DONT FORGET RITZ's 8:11

How is 13 flat in his reach? His 2-mile time is worth right around 7:36 and that's 13:10 material. Long way down to 13 flat.

13:03 this year I say

Totally agree. Amazing performance by Dathan. The range this kid has is incredible, and I would venture to say that almost NO ONE ever thought he was capable of a 8:11.

I'm sure they are posted somewhere, but for my benefit- what were the 3k splits for Ritz and Teg?

Whats the 5k equivalent performance on 8:07 and 8:11?

Now only 2 questions - who will be the first to go under 13 in the 5k and who breaks the American 10K record first? Teg, Ritz, Fam, Hall?

Not A Runner wrote:

How is 13 flat in his reach? His 2-mile time is worth right around 7:36 and that's 13:10 material. Long way down to 13 flat.

I think it's faster than 7:36, and don't forget that Dathan is a longer distance guy. 2 mile is not his ideal distance. sub-13 is definitely within his reach, although the chances that he actually does it are slim.

I am still nutting off to Rupp getting second at NCs.

Saladbar sucks.

According to McMillan:

8:07 = 13:11

8:11 = 13:17

I don't think Ritz or Hall will ever run under 13, and I doubt Fam as well. Only Teg and Webb have a shot.

You think? How about you look at it for what it really is, it's 7:38.x through 3k, subtract the extra 200 and some odd meters from the race and you get 7:36.

McMillan is shit and so are the IAAF tables. It puts 12:37 at 7:46.3. Yeah, right.

Based off of other elite runners, 7:30 is about the point where you can start looking at breaking 13 minutes. 7:35 is right around 13:10.

Agree about McMillan- must have been created before we started seeing East Africans running 12:55 like it was a walk in the park.

Not A Runner wrote:

You think? How about you look at it for what it really is, it's 7:38.x through 3k, subtract the extra 200 and some odd meters from the race and you get 7:36.

It's actually worth 7:34/7:35 for 3k which is worth much faster than 13:17. According to the IAAF tables his 2 mile his worth 13:02/13:03 for 5k

I'll vote for Teg breaking 13:00 first this year. He was close last year and has momentum. I wouldn't write off Webb or Ritz yet. Rupp is still young (see last weekend's surprising NCAA 10k loss), but is very promising. This is an exciting time, relatively, for US middle distance, as we have a great group of young runners between 20 and 26 years old who all have their best races ahead of them still.

Stop mentioning the IAAF TABLES!

They are meant to RELATIVELY COMPARE PAST PERFORMANCES in order to score different performances. For events like the two mile, which is run rarely, there should be no comparisons between other distances. A 7:35-7:36 3k should never be placed with a 13:02.

BK ran sub 13:00 and only 8:12 in the duece.

Alan

Good call. Dathan and Matt just ran fast. End of story. It will be interesting to see how things turn out in the next 3-4 months.

Mike

I'm with you guys...I thought he looked great and was pushing the pace in the middle of the race. Teg didn't get by him until 600 to go. I thought going into the race that if he ran 8:16 that would be great for him. His 1,500 pr. is at least 7 -10 seconds slower than the rest of the field which makes his final time more incredible. I hope he stays healthy, skips the marathon trials this year and runs the 10,000 at worlds and Oly's.

Not A Runner wrote:

Stop mentioning the IAAF TABLES!

They are meant to RELATIVELY COMPARE PAST PERFORMANCES in order to score different performances. For events like the two mile, which is run rarely, there should be no comparisons between other distances. A 7:35-7:36 3k should never be placed with a 13:02.

ah, don't confuse the kids. Teg, Webb, Ritz, Hall, Fam, Rupp, Solinsky and many many more will be breaking 13:00 for the US in the next couple years. And they will all break Meb's 10k record. Hell, while we are at it, Hasay and Flanagan will probably break those marks too! It's "morning in America" for USA track and field. WHOOOOPEEEEEEEEEE !

Not A Runner wrote:

Stop mentioning the IAAF TABLES!

7:35-7:36 3k should never be placed with a 13:02.

WAHHHH! I don't want to hear IAAF tables! WAAHHH! The McMillen tables must be some sort of a Dyestat thing? Just a quick glance at them will tell you they don't make any sense.

The IAAF tables are the only ones that make sense. They are the only ones that matter.

IAAF puts Ritzenheins 2 mile equal to 7:34.8 for 3000, right were one would expect it to be. His split time at 3000 would have been under 7:37, probably 7:36.5 considering how badly he died over the last half lap.(7:24.2 with 300m to go or 47.5)

Mercier has a good conversion table. It lists 8:11 --> 7:35 --> 13:07. I think that is pretty accurate.

Ritz is in great shape. Don't know if he has the wheels to run under 13 but I wouldn't count it out. Bob Kennedy wasn't much, much faster -- and as Runningart pointed out, had a slower 2 mile PR.

As far as charts go, I prefer to use this for my own racing:

http://www.cs.uml.edu/~phoffman/ex1old.html

It does five different conversions and you can kind of use your judgment to guess what might be fair depending on the kind of runner you are and how your training has been. But it's all guesswork, no matter what you do, and no matter for whom.

The IAAF are good for comparing elite performances. But that is where it ends. It's not a prediction tool nor is it clever enough to rank runners with.