Stefano Baldini 2:03 Marathon?

umm, I think he is saying he was in that shape going into the olympics, where it was 90 degrees and hilly as hell, so he ran to win and there was no way he could have run a real fast time there. but if he had been in that shape and run in conditions like berlin when tergat ran the wr then he could have gone faster, I am saying that that is what mr. canova is saying not that it is neccessarly true. So since then I would guess he hasn't been in that kinda of form. Not uncommon to have trouble getting motivated enough to put in that work for a lesser race after you have become the olympic champ.

His best times are 2h07'29", 60'56", 27'43"98, 13'23"43, 7'43"14. The relationship between his best perfomances from the 3000m to the marathon correlate perfectly.

A 2:03-2:05 marathon would put him on a very, very steep curve.

Bob the Builder wrote:

His best times are 2h07'29", 60'56", 27'43"98, 13'23"43, 7'43"14. The relationship between his best perfomances from the 3000m to the marathon correlate perfectly.

A 2:03-2:05 marathon would put him on a very, very steep curve.

I agree but so were the testresults wrong?

60:56 for the 1/2 is 2:53/km not far off the 1.8mmol/l pace while all other coaches,scientist - researches say that you can run a half at around 4.0mmol/l.

My guess is that he must have been glycogen depleted or overtrained and so had lower lactate values other wise he should be running much faster than he already has.

WHat does the correlation put Bekele's 26:19? or so at for the marathon, its gotta be somewhere in the 2:02 2:03 range isnt it?

Isn't part of the issue/fascination that there's no exact correlation between marathon times and shorter distance PBs because of, amongst other factors, the different efficiency that runners may have at lactate t'hold than at faster paces?

Anyone know Sammy Korirs 3k/5k/10k/ PBs? - not in the league of Tergat or Gebre I think but he's 85 secs quicker over 26.2m than Gebre. Perhaps the notional time Baldini was worth in Athens isn't outlandish, we'll never know but it was a mighty field he beat, in many cases by some big margins.

It should be noted, yet again, that you ARE ALWAYS BURNING GLYCOGEN NO MATTER IF YOU'RE IN A COMA OR RUNNING AT MARATHON!

Alan

maybe it should be noted that regardless of the accuracy of any PREDTICTIVE test...there are still assumptions that must be made, to account for variables that are far to complicated to calculate.....and the longer the race the more of those variables there will be

It could be noted that if you take any of those predict my marathon from my 10k ..type calculators.....even tergat falls far short of what he is supposed to be able to run..

These are MODELS folks...not real life ..they have certain predictive abilities....but you are expecting them to predict someones marathon time to within a minute or so???...that would be greater than 99percent accuracy(125 minutes in Tergats race.)...that is never going to happen when you are trying to predict the time over 26.2mi...of a highly complex organisim.

In perfect conditions with perfect pacing, on the perfect course then maybe Baldini could beat Tergat's 2.04.55 but that's a lot of ifs.

Also, the tests are not conducted when the athlete is fully carbo loaded. On the day of the race, Baldini will be a couple of pounds heavier than during the test, and this will have a slight effect on the pace.

Not necessarily you do burn fat too, once glycogen stores run out. Its called bonking, hittin the wall, crashing, etc....

also...that test...to be accurate...would require Baldini to maintain the same level of running economy over the entire marathon...as he did in the 2000m intrevals run at a relaxed paced...that as far as i can tell seems ..like a unrealist proposition.

"My guess is that he must have been glycogen depleted or overtrained and so had lower lactate values other wise he should be running much faster than he already has.[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------

Very astute observation and comment!

Tinman wrote:

"My guess is that he must have been glycogen depleted or overtrained and so had lower lactate values other wise he should be running much faster than he already has.

-----------------------------------------------------

Very astute observation and comment![/quote]

Merci but i can't believe that coaches like Renato Canova and Luciano Giglotti do such "mistakes" or don't see such signs.Renato Canova really believed that Baldini can run 2:03-2:04 based on this test.

Man, there surely is a ton of drivel getting passed off as informed comment in this thread.

All the test can predict with any true accuracy is that UNDER THE TEST CONDITIONS (temp - maybe cool, calm, time of day, previous training coming into test, etc), Baldini was (only) producing 1.8mM at 2.57m/km. In no way does that test predict what he would run IN THE CONDITIONS HE MET IN ATHENS.

All they might have been able to extrapolate from that test is that (viz a vis Baldini's previous tests under as close as poss to identical conditions) he was in great shape compared to his previous best-ever shape.

They do speculate that if he was ever in such shape going into similar race conditions like Tergat in Berlin (cool, calm), he might be capable of 2.04.

One final point is that if you are going to go for the WR in the marathon, you pretty much have to do so from the gun. Few runners will do this with world-class competition around them. Then, it's more important to go for the win (rather than go for the WR and blow-up). I doubt if Baldini has ever gone for the WR under such "protected" conditions.

Many factors are involved. Was the test done on a treadmill or on a track or on a rolling road course. How controlled were the conditions.

Under perfect controlled conditions you will always test better than you can run in a real world race because in the real world you have other competitors, surges, rolling terrain, turns and imperfect weather.

These tests are usually better for an individual's comparison against previous tests they have taken. As stated in the quote, they run the test every year and compare results and then try and extrapolate what that means. Each persons body chemistry and genetics is slightly different so there are not absolutes in these tests. One man's limiting factors may not be anothers. But if you test better than your did last year then you know you made improvement.

Also be careful extrapulating times across distances. i.e if a guy runs 26:17 then he must be able to run 2:02:25 as the Mercier Scoring tables would indicate as equivalent. Again each person is unique with different limiting factors. Some guys like Baldini chart almost perfectly equivalent times over a wide variety of distance but other do not; such as Pete Pfitzinger was a solid 2:11-2:12 marathoner (repeately) but could never get below 14:00 for the 5k (14:05 PR) when an equivalent 5k would have been 13:26. Similarly Khalid Khannouchi's 5k, 10k, 15k and 1/2 marathon are significantly inferior to his marathon bests even though he ran the shorter races regularly.

An to date Geb has not lived up to his marathon potential as indicated by the Mercier Tables given his 5k and 10k times. It remains to be seen if he does. (although I think he will)

I thought I remembered reading this same thing from somewhere but if I recal he also did a max lactate test. Something that is protocol for any lactate test to be accurate. If the max lactate was the same as previous tests which I believe it was. (10 mmls) Then he was not glycogen depleted from training and in fact was in better shape. Could he run a 2:03??? We may never know, but we do know he was the very best on an August day in 2004.

It seems to me the only reason his 203 prediction is questioned is because it is faster than the current WR. I'm a 250 marathoner, but according to calcs, I should be capable of a 244. Doesn't sound too unreasonable, does it? However, it is probably just ask likely as Stefano's 203.

Peace

Its not linear...it gets tougher to improve 4 minutes at 2:07 pace...that it would to improve 4mins at 2:50 pace....

Tinman wrote:

"My guess is that he must have been glycogen depleted or overtrained and so had lower lactate values other wise he should be running much faster than he already has.

-----------------------------------------------------

Very astute observation and comment![/quote]

NO Tinman, you are not an expert on lactate testing. Please, please, please stop pretending that you are.

As a previous poster has stated, Baldini was max tested at the end and did over 10 mmols.