lagat 3:32.56 in Morocco

No.

It is obvious he SHOULD have been able to run 1.44. He could'nt that is the puzzle. See all the discourse preceeding this... he had a few good shots.

No, the truth is that Lagat not only should have been able to run 1:44, he COULD have. His pb for 1000 is 2:16.18, and yet even pace would have him passing through 1000 in 2:17.56 in his 3:26.34. Get real.

Lagat never took these shorter races as seriously. Look at 2000. Lagat ran 3:28.51 in August, and in September, he runs 2:18.70. Even pace would have had him coming through 1000 in 2:19.01 in his 3:28.51. Ventolin is right, some of you are morons.

sorry guys i've really been an a-hole on this thread. you guys are right about lagat. if we could have run sub 1:44 or even 1:44 he would have done it by now with all of the chances he's had. oh and i have to admit that my formulas are all a bunch of bs too. they rarely ever working in predicting an athletes performance.

for the record, lets put some estimates on the board

bernie was worth at least 3'26.00 seeing as he ran 3'26.3 with a 53 finish - pace to bell had been far too slow - you shoud only manage ~ 55.0 last lap if pace was right ( he probably was worth even quicker, maybe 3'25.75 as he got balked when speeding up on last bend )

anyhows, 3'26.00 is good enough to work with

use various hypothetical 400s for him & some common sense/experience

trying

http://www.jundo.co.uk

3'26.00 with

50.00 -> 1'45.17 , 2'13.55 , 7'11.40 , 12'22.84 , 25'50.35

49.75 -> 1'44.94 , 2'13.36 , 7'12.39 , 12'25.68 , 25'59.32

49.50 -> 1'44.70 , 2'13.17 , 7'13.37 , 12'28.53 , 26'08.30

49.25 -> 1'44.46 , 2'12.97 , 7'14.35 , 12'31.38 , 26'17.27

49.00 -> 1'44.22 , 2'12.78 , 7'15.34 , 12'34.22 , 26'26.24

48.75 -> 1'43.99 , 2'12.59 , 7'16.32 , 12'37.07 , 26'35.21

48.50 -> 1'43.75 , 2'12.40 , 7'17.30 , 12'39.92 , 26'44.18

48.25 -> 1'43.51 , 2'12.21 , 7'18.29 , 12'42.76 , 26'53.15

the "goldilocksomometer" tells us that looking at the overdistance to 1500, especially most "sensitive" gauge, the 3k, that these times are too "hot" & therefore by implication the 800 times are a nonsense & that no 3'26 guy can have anything worse than 48.25 speed ( if running 400s regularly )

moving on :

48.00 -> 1'43.27 , 2'12.02 , 7'19.27 , 12'45.61 , 27'02.12

47.75 -> 1'43.03 , 2'11.82 , 7'20.25 , 12'48.46 , 27'11.09

47.50 -> 1'42.80 , 2'11.63 , 7'21.24 , 12'51.30 , 27'20.06

looking at that, the "porridge" looks just right fahrenheit at 47.75, with slight leaning towards 47.50

therefore 1'42.90 - 1'43.00 looks the number

further on for completion

47.25 -> 1'42.56 , 2'11.44 , 7'22.22 , 12'54.15 , 27'29.03

47.00 -> 1'42.32 , 2'11.25 , 7'23.20 , 12'57.00 , 27'38.00

46.75 -> 1'42.08 , 2'11.06 , 7'24.19 , 12'59.84 , 27'46.97

porridge far too cold here

ventolin.. Lagat does not fit your curve, instead of trying to guess where his line lies.. why not look at where his PB's lie?

If Lagat toes the line he wants to win like everyone else, he doesn't just not try as hard casue the race is less than 1500.00m.

See below....

1 Belal Mansoor Ali [BRN] BRN 2:16.55

2 Geoffrey Kipkoech Rono [KEN] KEN 2:16.82

3 Abubaker Kaki [SUD] SUD 2:16.98

4 Jeffrey Riseley [AUS] AUS 2:17.35

5 Bernard Lagat [USA] USA 2:17.52

6 Thomas Lancashire [GBR] GBR 2:17.63

7 Christian Smith [USA] USA 2:17.65

8 Peter van der Westhuizen [RSA] RSA 2:17.81

9 Nathan Brannen [CAN] CAN 2:17.87

10 Leonel Manzano [USA] USA 2:19.73

jingo

he's not a 3'26 guy now, ~ 3'30 woud be be good, so i woudn't give yourself haemorrhoids looking at 2'17 clockings ( & he probably still did that as a training exercise but with appearance $ thrown in )

look at previous list & instead of bernie, look at them with name "noah" - i considered them virtually interchangeable from '98

What fantasy world are you living in??

This is even more ridiculous than most of the crap you come out with!

So, now you are implying that not only was your mate Bernie capable or running 1:43 (which in itself is completely contradictory to what anyone whose seen him run an 800m would suggest), but now your formula is stating that he could have broken the 1000m world record. Despite not having broken 2:16! Absolute bs.

Lagat was always in the shadow of EL G and never broke a world record outdoors. I'm pretty certain he would have loved to join the likes of EL G, Ngeny, Coe, etc, by being a world record holder. If he thought he had the ability to run 2:11.6 (4.5 secs faster than his pb) I'm certain he would have been running them week in, week out at his peak until he did so.

He didn't for the simple reason he knew he couldn't run any faster than about 2:14.

I'm pretty sure that post isnt actually by ventolin - it's a joke dude.

moron

look at those numbers for 2 other guys who did run 3'26.00 & 2'11.96

ventolin wrote:

jingo

he's not a 3'26 guy now, ~ 3'30 woud be be good, so i woudn't give yourself haemorrhoids looking at 2'17 clockings ( & he probably still did that as a training exercise but with appearance $ thrown in )

look at previous list & instead of bernie, look at them with name "noah" - i considered them virtually interchangeable from '98

no he is not a 3.26 guy now, but he is still one of the best at 1500m, and STILL just average at 800m and it would seem 1km.

Why would you consider Ngeny and Lagat intercgangable? They have 1 PB time that is close..? Would you condider Juantoereno and Webb interchangable? Conpletely different runners.

Get off Lagats balls ventolin, he will have a career best for 800m of 1.46.

slate burger wrote:So what about his "false positive" EPO test. Didn't the test designer say a false test is impossible?

good post

the frenchie hired by WADA to validate their test did state so, but his official report was removed from WADA site in '04 ( how coincidental it came after bernie's demolition of their test claim ! )

this is a link to a post invoking it :

this is the legendary link ( no longer existent ) to claim of invincibility of ole EPO test ( glad someone quoted the jist !!! )

jingle bowels wrote:Why would you consider Ngeny and Lagat intercgangable?

becasue in their last laps of fastest 1500/mile, bernie ran a slightly balked 53+ in his 3'26.3, whilst noah ran low-55 in last lap of his 3'43.4 ( = 3'26.8 with 1.08 standard ), worth around mid-54 with 1.08/[1609.344/1500] conversion for laps

in fact, i'd consider bernie to have greater intrinsic speed than noah off this & potentially faster at 800/1k

Would you condider Juantoereno and Webb interchangable?

not even close

caballo ran 1'43.5 & webb 1'43.8 under totally different circumstances ( caballo already quicker )

webb ran 1'43.8 virtually wabitted from 200 - 800, offering a drafting advantage of upto 1s/400m or 1.5s =

1'45.3 solo equivalent

that's including the O2 rich atmosphere of a forest-surrounded benelux stadium ( reason why rieti has such quick times )

caballo had to run 300m in his lane, led to the bell & suicidally passed by some dumb singh for 40m, who offered no drafting potential ( singh shot past like a nitrous oxided bullet ), soon to be flattened by caballo

he ran a 1'43.50 effectively solo in a smog-town, which with webb-wabbit of say kip/cruz/coe drafting from 200 - 800 wouda offered him ~ upto

1'42.0

potential that day

Okay, so I got on the phone with Abdi (trains with Lagat), and Abdi asked him in his prime what he could run for 800m, and Lagat answered,

"1:43 would have been a challenge, I do not have speed."

You're talking b*** s**t again.

Where do you get all these conversions from indoors/outdoors, solo/rabbited (sorry, wabbited) from? Please tell us?

This is the response you made on another thread talking about the disadvantages of running solo outdoors compared to indoors:-

middle distance wrote:1:42.7 indoors, while a stupendous run, doesn't really have much bearing on what happens outdoors.

"it damn well does !

you can subtract ~ 1.75s for an indoor/outdoor conversion - see borza/kaki as modern examples in '01/'08

that means kip ran = of ~ 1'40.9 SOLO outdoors in that paris run

you can knock 1/2s off that in a wabbited race

Coe's solo 1:43.9 relay in 82 in very windy conditions off a 49.1 first lap is of a similar quality as a solo effort.

nonsense

a solo 1'43.9 in never in same league as above !!!"

I implied that a totally solo run outdoors of 1:43.9 was equivalent to about 1:42.7 for someone running indoors, which you dismissed as nonsense.

Now you're saying that Juantorena was slowed down by 1.5 secs for running at the front, and that Webb was able to run 1.5 secs faster with a rabbit than without. But this obviously only applies to those athletes you decide it applies to and no others! So Coe's solo 1:43.9 relay leg with no opposition isn't worth 1:42.4, which your conversion applies??

And why have you not added 1.5 secs to "your converted time" of Kipketer's run indoors? You say it would have been worth 1.75 secs faster outdoors than indoors, despite the banked curves and lack of any wind indoors (plus limited drafting), giving Kip 1:40.9. You then suggest to knock another 0.5 secs off his time for rabbits. Why 0.5 and not 1.5, which you've already told us is the proper conversion?

Is it because 1:40.9 - 1.5 = 1:39.4, and that is so far fetched that everyone would see what bs you were spouting!?

I think so.

Either it's 0.5 secs or it's 1.5?

You are forever contradicting yourself and giving different conversions for different athletes. People should realise that you make it all up as you go along to justify your warped opinions.

Ignore previous post.

Middle distance runner, why don't you go play with the childen on dye state? You contribute nothing to this thread.

No, he makes a good point. There are no accepted conversions for:

- rabbited vs. non rabbited

- wind vs. no wind

- head wind vs. tail wind

- indoor vs. outdoor

- dirt/grass track vs. synthetic track

- track in the middle of a forest and therefore O2 rich (now I've heard everything) vs. tracks elsewhere

- being balked vs. having your kick unimpeded

- dead even pacing vs. going out too fast

What's more, you treat the jundo software as if it's infallible. How do we know how accurate it is?

The crazy thing is I had this same argument with you last week about Kipketer's 800 times, yet today I half agree with you about Lagat. If the man ran sub-1:48 within a 1500 then obviously on that day he could have gone sub-1:46 open (duh).

What I refuse to do is calculate his potential time based on the indirect methods you're using. Could it have been 1:42? Maybe. 1:43, 1:44? Maybe. We don't know.

Also, this: