Ritz vs Webb?

Just wondering, but did you even give Webb a fair chance in that debate. :) Though my list would look similar.. though I'll say they both have a very good chance at Athens, IMO..

Wait until Webb gets into a night race where there are a couple of faster runners towing him along.

6) Who will run faster this year?

My Answer:

Webb- He can drop 2 more seconds

To compare their talent levels is to compare apples and oranges. They are specialists at different events. If both of them were milers than comparing their talent would make sense. They are both overwhelmingly talented, and are gutsy performers. Both of them have a good shot to make it to the Olympics, based on their times and their attitudes. Alot of American runners have run good times but are inconsistent, or only run good times in a time trial type race. This is where Webb and Ritz I think are very strong. But as far as the total comparisons, it doesnt work. Give them both their due, they are and will continue doing great things. Good luck to both of them.

Just answer the questions. No need to say they are both good, we all know that. Just pick one though. You can't have both.

umm, then I pick both. Neither is better than the other. I pick both because it would be the most fun for me to see both of them running in the Olympics. Sorry, but the whole who is better, more talented thing is a childish high school game. I watch, race, have fun, and enjoy the entertainment. Not debating who has more talent and who should we say is a better runner, Dathan or Alan. Get off it.

1) Damn, 2738 is smoking, but Webb did run the final part of that 335 by himself and looked kind of windy. Push.

2) I think Webbs looking pretty good to make Athens as of right now, Id put money on that. Ritz, I think hes going to make, just got that feeling. But I give the edge to Webb, the field is looking a little weaker, especially after today.

3) Both seem alright, but tales of Webb driving in with a keg at JMU is what I like to hear. But american distance running is in luck, both of these kids are in good positions to make the olympics and both handle themselves pretty well.

4) Damn, Im going to say Ritz. But dont forget difference between mile and 10k, people are naturally pulled more towards the mile. But Ritz always seems to amaze, just go back and watch the 03 xc race final 800, that was awesome.

5) Not this question again. Id give it to Webb, but I think both are underrated when out of their distance, meaning I think Webb can run a faster 5k than I think most think he could, and Ritz has way more speed than most people think he does.

1) Ritz- The 27:38 debut over 10K is more impressive. The real thing to look at is Webb actually ran 3:35+ 3 years ago, whereas Ritz could only run 27:38 pace for about 5K 3 years ago.

2) Webb- US milers aren't too strong at the moment, and I'm sure Webb'll go a little faster before season's end.

3) Ritz- Though a die-hard Ritz fan, I truly liked seeing Webb run fast today, especially after he was the only guy who even attempted to go with the rabbit. Hopefully he has the confidence he had back in HS now.

4) Push- Who knows.

5) Push- My head hurts.

Alan ran 3:38 3 years ago. Not 3:35 plus.

Figure out what 3:53.4 equates to for 1500m. 'Bout 3:35-3:36, no? Unless of course, he ran all out for 1500m, then picked up the pace for the final 109 meters.....

Figure out what 3:53.4 equates to for 1500m. 'Bout 3:35-3:36, no? Unless of course, he ran all out for 1500m, then picked up the pace for the final 109 meters.....

umm, he ran 3:38 for the 1500 en route to the mile, and ran 3:38 at US Nationals. He did NOT run 3:35. Going off of the could have, would have argument doesnt hold water to fact. Sorry. He has improved alot.

equations don't mean anything if they didnt run the time. he has never run 3:35 before for the 1500. Don't get vulgar about it. Ridiculous. That is the point. Conversions may show what they are capable of, but he never actually ran it. so calm down. 3:38 is what he has run before, that is fact.

In order for one to run 3:53 for the mile one would have to go through the 1500 in 3:34-3:36... why dont you understand that? Because the two are so close in distance one could compare the two performances... its not like comparing a 400 vs an 800 or an 800 vs the 1500. this comparision is between the 1500 and the mile... Honestly I dont care but you are an idiot if you think that this performance is a giant improvement from what he ran 3+ years ago.

1. Ritz

2. Webb

3. "

4. "

5. "

huh,

You are showing severe ignorance with comments like "one would HAVE to go through 1500 in 3:34-3:36" (to run a 3:53). If you want to backtrack, we will give you a chance now. last chance.

huh wrote:

In order for one to run 3:53 for the mile one would have to go through the 1500 in 3:34-3:36... why dont you understand that? Because the two are so close in distance one could compare the two performances... its not like comparing a 400 vs an 800 or an 800 vs the 1500. this comparision is between the 1500 and the mile... Honestly I dont care but you are an idiot if you think that this performance is a giant improvement from what he ran 3+ years ago.

I can't believe I'm participating in a Ritz vs. Webb discussion, but...

"Webb's previous best in the 1,500 was 3:38.26, run during his record-setting mile in the 2001 Prefontaine Classic at Eugene, Ore., when he was a senior at South Lakes High in Reston, Va." (from LA Times)

I understand the concept of conversions and calculators, etc. But he had never run faster than 3:38.26 for 1500m until yesterday. That's the bottom line. If somebody showed you an "equivalent marathon time" for Webb based on his 1500m PR, would you consider that marathon time as his PR?

Silly...

Great time and great race for Webb - and great to see.

BDG

3:35 1500m is better than 27:38 10k, if Webb can get down to 3:32-33, what doesn't seem unrealistic considering the circumstances of the HD-Invit.-Race, he has the potential for a Top-5 spot in Athens.27:38,no challenge for the Africans...

Webb\'s 1500 would equate to just under 3:53 mile. The most accepted conversion for 1500 to mile is 1.08 (no conversion is perfect). This would make Webb\'s 1500 about a 3:52.9 mile. So......is it a BIG pr ? No, but is the fastest 1500 he has ever run, and most likely equivalent to being a touch faster than his HS mile time a few years ago. BUT.....he won this race by a huge margin, kicked the butts of some quality runners, and the season is still young. With all that in mind, this was indeed a great race for him. His fastest 1500/mile, his biggest win, and a mega confidence builder. Ritz\'s 10k vs this 1500 of Webb\'s? On a time-only basis, of course it is hard to say. But if we measure their times against the best-ever run in their repsective events (El G\'s brilliant 3:26 & Geb\'s smoking 26:22) we find: Webb\'s 1500 is 1.047 x El G\'s WR, while Ritz\'s 10K is 1.048 x Geb\'s WR. So.....they are very close in that sense (when compared to the fastest ever run in their events). If, on the other hand, one compared their times vs all-time best US performers in their respective events....I would assume Ritz is a bit higher ( I know it put him in the top 10 right? I assume Webb has not cracked that? Or has he?). Someone, look that up for us. I would say, in summary, their times are equally impressive. Let's hope both knock a nice chunk of their new PR's.