Most Bogus WR??

I think both Radcliffe and Ndereba would disagree with you. Radcliffe truly believes she could "shatter" 29:31. Ndereba runs 32:00 at 9000ft altitude.

OTR wrote:

Radcliffe truly believes she could "shatter" 29:31

Where on earth did you get that from?! I have NEVER seen or heard Paula speak about breaking the 10,000m WR. She strongly believes she can run sub-30, but sub-29:31 is a WHOLE other kettle of fish.

What you seems to be frgetting with all these comparisons of marathon pace to 10k pace is that as the athlete gets quicker (Radcliffe for example is approx. 15 seconds per mile quicker than Benoit) the difference becomes more and more exceptional.

ie. for arguments sake

Radcliffe runs 4.48 for 10k and 5.10 for marathon

Benoit runs 5.10 for 10k and 5.22 for marathon

Radcliffes differentail is far far more impressive becasue as anybody knows as you get quicker it becomes harder to improve, teh differential of Benoits time is far less percentage wise than Radcliffes. In other words a 22 second difference when the 10k time is 4.48 is totally different to a 22 second differential when the 10k time is 5.10 because the 22 seconds is a far greater percentage of the time.

22 seconds at radcliffes marathon time is 14.1% slower

That Chinese lady's 10K wr...what ever happened to her?

Letsrun should do a "where is she now?" profile on her.

Without a doubt the most bogus WR is the Womens 10km.

Her last 5000m was done in 14.26 (would've been a WR for 5000m at the time), last 3000m in 8.16 (no current woman would be able to start the race with 3000m to go and still beat her), LAst 2000m in 5.31, Last KM in 2.46.

This, and the fact she ran 8.06, 8.12, 3.54and the 10000m within a week.

Nobody can convince me that that isn't dubious....

Funny how most of you would all say that the 5000m record that the Chinese women set (Jiang Bo) of 14:28 was absolutely ridiculous and completely drugged.

AND NOW, the record is 14:24, so perhaps the record was clean, or what has made this new athlete clean the Chinese drugged?

29:31 will soon be ancient and attacked by the Dibaba's, etc., of this running world. And then what will you say? Was it drugged or was she ahead of her time in training?

I say 29:31 is not a phenomenal time for women and not drugged. I can see about 2-3, if not, 3-5, women dip under 30-minutes THIS YEAR in proper conditions... especially if they hopped in the Distance Carnival at Stanford. You can't sit here and tell me that Radcliffe would not approach 29:30 with the boys out at Stanford on those nights of magic on the track. She would roll, as would Kiplagat and the Ethiopians..

Your posts just get funnier and funnier.

First off, Bo Jiang's 5000m record was obviously the weakest BY FAR of all the chinese distance records set in '93 and '97. On other messageboards I (along with a few others) had been saying for years that the 5000m WR had outstayed its welcome and that one of several women stood a good chance of breaking it.

I'll make this prediction now and I don't mind laying my neck on the line - Tirunesh (or Ejegayou) Dibaba will NOT break Wang Junxia's 10,000m WR.

Whatever makes you think that Paula, Kiplagat and the Ethiopians would find 29:30 "a stroll" with male pacemakers?? If they find that kind of pace so easy, then Kiplagat would have won the WCh and OG, Paula would have ran it in 2002 and the Ethiopians would all be there by now.

Now, repeat after me:

30:00 - breakable by several of the current female distance runners

29:31 - Ain't nobody breaking this one any time soon.

Simple propotionality maths can be used to plot a graph of speed decay, which is helpful for predicting times for distance events. Paula's 'line of best fit' is very accurate, as 14:29 / 2:15;25 gives a time of around 29:55. The same graph can be applied to other athletes and it will work out similarly. I've looked at the PBs of the top female distance runners, and there is no-one at the moment with anywhere near the potential to run under 29:31. You're really not giving that time the credit it deserves.

SJD, you seem to be Radcliffe's staunchest supporter. I fear for you when her running goes wrong. I remember when you were devastated at Athens and more will happen in the future. I find it is best not to obsess with one athlete and believe you can speak for such athlete, etc.

By the way, I have run 29:35 for 10,000m and I have a 5000m PB of 14:38, so I believe that YES, Radcliffe can run close to 29:30 or better. IT is you who does not have a good understanding of race distances and times. And by the way, Radcliffe also bests my PB at 3K (8:28).

If she were to get into a race with men on the track like she does on the road, she would perhaps break the 29:31. Many of my mates believe the same, and they have run 28:40's, etc.

I believe that Paula Radcliffe's 2:15:25 Marathon World Record re-inforces the fact that a female CAN cover 10,000m in 29:30+. Check ANY performance table, VDOT, ask your coach or any coach from the 1970-1980's and they will tell you that a MALE athlete capable of running 2:15 has to have the capacity of running close to 29:05 +/- for 10,000m in order to even consider running 2:15 for the marathon distance.

Paula Radcliffe is not male. Male performance curves do not apply to females. You need to compare Paula's decay curve to that of other female elites, not to males.

elflord wrote:

Paula Radcliffe is not male. Male performance curves do not apply to females. You need to compare Paula's decay curve to that of other female elites, not to males.

Spot-on.