
13:17.82 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 London 13.09.1987
13:24.43 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 Rieti 31.08.1988
13:23.8 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 7s1 Seoul 29.09.1988
13:23.85 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 6 Seoul 01.10.1988
13:17.82 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 Oslo 01.07.1989
13:19.17 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 6 Bruxelles 25.08.1989
13:26.89 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 Barcelona 10.09.1989
13:10.47 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 Roma 09.06.1992
13:22.50 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 Birmingham 27.06.1992
13:21.92 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 8 London 10.07.1992
For 3k he ran --
7:45.19 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 London 17.06.1984
7:47.51 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 Oslo 21.07.1984
7:47.26 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 London 18.08.1984
7:46.06 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 Roma 31.08.1984
7:48.3+ Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 London 07.09.1984
7:46.1+ Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 San Diego 15.02.1985
7:48.62 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 3 San José 25.05.1985
7:40.43 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 Oslo 05.07.1986
7:45.6+ Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 London 12.09.1986
7:46.54 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 1 Loughborough 07.06.1987
7:45.76 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 6 Edinburgh 07.07.1989
7:44.60 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 10 Nice 15.07.1991
7:47.63 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 Birmingham 14.03.1992
Again, remarkable consistency.
2 Miles --
8:19.63 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 London 07.09.1984
8:21.4 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 San Diego 15.02.1985
8:17.12 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 London 12.09.1986
8:26.52 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 London 28.08.1988
It seems like when he was "normal" he ran 13:25 and then when he ran fast he ran 13:10, similarly when he ran "normal" he ran 7:45 and he had one special race (that he won -- and I remember watching that race) in 7:40.
But very strong consistency. Interestingly his 2mile/3k/5k bests were close to Clarke's as well.
Here are Keino's 5k races (below 13:30)--
13:28.2 Kipchoge Keino KEN 17.01.40 2 Helsinki 30.06.1965
13:26.2 Kipchoge Keino KEN 17.01.40 1 Turku 02.07.1965
13:29.4 Kipchoge Keino KEN 17.01.40 1 Stockholm 25.08.1965
13:24.2 Kipchoge Keino KEN 17.01.40 1 Auckland 30.11.1965
13:26.6 Kipchoge Keino KEN 17.01.40 1 Berlin 26.06.1966
13:27.6 Kipchoge Keino KEN 17.01.40 3 Edinburgh 25.07.1970
13:25.8 Kipchoge Keino KEN 17.01.40 1 London 10.09.1971
Do you think he that Jack Buckner could have broken 7:30 and 12:50?
TrackCoach,
Lydiard did not coach Ron Clarke, Lasse Viren, or John Walker.
Only Walker was from NZ. Just thought you should know this.
Garry Lydman wrote:
HRE wrote:It was never going to happen for his original group even if he was convinced altitude training was useful. They all had full time jobs and limited incomes. None of them, including Arthur, would have been able to afford to spend time training at altitude.
Both Halberg and Lydiard spent time training at altitude.
When?
Actually, Ron Clarke has an Olypmic Gold medal! It was given to him by the man many called the greatest runner of all-time: Vladimir Kuts......Yeah, that's what Kuts thought of Clarke!!! He gave him one of his own golds! Kuts won three I believe.
(Sure, Clarke could have won gold in 1968> Just look at his resumee going into the race: numerous world records and a bronze from Tokyo. No automatics in sports so he came up short, so what.....Had Track and Field had a World Championship every year only a fool would thing Clarke wouldn't have won a few of them.)
Whoops!! My bad......it was Zatopek who gave him one of his golds.
reader of the forums wrote:
Deep Impact wrote:
Keino ran 3:34.9 on a synthetic track in the peak form of his life and at an altitude that didn't affect him over 1500m.
On an even paced circuit run on synthetic he was probably capable of 3:32/3.33. Any suggestion of 3:30 is stupid
Wow. And you think Ventolin is stupid...
it's same chump posting under umpteenth+++ handle
The upshot of the charts is that for a 3:47 1500m at sea level, you get ten seconds grace for 1500m at 7544, quite close to Mexico City. Dropping 3:34.9 by a bit less than 10 seconds (assuming this is a percentage calculation) gets you an insane world record. Not only did Keino never even run sub 3:35 anywhere in his long career but he was an altitude-born and raised athlete, and therefore would not figure to drop anywhere near as much time as the typical sea level athlete running at altitude would add--which is the primary basis for the NCAA conversions. It may be that if you have been at altitude training for months or years you might be equal to the altitude-born athletes, but then you won't drop as much time when you go to sea level. If you figure that Kiplagat has run 3:27.64 and ran 3:32ish in Kenya at altitude, I'll give Keino a 3:29 with even pacing, drafting, and sea level on that day. But if you take the guy who had mono that year and was not an altitude athlete, Jim Ryun, his 3:37 is probably worth 3:27-8 at sea level, and recall that he never had a pacer like that in any of his other fast races.
ALAMOSA, COLORADO ALTITUDE: 7544
WOMEN MEN
EVENT I II III I II III
10000 M 35:38.76 38:07.73 38:05.60 30:35.50 31:39.35 32:16.59
(128.76) (137.73) (137.60) (110.50) (114.35) (116.59)
5000 M 17:47.16 18:00.86 17:50.32 14:58.44 14:56.33 15:15.31
(55.16) (55.86) (55.32) (46.44) (46.33) (47.31)
3000M SC 11:23.15 11:28.15 11:16.59 9:34.68 9:36.78 9:35.73
(32.90) (33.15) (32.59) (27.68) (27.78) (27.73)
3000 M
1500 M 4:39.59 4:42.93 4:44.49 3:57.83 3:56.99 4:00.75
(11.79) (11.93) (11.99) (10.03) (9.99) (10.15)
1 MILE 5:02.03 5:05.58 5:07.15 4:16.83 4:15.95 4:19.96
(12.73) (12.88) (12.95) (10.83) (10.79) (10.96)
800 M 2:11.58 2:12.19 2:12.79 1:51.91 1:51.51 1:52.62
(1.78) (1.79) (1.79) (1.51) (1.51) (1.52)
"NCAA altitude conversion calculator is the gold standard for altitude conversions."
Bha Ha Ha!
You mean created by drunken cross country coaches from universities at altitude and widely reviewed as a joke and being far too generous.
Areyoukiddingme! wrote:
"NCAA altitude conversion calculator is the gold standard for altitude conversions."
Bha Ha Ha!
You mean created by drunken cross country coaches from universities at altitude and widely reviewed as a joke and being far too generous.
Agreed.
Kiplagat hasn't been in enough top notch paced efforts at altitude to summise that 3:32 is his best possible time at altitude.
In fact his best time at altitude (Nairobi - 5900ft) is 3:31.39 from 2011. Comparing that to his pb is stupid because that was in 2014 when he ran 3:27.64. There are 3 years between those 2 performances.
When he ran 3:31.39 at altitude, his best that year was on the known fast track of Monaco, where he ran 3:30.47. That's less than 1 sec faster than what he managed at altitude. And only 1.12 sec behind his career best at the time, which was 3:29.27 in 2010.
Does this mean, as some foolish people on here imply, that Kiplagat was capable of 3:21 at sea level when he ran that 3:31 at altitude? Of course it doesn't. Some people are prepared to use an "random, general calculator" rather than what's called common sense.
Keino was a great runner for his era but nowhere near the same standard of Kiplagat or Kiprop. If Kiplagat was able to run within a second or two of his then potential at 5900ft altitude, than Keino was capable of doing similar at 7300ft in Mexico City. Let's say 2 secs. That brings him down to a 3:32 athlete, which, considering he never broke 3:35 before or after that run anywhere else, is a generous figure.
It's ridiculous to state someone is capable of 3:26 when there is no evidence remotely near that figure to 'back up' a hypothetical suggestion based on a conversion table that isn't a 1 fit for all. Nothing else Keino did at any other distance is remotely indicative of sub 3:30 let alone 3:26.
Using the evidence from Kiplagat's performances, it would appear that the NCAA conversion tables are pretty useless and are to be used as a guide to sea level born and based runners. Even then, they are way too generous for elites.
Areyoukiddingme! wrote:
"NCAA altitude conversion calculator is the gold standard for altitude conversions."
Bha Ha Ha!
You mean created by drunken cross country coaches from universities at altitude and widely reviewed as a joke and being far too generous.
Does NCAA altitude conversion calculator also work for SPRINTS & jumps?
If you ran a 10.2 100 meters @ Flagstaff, would that convert out to a 10.5?
In other words, does the NCAA altitude conversion calculator work in REVERSE for sprints? If not, why not?
ventolin^3 wrote:
newname wrote:ventolin^3,
1st Q:)
Couldn't you use your calculator to estimate what 1500m time he was capable of when Keino ran a WR 7:39 and WR 13:24?
no
reason is despite smashing 3k wr & breaking 5k wr, keino was always a miler & trained for the mile
he broke the 3k/5k wrs off miler training & his outrageous talent, similar to aouita being principally a 1500 guy & breaking 5k wr off it & morceli who shouda smashed 5k wr when off 1500 training he ran 13'03 in miserable weather with 51+ finish !!!
keino's 3k & 5k woud never be as good marks as 1500 as training only for 1500 & his endurance woudn't be expected to "last perfectly" to 3k let alone 5k
the 3k/5k wrs were on dirt not synthetic, so going to be much slower
I suppose we could discuss for the rest of our lives about what he might have been capable of VS. what he actually did, but here is an athlete at the peak of his abilities who won the Gold Medal and then set multiple WRs ... it seems like a perfect opportunity to use your calculator to estimate what he could run?
see above
2nd Q:)
I remember (just off the top of my head) Jack Buckner running (I think) 3:35, 3:51y, 7:40 and 13:10 and they seem like times remarkably close to Keino's actual marks.
He never thought about running 3:26. What do you think he could have run for 5000m?
you can use calculator on a "generic" buckner type-guy who's 3k/5k are best events at 3k/5k simultaneous peak
prelim, a 52.0 / 1'50.0 ->
3'36.5
3'53.5
7'35.5
13'06.7
buckner's 3k was not great, which any fan woud know as 7'40 doesn't compare to a 13'10
the pacing/conditions of his 7'40 need to be examined
Do you think he that Jack Buckner could have broken 7:30 and 12:50?
a nonsensical question not worth bothering with
Your response initiates a few questions --
1) Do you honestly believe a 3:51.59 miler could only run 52/1:50 or do you just think that these numbers make better fodder for your calculator?
What 3:35/3:51y performer in history was only able to run 52/1:50?
He ran 1:49.80 in '81, while he was in college. In the years that followed he concentrated on training and ran better and did not run the 800. Clearly he improved in 1982, then '83, then '84, then '85 and '86.
Your calculator is worthless ... useless.
The only value it has at all is as a trolling tool.
In Chrono order --
1500m
3:37.96 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 Tirrenia 25.08.1982
3:37.25 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 7 Koblenz 31.08.1983
3:37.66 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 3 Bruxelles 01.07.1984
3:37.32 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 6 Rieti 02.09.1984
3:36.73 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 8 Oslo 27.06.1985
3:35.28 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 3 Stockholm 01.07.1986
Mile
3:53.44 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 8 Cork 13.07.1982
3:55.91 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 6 Edinburgh 31.07.1982
3:59.48 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 6 London 20.08.1982
3:56.79 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 Gateshead 10.06.1984
3:56.27 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 5 Cork 03.07.1984
3:51.57 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 Koblenz 29.08.1984
3:58.07 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 2 Inglewood 08.02.1985
3:55.61 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 3 Westwood 18.05.1985
3:57.29 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 6 London 08.08.1986
3:59.33 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 Birmingham 19.08.1986
3:59.55 Jack Buckner GBR 22.09.61 4 London 22.08.1987
3:58.87 Tom Buckner GBR 16.04.63 8 Portsmouth 05.06.1993
2) What is "generic" about Buckner? He was a Euro Champion and 3rd place in the WC. He would be equal to a 12:52-55 runner who medaled in a WC meet in this era.
The point of my obscenely long post was to point out the flaws in your approach. It is your calculator that is broken. I think that part of how it is warped is that it doesn't take into account the effects of EPO (which affects the 3k/5k/10k more than the 800/1500).
When Buckner ran 13:10 / 7:40 (in the SAME YEAR) he was 9.75 secs and 8.33 secs off the WR for 5k and 3k respectively. Those results are pretty comparable if you ask me.
So the upshot is ... If Keino could run 3:26, then Buckner could have run 12:50. I am just illuminating the absurdity of the calculator that you use.
These runners from Buckner's era, and before the EPO era, have real world marks that show the flaw in your approach--
Hutchings --
7:43, 7:44, 7:44, 7:44, 7:45+, 7:46, 7:46, 7:47, 7:48+, 7:49, 7:49 (no indoor marks)
13:11, 13:12, 13:16, 13:19, 13:20, 13:20, 13:20, 13:23, 13:23, 13:24, 13:24, 13:24, 13:24, 13:25, 13:25, 13:25, 13:26, 13:26, 13:27, 13:28, 13:29, 13:29, 13:29 (no indoor marks)
Others --
Ovett -- 7:41, 7:43, 7:44 / 13:20, 13:23, 13:24
Walker -- 7:37, 7:40, 7:41 / 13:19, 13:20, 13:24
Treacy -- 7:45, 7:47, 7:47 / 13:16, 13:19, 13:20
Plasencia -- 7:46, 7:47, 7:49 / 13:19, 13:19, 13:23
McChesney -- 7:40, 7:45, 7:48 / 13:14, 13:15, 13:18, 13:19
Is the calculator that you use online?