All the race conversion calculators I've tried have said that Bekele's 12:37 5k is worth 7:20 or faster for 3k. McMillan's calc says 7:10.9... I think that's a bit extreme.
All the race conversion calculators I've tried have said that Bekele's 12:37 5k is worth 7:20 or faster for 3k. McMillan's calc says 7:10.9... I think that's a bit extreme.
Yeah... 7:10 is just crazy. I'll say somewhere between 7:20-7:23. He was better as the distance strength required went up. Can't wait for him to go after the marathon.
and here is your answer...
Komen would have probably run faster than 7:20 too since he labored to finish a sluggish 5k two days prior to his 3k WR.
postpre wrote:
Komen would have probably run faster than 7:20 too since he labored to finish a sluggish 5k two days prior to his 3k WR.
This.
As for Bekele, though, I'd guess more like 7:15-7:20.
I'd guess around 7:25.79.
we love to guess what the BIG 3 would have done in the 3k, but speculation isn't fair. They all ran the 3k, their PR is their PR, we have no way of truly knowing what "Could have been."
Okay. Obviously I need to make my OP a little clearer.
How fast was Bekele's potential at 3k? Surely faster than 7:25
3:29 1500m / 7:20 3000m
cbenson4 wrote:
Okay. Obviously I need to make my OP a little clearer.
How fast was Bekele's potential at 3k? Surely faster than 7:25
Why surely faster? Bekele's best event was the 10,000m. He got worse as he dropped down. Komen is a sub-3:30 runner in the 1500m. 3000m was probably Komen's ideal distance, given his 12:39 and 3:29. I think it's perfectly reasonable to think that Komen was considerably better at 3000m than Bekele, even at their respective peaks. Komen was 2 seconds slower than Bekele over 5000m and 3 seconds faster over 1500m.
7:20 is nothing to sniff at. El G gave the record his all and ran 7:23. I think it's safe to say El G was more suited for the 3000m than Bekele was. I think 7:24-5 is fair for Bekele.
sharpkid wrote:
we have no way of truly knowing what "Could have been."
That's silly. Running performances are fairly predictable based on adjacent performances.
v6 wrote:
cbenson4 wrote:Okay. Obviously I need to make my OP a little clearer.
How fast was Bekele's potential at 3k? Surely faster than 7:25
Why surely faster? Bekele's best event was the 10,000m. He got worse as he dropped down. Komen is a sub-3:30 runner in the 1500m. 3000m was probably Komen's ideal distance, given his 12:39 and 3:29. I think it's perfectly reasonable to think that Komen was considerably better at 3000m than Bekele, even at their respective peaks. Komen was 2 seconds slower than Bekele over 5000m and 3 seconds faster over 1500m.
7:20 is nothing to sniff at. El G gave the record his all and ran 7:23. I think it's safe to say El G was more suited for the 3000m than Bekele was. I think 7:24-5 is fair for Bekele.
Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_gNfJHDg0gHe ran 7:26.7 in that 3k. His last 1600m was about 3:54. And people say 7:25.7 was his limit? No way.
cbenson4 wrote:
Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_gNfJHDg0gHe ran 7:26.7 in that 3k. His last 1600m was about 3:54. And people say 7:25.7 was his limit? No way.
I don't get the point you're trying to make here. He ran 7:26.7.
Splits around 58 -> 1:59 -> 3:01 -> 4:02 for the first 1600m. They weren't running terribly slowly. WR pace for the 3K is right around 59 second quarters. They ran the first half of the race in just over 60s on average. If he would have gone out a little harder, he would've ran a slightly faster time, sure, but like, 7:24-25, not like 7:20-22.
iisk wrote:
sharpkid wrote:we have no way of truly knowing what "Could have been."
That's silly. Running performances are fairly predictable based on adjacent performances.
I guess, but they all had rabbited 3000m attempts in their primes and have times to show for it, and the 3000m is kind of a special event, because it requires tons of speed and endurance. Komen was suited for the 3000m and 2 mile in a way no one else has really been since. It obviously wasn't Bekele or Geb's best event. It wasn't Lagat or El G's best event. Maybe Said Aouita?
Either way, Komen's 3000m records are considered the Mount Everest of distance records for a reason.
cbenson4 wrote:
He ran 7:26.7 in that 3k. His last 1600m was about 3:54. And people say 7:25.7 was his limit? No way.
What is that supposed to prove? 7:26.7 on dead even splits is 3:58 at 1600. So he has some massive unused potential because he split 3 seconds under what would be an even pace?
Are they predictable by looking at one's actual times from 3k events, too?
iisk wrote:
sharpkid wrote:we have no way of truly knowing what "Could have been."
That's silly. Running performances are fairly predictable based on adjacent performances.
sharpkid wrote:
Are they predictable by looking at one's actual times from 3k events, too?
Why are you playing stupid? You know that if someone negative splits by 8 or so seconds in a 2 mile at that speed, then they could run much faster. So, yes they are predictable by looking at how the 3k was actually run.
v6 wrote:
I guess, but they all had rabbited 3000m attempts in their primes...
No. Komen had a PERFECT rabbit. No one else got that opportunity. As has already been pointed out, El G's rabbit was way off pace. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?
cbenson4 wrote:
All the race conversion calculators I've tried have said that Bekele's 12:37 5k is worth 7:20 or faster for 3k. McMillan's calc says 7:10.9... I think that's a bit extreme.
you got it right there.
7:20.
iisk wrote:
v6 wrote:I guess, but they all had rabbited 3000m attempts in their primes...
No. Komen had a PERFECT rabbit. No one else got that opportunity. As has already been pointed out, El G's rabbit was way off pace. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?
Huh? El G went through 1600m and 2000m at about what Komen did, he just died down the stretch.
1.) It's not that it's difficult to understand, it's that I think the argument that Bekele's time would have been 7:20-21 idiotic when he went through 1600m in 4:01. It's generally better to error on the side of negative splits rather than positive, and with more even pacing, I think it's ludicrous to think that he would've been more than 2, 3 seconds faster overall at the most, putting him at 7:23.7 with a "perfect rabbit."
3.) El G went through 1600m in 3:54 and 2000m in 4:53. He was on WR pace at that point and totally crashed down the stretch. Komen went 57 -> 1:56 -> 3:54-5 -> 4:53. So, about the same according to the videos. Komen had a rabbit for about 200m more or so.