"Honest race"

Honest = truthful.

Running a world championship 3000m 30 seconds slower than the world record doesn't prove that the winner is the true best 3000m runner in the world.

So it was a dishonest race?

Zipped and tied wrote:

Honest = truthful.

Running a world championship 3000m 30 seconds slower than the world record doesn't prove that the winner is the true best 3000m runner in the world.

The term is usually honest pace, not race. Meaning you're not sandbagging the first 98 % of the race and then turning it strictly into a kickers race. Instead you're running a pace close to the best of your ability for the distance.

what he said. pace not race.

Distance running and Discus are two completely different events. Honestly.

Zipped and tied wrote:

Honest = truthful.

Running a world championship 3000m 30 seconds slower than the world record doesn't prove that the winner is the true best 3000m runner in the world.

FALSE. They raced over 3000m. Whoever won is the best. It is really very simple.

The idea of an "honest race" being only one run close to ones maximum potential for time at the given distance is a perversion of the core idea behind our sport.

the "best" runner at a given distance is the runner able to cross the line first among the other runners in the field. This requires a number of different skills, among them the ability to kick, handle surges, maintain position, and a level of fitness capable of sustaining a hard pace. Each of these skills could be more or less important given the nature of a given race.

Gebrhiwet is a 12:40s 5K guy who came into world indoors with the year's fastest 3000 time. Yet he can't ever figure out how to win a championship race. Maybe he and his pal Gebremeskel should run an "honest" race at a championship and see how that works out for them.

That would be the American Indians, if you want an honest race.

Hence, the term, "honest injun".

Hatts to be shed wrote:

Zipped and tied wrote:

Honest = truthful.

Running a world championship 3000m 30 seconds slower than the world record doesn't prove that the winner is the true best 3000m runner in the world.

FALSE. They raced over 3000m. Whoever won is the best. It is really very simple.

Actually they raced over a few hundred meters. The rest of the time was spent as more or less a warmup for those few hundred meters.

Seyta wrote:

Actually they raced over a few hundred meters. The rest of the time was spent as more or less a warmup for those few hundred meters.

Actually they raced over 3000 meters...

As an experiment, it would be interesting to see what happens if you set time cuts to stay on the track. For an elite indoor men's 3000m, for example, you could set 2:35 at 1k and 5:10 at 2k as cutoffs - anyone over those cuts gets pulled from the track.

In the 3000m, the racing really didn't begin until 600m to go. Non-sprinting events shouldn't be won by the best sprinter necessarily. All of the slow twitched guys are not being honest with themselves thinking they are fast.

Send them off bike TT style. Every 15 secs send the next guy out. If technology kept up and we could tell by lap splits who was +/- at xdistance, that might be fun to watch.

hmmmmmmmmm wrote:

Seyta wrote:

Actually they raced over a few hundred meters. The rest of the time was spent as more or less a warmup for those few hundred meters.

Actually they raced over 3000 meters...

Agreed.

Weird how so many have trouble with this concept. It is almost as if they have never raced. Or at least never learned how to win races.

I've won plenty of races. Usually by leading from the start.

Big little man wrote:

I've won plenty of races. Usually by leading from the start.

Just so I understand your argument, you challenge the idea that leading from the start often causes increased energy expenditure vs a more conservative strategy of drafting until the later stages of the race?

Im not saying that leading from the start is never a sound strategy...namely when you have a significant fitness advantage over your competition (or a significant disadvantage in finishing speed), however in the majority of scenarios its simply foolish, evidenced by the fact that the only people who tend to be able to pull it off consistently are the bekele or El G types who are head and shoulders above the field...

Big little man wrote:

I've won plenty of races. Usually by leading from the start.

So?

LOL II wrote:

Why isn't a slower, more tactical, surge-filled race an honest race?

Discus.

Your welcome, my deers.

Discus is really pissing me off.