Yes. It may be his best distance once he trains for it. He thought he could be competitive with non-specific training. He was wrong. That's all we know.
He was wrong? But you are right? So what makes you think you know what he needs - an Olympic champion and world record holder - better than he does?
I wonder if he could also beat Rudisha's record if he "trains for it".
Apparently he had to say it for you, and only you, to understand it.
He didn't understand it either because he didn't do that training.
I will try to explain this in a way that you may understand: When John Walker ran the Mile world record, do you think he was ideally trained to run his best half marathon ever?
I only raise what Jakob said -- that his long season was focused on 1500m. This explains why he "could barely finish the race" -- his training did not develop the stamina required to race for 1 hour.
Trying means training with a focus on the half-marathon. Again, I'm just raising what Jakob already told us about what he has to do: "You can't just wake up and jump in the race and break a world record." "... it takes a lot of time and there's still a lot of work to be done to get there ...."
He could have said the same about the 1500 - you don't just wake up and do it. No one claims that you do. But no one also suggests he hasn't broken the 1500 record because he wasn't properly trained for it.
He has said his training suits the longer distances. He has never said he lacked the right preparation. His poor performance was because he misjudged his ability at the longer distance. What none of you brainless apologists can contemplate is that he simply does not have the ability over longer distances that he has in the shorter events. Your belief in his distance abilities is based solely on his own unsubstantiated claims and you therefore look for specious arguments as to why he failed to show those abilities at Copenhagen rather than accept the unpalatable fact he isn't the distance runner he claims to be.
He can't really say the same thing for 1500m, because he long season was focused on the 1500m, and he put in the time and work.
He doesn't contradict himself, when he says normally the distance suits his training, but exceptionally after a long season focused on 1500m, his expectation for the half-marathon was reduced to just being excited to see if he could finish.
I never said I believed in his distance abilities. On the contrary, I said I cannot judge him at the longer distances until he tries, i.e. taking a lot of time and doing a lot of work to get there.
He already admitted all that before the race. When he moves up in distance, I think you can rest assured that his training will no longer be focused on long seasons of 1500m.
You can't be so "assured". He doesn't follow your advice. No one does. He hasn't admitted that his training was inadequate, only that his focus throughout the season was on another event. That would mean he might not match his achievements in the shorter events, not that he would be completely outclassed in the longer event - as he obviously was. Your arguments would see him compete in the sprints and similarly fail while you put that failure down to "inadequate preparation".
"inadequate preparation" looks like your strawman.
Whether he follows my advice or not, I am following his statements. Jakob set the expectations before the race, and my expectations did not exceed his.
His quote is clear: the long season focused on 1500m has reduced his expectation for the half-marathon to just being excited to see if he could finish. His training was adequate enough to set a 10K national road record, and to finish in 63 minutes. He never said he expected to do better than that in Copenhagen.
He could have said the same about the 1500 - you don't just wake up and do it. No one claims that you do. But no one also suggests he hasn't broken the 1500 record because he wasn't properly trained for it.
He has said his training suits the longer distances. He has never said he lacked the right preparation. His poor performance was because he misjudged his ability at the longer distance. What none of you brainless apologists can contemplate is that he simply does not have the ability over longer distances that he has in the shorter events. Your belief in his distance abilities is based solely on his own unsubstantiated claims and you therefore look for specious arguments as to why he failed to show those abilities at Copenhagen rather than accept the unpalatable fact he isn't the distance runner he claims to be.
He can't really say the same thing for 1500m, because he long season was focused on the 1500m, and he put in the time and work.
He doesn't contradict himself, when he says normally the distance suits his training, but exceptionally after a long season focused on 1500m, his expectation for the half-marathon was reduced to just being excited to see if he could finish.
I never said I believed in his distance abilities. On the contrary, I said I cannot judge him at the longer distances until he tries, i.e. taking a lot of time and doing a lot of work to get there.
He did a ton of work to get to where is. What will his focus on the HM look like? With even pacing, I think he could have run 60:00 at Copenhagen, which puts him at 3:26.7/60. If he puts in the HM training, will he be at 3:26.7/58 or will he slow down to 3:30? His top-end isn’t going anywhere, so if he has a big improvement for HM, I believe he’ll be even faster for 1500m to 5000m.
As I said, he obviously did at Copenhagen. He could literally run no further after 10k till he had recovered.
What is obvious is that you are impervious to learning. LarsL11 already tried. Anyway, Jakob has never gone for a 10,000m PB.
So you keep saying. Yet he was done after running only 10k at Copenhagen, so he had run it as fast as he could. It is also his fastest time. Any faster is only in your imagination.
He was wrong? But you are right? So what makes you think you know what he needs - an Olympic champion and world record holder - better than he does?
I wonder if he could also beat Rudisha's record if he "trains for it".
Has he ever claimed to be an 800m man?
It doesn't matter what he claims. He is no closer to being "a HM man" than he is to beating Rudisha's 800 record. But if he claims something his fans think it must be true.
He didn't understand it either because he didn't do that training.
I will try to explain this in a way that you may understand: When John Walker ran the Mile world record, do you think he was ideally trained to run his best half marathon ever?
John Walker never claimed to be a HM man. A change of training may have made him no faster over that distance, because he didn't have the ability for it. And neither does Jakob.
Being focused on the 1500 does not mean his training was inadequate for the longer event. That is your self-serving interpretation.
No. That is a fact that apparently you and Kickers don't understand. Ask malmo.
Lydiard-trained md runners like Snell trained the same way as distance runners. If he had had the ability he, too, could have been a successful distance runner on the same core training that made him a top md runner. Ability aside, the crucial factor is whether the runner has done enough conditioning work in their training. Jakob believes he has.
It doesn't matter what he claims. He is no closer to being "a HM man" than he is to beating Rudisha's 800 record. But if he claims something his fans think it must be true.
He could have said the same about the 1500 - you don't just wake up and do it. No one claims that you do. But no one also suggests he hasn't broken the 1500 record because he wasn't properly trained for it.
He has said his training suits the longer distances. He has never said he lacked the right preparation. His poor performance was because he misjudged his ability at the longer distance. What none of you brainless apologists can contemplate is that he simply does not have the ability over longer distances that he has in the shorter events. Your belief in his distance abilities is based solely on his own unsubstantiated claims and you therefore look for specious arguments as to why he failed to show those abilities at Copenhagen rather than accept the unpalatable fact he isn't the distance runner he claims to be.
He can't really say the same thing for 1500m, because he long season was focused on the 1500m, and he put in the time and work.
He doesn't contradict himself, when he says normally the distance suits his training, but exceptionally after a long season focused on 1500m, his expectation for the half-marathon was reduced to just being excited to see if he could finish.
I never said I believed in his distance abilities. On the contrary, I said I cannot judge him at the longer distances until he tries, i.e. taking a lot of time and doing a lot of work to get there.
You keep prattling on about how excited he would be just to finish, which is what an 80 year-old or a barely trained hobby-jogger would say. It was merely said to likely lower expectations that he would win or break the wr on his first attempt at his "best" distance. If he says it is his best distance - which he has never pulled back from - that means he thinks he should run it as well or better as any other distance. He has said NOTHING to the effect he needed to train specifically for it. How would he know it was his "best" distance if he didn't think the training he was doing enabled him to know that? If his judgment was correct, focusing on a shorter event might mean he wouldn't necessarily perform to his absolute best at the longer distance; it certainly wouldn't mean that he would flop - as he did. (And, no, it wasn't a f***ing 10k race.)
You also keep referring to him saying you don't just wake up one morning and run a record, as though that explains his lack of preparation for a HM. It doesn't say that since it applies equally to the 1500, for which he was obviously trained.