Which DISTANCE world record will be the first to fall?

5,000m Women

Men: 3000m,1500m, mile

Women: 5000m,10000m, 100m

it's about time 7'20 went down

it's been on borrowed time since '99 when hicham shouda broken it but got a messed up wabbit given him

i wouda thought kennster wouda done it this year but i checked that 5k is a golden league event & he's likely to save all his energies to winning those rather than aim for a 7'19

seeing as he's likely to be "racing" this year rather than chasing the clock, 5 & 10k records look safe

that probably leaves the 1k or 2k as the best bets - kaki over 1k & asbel over 2k although i'd put chances of either somewhere below 20%

I can't see any of the mens going anytime soon apart from perhaps the 800/1000. 1500 and upwards are all at a level that no-one gets near to these days and I imagine we'll see bekele move to the roads within a couple of years and I can't see him rushing to improve his marks as they stand.

The womens 5000 is probably the weakest as its a relatively new serious event and the only one currently untouched by the dubious eastern european/chinese regimes. Can imagine that falling soon.

The 800 always seemed soft to me. Anybody can run 200 in 25. Tons of people can run a 400 in 50. Lots of people can run a 600 in 1:15. All it takes is one guy to run 4 200s in a row to smash the WR with a 1:40.

Birdlegs wrote:

The 800 always seemed soft to me. Anybody can run 200 in 25. Tons of people can run a 400 in 50. Lots of people can run a 600 in 1:15. All it takes is one guy to run 4 200s in a row to smash the WR with a 1:40.

0/10

actually, it's a 10/10

statistically, he does have a point

the wr for 600m is 1'12.8 ( & rarely run ), so it's quite likely there are a dozen+ guys currently who can run quicker than 75

it's quite reasonable to ask why hasn't at least 1 of these guys maintained 25s for another 200m or 1/3 more distance

GF will break all of them in a marathon on the track one day

he will come through 800, 1000, 1500, 1600, 1609.344, 2000, 3000, 3200, 2 miles, 5k , 8k 10k etc all in world records

ventolin wrote:

actually, it's a 10/10

statistically, he does have a point

the wr for 600m is 1'12.8 ( & rarely run ), so it's quite likely there are a dozen+ guys currently who can run quicker than 75

it's quite reasonable to ask why hasn't at least 1 of these guys maintained 25s for another 200m or 1/3 more distance

Pretty simple. It's because Jeremy Wariner won't move up to the 800. He'd run 1:38 easy.

Thank you for the support on my views of the 800 WR.

Maybe JW will read this and go for it.

there's obviously some law of diminishing returns/survival of fittest/etc at root

i e along lines of double distance you 1/4 those left, double distance more you 1/16 who ever is left, etc

there is some sort of acceleraing exponential relationship involved here

it's worth throwing out there to get some input/inspiration...

uh_no wrote:

GF will break all of them in a marathon on the track one day

he will come through 800, 1000, 1500, 1600, 1609.344, 2000, 3000, 3200, 2 miles, 5k , 8k 10k etc all in world records

I'm sorry. What is 2 miles? Did you mean 3218.688?

Men - I'd have to go with 800 (Kaki) or 10,000 (Bekele if he makes another run at it). These are the only two which have had any kind of near attempts in recent years. Bekele was only 3 sec off last year at that Pre meet where it was set up for him to run the WR. The 800 is another story...as 1 sec there equates to a lifetime it seems. No other event has had anyone within striking range in YEARS.

Women, 5k will probably go down again this year (Tiru or Defar). But if either of these women makes a run, the 10000 will go down. I know the record is likely as bogus as that bullshit 800m record, but Tiru and Abeylegesse both broke 30 while racing. Set up the right pacemakers and I have to believe that a 14:11 5k runner can get under 29:30 for 10k. right? McMillan calculator puts 14:11 at 29:28.

You make 1:40.00 sound so easy. Basically 4 lots of 200m in 25 secs. Do you really think that the chances of someone running 1:40 are 10/10?

The Jundo Predictor (which I don not think is reliable at all, I hasten to add), which I think you're familiar with, claims that to run 1:40.16, the athlete would need to have the ability to run 400m in 43.5 (within a few tenths of the WR) and 1000m in 2:10.5; 1.5 secs inside the current world record!

Yes, I can see the queue of all those athletes with such ability outside the stadiums of Europe as we speak! Lol.

All this talk about Wariner being able to run 1:40 if he "tried" it out (like a new pair of jeans or something) is utter nonsense. From the above model, Wariner is only just about able to run 43.5 in his speciality as it is. Are we really expecting him to suddenly (in a season or 2) be able to run more than a second faster than the WR at 1000m? The WR for 800m has been pretty constant for over 25 years now for a reason. Not because it's due for a "leap forward" anytime soon, but because 1:41 is a tremendous and very difficult time to run.

The Jundo Predictor (which I don not think is reliable at all, I hasten to add), which I think you're familiar with, claims that to run 1:40.16, the athlete would need to have the ability to run 400m in 43.5 (within a few tenths of the WR)

As you guessed that Jundo thing is not right for this. Coe / Kipketer could do 46+ for 400m. To drop a second would only need someone with 45 something capability. The trouble is that speed is infringing onto the area of and out & out sprinter with subsequent loss of aerobic ability. Thats why the record is to tough

You are talking a lot more sense than that joker above though. 'Just' another 25 sec 200m! Off his 'statistical' reasoning Bolt could just carry on his 200m speed for another 42km & complete the 1st 1 hr marathon!

My vote is for women's 5,000

ukathleticscoach wrote:

The Jundo Predictor (which I don not think is reliable at all, I hasten to add), which I think you're familiar with, claims that to run 1:40.16, the athlete would need to have the ability to run 400m in 43.5 (within a few tenths of the WR)

As you guessed that Jundo thing is not right for this. Coe / Kipketer could do 46+ for 400m. To drop a second would only need someone with 45 something capability. The trouble is that speed is infringing onto the area of and out & out sprinter with subsequent loss of aerobic ability. Thats why the record is to tough

You are talking a lot more sense than that joker above though. 'Just' another 25 sec 200m! Off his 'statistical' reasoning Bolt could just carry on his 200m speed for another 42km & complete the 1st 1 hr marathon!

Logic fail. You incorrectly applied his reasoning. Try again.

epopians wrote:

You make 1:40.00 sound so easy. Basically 4 lots of 200m in 25 secs. Do you really think that the chances of someone running 1:40 are 10/10?

no

i was saying the argument offered was 10/10 in terms of thought provoking, not 10/10 chance of running 1'40

( work for another day ! )

The Jundo Predictor (which I don not think is reliable at all, I hasten to add), which I think you're familiar with, claims that to run 1:40.16, the athlete would need to have the ability to run 400m in 43.5 (within a few tenths of the WR) and 1000m in 2:10.5; 1.5 secs inside the current world record!

i think you need to try it some more & use a little commonsense

the main guy worth thinking about is coe ( as he had proven 800/1500 ability ) & then maybe likes of noah & cram

coe had to have ~ 46.0 in '81 ( maybe 0.25s either way ? ) & he certainly was worth 1'41.50 if he'd gone thru in maybe 75.5 - 75.75 instead of 75.0 ( suicidal split as time has shown )

45.75 - 46.25 / 1'41.50 ->

46.25 with 1'41.50 ->

~ 2'10.50 3'25.62 3'42.44 7'24.98 13'03.09

46.00 with 1'41.50 ->

~ 2'10.70 3'26.47 3'43.46 7'28.56 13'11.35

45.75 with 1'41.50 ->

~ 2'10.90 3'27.32 3'44.47 7'32.13 13'19.62

what you've missed is that coe was "clockwise" a 800 guy & lacked endurance at longer distances ( albeit setting WRs at 1k - mile & 1500 golds )

bottom line is a 1'41 guy shoudn't have run a fairly "pathetic" 2'12/3'47 as passage of time has shown ( & i mean that as a compliment )

at very worst if he'd run it a few times in '81, he shouda gone <<2'11.5 & probably about 2'11.0 - 2'11.3

his theoretical 1500 times show what shoud be expected for a 1'41 guy - the 3'25/3'27 is only what is expected of a 1'41 guy ( with ~ 46.0 ) if his endurance holds up "perfectly" to 1500

at worst he shouda run <<3'30 in '81

here's one for you : try 1'41.73 with 3'47.33 for 1k/1500 & then 1'41.50 & 3'46.5 ( for his uneven splits in the mile ) & then look at his actual 3'31.95 best that year ( why 1.08 conversion doesn't work for exceptional 800 guys & why watman was right in saying <3'30 for him in '81 ( his 3'47.33 ) )

( what the interesting thing is, if you keep 1'41.50 constant & speed up his 1500, his 400 slows down - stop when you find an "acceptable" 400 for quickening "potential" 1500s )

The women's 5000 is the only one in danger for some time. Just about all the rest are completely out of reach. And the talk about the men's 800 record being "soft" is quite humorous. To anyone who thinks 1:40 should be "easy"--get on the track and give it a try.