Around 13:05?
Around 13:05?
also consider that as distance increases, his relative performance will improve
Who?
So is 13:05 a decent estimate?
IAAF 2011 pts table has 7:36.60 equivalent to 13:03. So close.
someone had to do it wrote:
also consider that as distance increases, his relative performance will improve
Based on what?
What?! Sorry. I'm a big Ben True fan, but 7:36.5 is not equal to 13:05. I say 13:12, give or take a second.
And I'm not saying he can't run 13:05, just that, if he does,
that 5000 will be better than 7:36.5
hgf wrote:
Based on what?
Based on him being a distance runner
durrrrr
hgf wrote:
someone had to do it wrote:also consider that as distance increases, his relative performance will improve
Based on what?
6th place xc world championship, beating Derrick
someone had to do it wrote:
hgf wrote:Based on what?
Based on him being a distance runner
durrrrr
Those calculators already take that into account. No need to add an extra bias to it.
doo doo wrote:
6th place xc world championship, beating Derrick
A more accurate recent performance would be the 13:11 or whatever he ran in the 5000, and the fact that he LOST to Derrick in the 10,000.
Maybe he was in better 12k shape then and in better 3k shape now. Also note that the course conditions played into his hands at WXC.
Link wrote:
What?! Sorry. I'm a big Ben True fan, but 7:36.5 is not equal to 13:05. I say 13:12, give or take a second.
And I'm not saying he can't run 13:05, just that, if he does,
that 5000 will be better than 7:36.5
Ummmm...Pretty sure I'd take the iaaf scoring tables as a guide over your WAG.
Around 13:03
Yeah, I'd say it's worth about a 13:15ish. Not 13:00-13:05.
watchout wrote:
Yeah, I'd say it's worth about a 13:15ish. Not 13:00-13:05.
If you think that, you are a bit dim. It's certainly worth much better than 13:15.
As far as equivalent performances, a 7:36.5 would equal ~13:04-13:05-about 3.5% slower than the world record,and about the same amount slower as 7:36.5 is to the 3k world record.
Given that Ben True is certainly more of a 5k/10k guy and not a 1500/3k guy, this performance actually WOULD indicate around 13:00-13:05 type fitness for him.
washed up.runner wrote:
Around 13:05?
not much to go on here
http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/united-states/ben-true-234389#progressionno recent under-distance & this year's 10k time is a joke
however from info based on canova's stats on his runners, who indicates mid-52 is about slowest time likely for an elite 5k/10k guy, then 2 nearest lines of fit to 7'36 are :
52.5 with
1'50.7 -> 3'37.3 , 7'35.9 , 13'06.1 , 27'23.4
or
1'50.6 -> 3'36.9 , 7'34.8 , 13'03.8 , 27'17.6
anyone who said ~ 13'05 looks to be pretty spot on...
Teg's PRs are 7:34.98 and 12:58.56, for what it's worth.
Tony Soprano wrote:
Teg's PRs are 7:34.98 and 12:58.56, for what it's worth.
Yeah, i think the 13:03 mark is pretty dead on. I can't remember exactly but E. Jager has run roughly the same 3k this season no (maybe a touch slower)? and he just rolled 13:02.
True flat out beat Jager from the front in a 13:14 race earlier this season. True is in 13:00 shape for sure. He almost just outkicked Edwin Soi, the only guy to beat Mo Farah this year.
watchout wrote:
Yeah, I'd say it's worth about a 13:15ish. Not 13:00-13:05.
Then you too would be displaying ignorance. Where the heck do you think that they get the iaaf table values from? Just pull them out of mid-air?
Here are the point values for 7:36.5, 13:03 and 13:15
7:36.5 - 1199
13:03 - 1199
13:15 - 1156
By your "logic" (the tables are off by 43 points between the 3000 and 5000) Komen's incredible 3000m would only be worth about a 12:47 and Bekele's 5000m record would be the equivalent of 7:14. Yeah, right!
Get a clue. Your waving your finger in the air estimates are worth exactly zip. The iaaf tables exist for a reason.
Link wrote:
What?! Sorry. I'm a big Ben True fan, but 7:36.5 is not equal to 13:05. I say 13:12, give or take a second.
And I'm not saying he can't run 13:05, just that, if he does,
that 5000 will be better than 7:36.5
So what is 7:20 equal to?