Wow: G Dibaba has entered Doha DL women's 800 where she'll clash with Semenya, Niyonsaba and Wambui

jeff tallon wrote:

i think genzebe could run about a 52 second flat 400,or 51.9.no faster than that.she has good leg speed,and shes potentially even a sub 24 second 200 meter runner as well.i think if she contested 100,200,400 and 800 meters,she might at her peak,run 11.9, 23.9, 51.9 and close to 1.55.

Haha, ok.

jeff tallon wrote:

i think genzebe could run about a 52 second flat 400,or 51.9.no faster than that.she has good leg speed,and shes potentially even a sub 24 second 200 meter runner as well.i think if she contested 100,200,400 and 800 meters,she might at her peak,run 11.9, 23.9, 51.9 and close to 1.55.

52 seconds is very fast, I'm pretty sure she can't do that. She will get big problems in running sub 53.

stats.gangsta_the_real_1 wrote:

said88 wrote:

I wouldn't read too much into these predictions. And, you write: "if she maintains her 3:50 ability". She is far from this at the moment. But, much more important for me, Genzebe Dibaba just is a "miler". Ayana has destroyed her over 5000m, and 14:15.41 really is weak compared to 3:50.07.

If she improves to 13:50? Well, 25 seconds over 5000m in WR territory should be an easy task. I really would like to see her over 10000m, but I think she has much better chances to excel over 800m. Not really a chance for the WR, but around 1:55.

They aren't predictions. They are calculations. Because they are calculations, you should read much into them.

Unfortunately guys like Alberto Juantorena, Harald Schmid or Mark Everett in their days didn't know anything about these calculations. If they had, they definitely would have concentrated on the 100m - Usain Bold still just would look like a hobby sprinter.

But since the 9.23 or the 9.33 for Juantorena and Schmid are rock hard calculations, they definitely could have achieved them.

But still...

No idea, why I'm also still sceptical for the 19.84 for Sydney Maree - since it was CALCULATED.

A 45/1:48 type of athlete (nothing very strange) could run sub 9 for the 100m - or maybe...

I hope Dibaba can beat those guys over 800m.

said88 wrote:

Unfortunately guys like Alberto Juantorena, Harald Schmid or Mark Everett in their days didn't know anything about these calculations. If they had, they definitely would have concentrated on the 100m - Usain Bold still just would look like a hobby sprinter.

But since the 9.23 or the 9.33 for Juantorena and Schmid are rock hard calculations, they definitely could have achieved them.

But still...

No idea, why I'm also still sceptical for the 19.84 for Sydney Maree - since it was CALCULATED.

A 45/1:48 type of athlete (nothing very strange) could run sub 9 for the 100m - or maybe...

There's no problem with the calculator. You are using it incorrectly. Also, I am not sure why you are being so hostile. There's no need for that attitude.

1) The calculator states that it should not be used for 100/200m times.

2) Did you use the optimizer before you used the calculator? I'm guessing not.

Again, you are using the calculator incorrectly. If you need help, just ask. There's no need for a negative attitude.

These calculators nevere ever can give good results for all athletes. At least two distances for the input definitely is not enough. There could be two different athletes who have the same PBs (and same potential) in two events, yet have totally different potential for other events. But the calculator can't give note to this.

And there are the 100m and the 200m given as output - so, why shouldn't I list them? When the calculator lists's sub 7 seconds for the 100m as result, then I think I have good reason to be sceptical.

I'm just very sceptical to all these kind of calculators - so often that you just get some nonsense output. After you get some result, you always have to look if it seems to be plausible - and if not, you have to do some sort of adaptation. I can do this directly without using the calculator.

I find the calculator is fairly accurate for middle distance events personally.

If you ignore the 100/200 as it says on the website, then for your hypothetical (and also unusual 45/1:48 athlete, I personally have never come across someone with those PBs)

400 0:45.0

800 1:48.0

1000 2:22.72

1500 3:55.26

1-mile 4:16.30

3000 9:03.76

2-mile 9:51.28

5000 16:37.36

They seem fairly accurate to what I would expect.

But you can't (at least I can't this) expect the same numbers for any runner - they are just too different. Even when they have the same potential for two events.

You don't see a 45/1:48 Combo often for sure, because someone of international class 400m don't runs the 800m when he just can get to "national" level. What do you think a close to world class 400m runner "should" achieve over 800m? A few can run much faster, many definitely can't run that fast. I really don't think my numbers are that special.

said88 wrote:

But you can't (at least I can't this) expect the same numbers for any runner - they are just too different. Even when they have the same potential for two events.

You don't see a 45/1:48 Combo often for sure, because someone of international class 400m don't runs the 800m when he just can get to "national" level. What do you think a close to world class 400m runner "should" achieve over 800m? A few can run much faster, many definitely can't run that fast. I really don't think my numbers are that special.

I understand, but in my opinion those numbers would suit the typical runner of that calibre. I would not expect them to be able to break 16:00 with such poor endurance, nor do much better than 4:00 for 1500m. These things are common sense.

That calculator is the dumbest gimmick I've ever seen.

As for Genzebe in sprints, it's impossible to predict what she would do unless she did full sprint training, which is not going to happen because her money is made as a miler.

If this 800 works out for her, may see a 400 training run or two. The new 800 WR will belong to Jelimo and it is within reach. She will now probably go for the new 3000 WR as well, it will be a real soft record that is actually slower than her indoor 3K WR. The outdoor mile will already be hers anyway..

I already explained this to you. Do not use the 100 and 200 BECAUSE IT SAYS DO NOT USE THE 100 and 200.

"These" caculators? My calculator is unique. Other calculators do not use 2 inputs and that is where they lose accuracy. It does not make sense to compare my calculator to 1-input calculators.

This calculator DOES give good results for ALL athletes. If 2 athletes have the same ability at 2 distances, then they will have the same ability at all other distances. I do not understand why you think 2 inputs is not enough. 2 inputs is all that is necessary.

When the calculator does not produce good results, it has always been because of the user (you).

1) not following the instructions to not use 100/200 times

2) not using the optimizer BEFORE using the calculator

3) not making sure the PBs were achieved in the same period

You failed at ALL THREE of these mistakes. This is why you are getting wrong numbers. The calculator is not the problem. Your use is the problem.

I am open to the possibility that my calculator is flawed, but in every case so far, it has been user error.

Coach Crazy wrote:

That calculator is the dumbest gimmick I've ever seen.

The calculator is very accurate so far. I see no problems. If you think you see a problem, then please offer specific and constructive criticism. Why exactly do you think it is "the dumbest gimmick" you have ever seen?

Coach Crazy wrote:

As for Genzebe in sprints, it's impossible to predict what she would do unless she did full sprint training, which is not going to happen because her money is made as a miler.

..

This is quite off the topic. We can have a good guess at her 400m ability right now with or without a calculator. It is unnecessary for Genzebe to take part in "full sprint training" before we can make that guess.

When she is in 3:50 shape I guesstimate she can run 1:55 for the 800m and 53.5 ish for the 400m.

You may have a guess too, this is just an informal running forum

I used to think Semenya, Niyonsaba and Wambui were dudes but maybe they just all steroid up like the LSU 4 by 1 sprint team. Roids makes women look like dudes in the face and body. The first time I saw the LSU women's 4 by 1 team I was like damn why 4 dudes racing Women in the 4 by 1 lol it was funny but pretty gross all at the same time.

800ftw. wrote:

This is quite off the topic. We can have a good guess at her 400m ability right now with or without a calculator. It is unnecessary for Genzebe to take part in "full sprint training" before we can make that guess.

When she is in 3:50 shape I guesstimate she can run 1:55 for the 800m and 53.5 ish for the 400m.

You may have a guess too, this is just an informal running forum

Anyone who can run 1:55 can go much lower than 53.5. While cross-gender comparisons aren't great, every 1:55 male that I've been around could run at least 51 - most dipping under 50.

Now, Dibaba is more strength than speed so I'm not saying she's world class at the 400, but I'd be surprised if she couldn't run around 51.mid or 52.low.

Heck, if you're only capable of 53.5, what are your splits to get to 1:55? I've always followed the 400+5 seconds for the first lap... that puts her at 58 with your numbers... no chance she runs 1:55 in that race.

I didn't know it's your calculator (havn't looked at the name). Where does it say DON'T USE THE 100 AND 200? Can't see it.

And - no - two runners with same (current) ability at two distances must not have same ability at all other distances. There have been some athletes with around 1:44/3:30 ability over 800m/1500m who get big problems in breaking 13:20 for 5000m. Aouita ran 12:58 and underachieved at 80% humidity.

There were several women who have had very similar capabilities over 100m/200m like Marita Koch has had when she run 47.60 - most of them would have problems for breaking 51 or even 50 seconds.

There are other calculators which try the same, that's why I was talking about THESE calculators. There are 1-input calculators? This really would be strange (but also a 2-input is not enough).

1:55 is not that quick. Without amazing endurance 52 is plenty fast enough.

I did not have the endurance capability of Dibaba and broke 1:55 with a 52.3 400m from blocks. I ran 3:55 and that was my top end.

Dibaba could certainly run 1:55 off a 53.5 with her 3:50 endurance.

400+5s is a rule of thumb I've never heard of. It certainly doesn't work for me, it's miles off. I ran 1:50 high with a 54 first lap and my best 400m was 50.5. It's completely reasonable to do this.

No way does Dibaba run 51. She has run 14:15 for 5k. She simply does not have the speed.

I'd expect her 1:55 to consist of a 57 first lap followed by a 58.5 for 1:55.5 or so. That is so ordinary for a fast (male)distance runner it baffles me that anyone should think that is impossible.

Just a further note on that 400m+5 rule, the great late Frank Horwill used to state a +4s a lap difference as ideal.

For Rudisha 45.5 +5s = 50.5s - too slow for first lap

For Coe 46.8 +5s = 51.8 - too slow (even using his 45.4 relay split 50.4 is too slow)

A hypothetical 1:50 runner would hit the first lap in 53s usually. Your rule has it necessary for them to have a 48 400m. That's just unrealistic, especially for an 800/1500 type.

I don't see that rule working for any runner really, speed type like Rudisha or strength type.

With a 53.5 as a 400m best she will have a hard time running 1:55. Most 1:55 runners I know can go at least 51.