How Much Faster is Track than Road?

In short distances, probably about the same. A road 10k is about 30 seconds slower than a track 10000 for the elites.

Why? Is it because splits are coming to people all the time, the track is completely level, etc.?

An accurately measured road course is faster than a track of the same distance.

Please provide ANY example of a road world best time that is faster than the equivalent distance track world record time. I think you won't find one.

marathon

What if they built an entirely straight track that's 5000-10000meters long?

Buffalo Orange wrote:

Please provide ANY example of a road world best time that is faster than the equivalent distance track world record time. I think you won't find one.

Both the 25K and 30K records are faster on roads than on the track. Maybe others too?

Isn't there some 10k with a huge elevation drop where the course record is like 25 minutes or something like that?

Buffalo Orange wrote:

Please provide ANY example of a road world best time that is faster than the equivalent distance track world record time. I think you won't find one.

Mike Boit ran a 3:28 road mile in New Zealand.

OK, the marathon, 25k, and 30k are almost never run on the track, so the records are pretty soft (if they're even kept). For distances that are commonly run on both surfaces, I think the track times are uniformly faster, barring times from assisted road courses with huge net downhill, etc. I'd like to know the circumstances of the 3:28 road mile. Was it a flat, accurate course? I doubt it.

New England Trail Runner wrote:

What if they built an entirely straight track that's 5000-10000meters long?

Lol, that would be a sight to see!

The IAAF points table has entries for 10k for both road and track. Bekele's world record track 10000 of 26:17 is worth 1296 points. The road 10k worth 1297 points (no entry for 1296) is 26:23. So 6 seconds over 10000 meters= 0.0006 meters per second, according to scoring tables.

Published: April 9, 1983

Mike Boit of Kenya ran what was believed to be the fastest mile ever Saturday, when he was timed in 3 minutes 28.36 seconds in Auckland, New Zealand. That's fast enough to break easily Sebastian Coe's world record of 3:47.33.

But Boit's time will not count as a record because his run was on a downhill course. Also, road races are not eligible for records. Boit won the Molenberg Mile over a carefully measured course down Queen Street in the heart of the city. The Queen Street course fell nearly 208 yards in altitude from start to finish. Steve Scott of the United States was second in 3:29.44, and Ray Flynn of Ireland was third in 3:29.66.

Buffalo Orange wrote:

OK, the marathon, 25k, and 30k are almost never run on the track, so the records are pretty soft (if they're even kept). For distances that are commonly run on both surfaces, ...

You said to provide ANY example. You got it. Now, stfu.

Buffalo Orange wrote:

The IAAF points table has entries for 10k for both road and track. Bekele's world record track 10000 of 26:17 is worth 1296 points. The road 10k worth 1297 points (no entry for 1296) is 26:23. So 6 seconds over 10000 meters= 0.0006 meters per second, according to scoring tables.

Winner.

This is a ridiculous conversion based on a road USATF certification is .01 longer than the actual distance when being measured. No one has broken 13:00 or 27:00 on the roads. About 25-30 seconds per 10K is the correct answer. So is one second per 400-meter lap.

Buffalo Orange wrote:

The IAAF points table has entries for 10k for both road and track. Bekele's world record track 10000 of 26:17 is worth 1296 points. The road 10k worth 1297 points (no entry for 1296) is 26:23. So 6 seconds over 10000 meters= 0.0006 meters per second, according to scoring tables.

Winner.[/quote]

Buffalo Orange wrote:

OK, the marathon, 25k, and 30k are almost never run on the track, so the records are pretty soft (if they're even kept). For distances that are commonly run on both surfaces, I think the track times are uniformly faster, barring times from assisted road courses with huge net downhill, etc. I'd like to know the circumstances of the 3:28 road mile. Was it a flat, accurate course? I doubt it.

As distances increase, roads typically become faster than tracks. The records are very clear on this.

OK, the road marathon record is faster than the track marathon record. Big effing surprise. Now would you care to elaborate on your original blanket statement that the road is faster than the track? There's exactly no evidence that it's true, so you resort to ridiculous comparisons between events that are almost never run on the track. Why is the world road 5k record 13 flat? Sammy Kipketer wasn't some nobody, but he couldn't break 13 on a faster surface than a track? Neither could anyone else?

Tracks are faster than the roads predominantly because they're dead flat. Not having to deal with potholes, the crown of the road, etc. is probably good for some time, and stadia are often more sheltered from the wind than road courses. Spikes and a consistent surface to run on help, too.

That's why I think I'm right. Let's see why you think roads are faster.

Oh, wait, your style of discussion is to blindly assert something that you want to be true without providing any evidence or thought behind it and then use vulgar abbreviations toward someone who dares to disagree. Never mind.

This is not difficult, people. The longest event OFTEN contested on tracks is 10000 meters. All the evidence shows that track 10k times are faster overall than road 10k times. Track 5k times are faster than road 5k times. The winner of a typical elite track mile is faster than the winner of the typical 5th avenue mile. The reason the 60-mile record or some stupid thing is faster than the track equivalent is because no one ever races it on the track. If you could get a good field to race 60 miles on a track, the fastest guy who could keep from shooting himself in the head out of pure boredom would probably knock a big chunk of time off the road record.