As per one of the initial posts, he will be lucky to go under 1.42 again. Injuries and the stresses of training have taken a toll on his body. He simply cant do the quantity to gain the strength he needs for run 1.42. His speed is not in question though. He ran a 1.13.71 last year. Thats close to Johnnys record. Dont forget though 142 is a very fast time. Only 5 people have gone under that.
Nah probably not. He just doesn't seem to be able to really gap the competition like he used to. And he got outkicked at the Kenyan Trials.
99 seconds!! wrote:
He can do it. His pr should be at least a second faster than his 2nd fastest time. Most runners have their pr at least 1 second faster than their 2nd best time. If he's feeling great one day he will do it.
Maybe at the high school level that is true of most runners but it's certainly not the case at the level Rudisha is at. Simple bit of data checking because it seemed like fun:
Rudisha - 0.1 seconds
Kipketer - 0.13 seconds
Coe - 0.6 seconds
Amos - 0.72 seconds
Cruz - 0.57 seconds
Kaki - 0.46 seconds
Koskei - 1.00 seconds
Bungei - 0.18 seconds
Aman - 0.16 seconds
Borzakovskiy - 0.32 seconds
Those are the 10 fastest men ever at 800m and the amount of time between their PR and 2nd best. Sammy Koskei interestingly enough did actually follow the 1 second rule but the average among the top ten is 0.424 seconds. Based on that average, if Rudisha gets another PR it is unlikely it will be sub 1:40. Especially noting the fact that his WR progression was 0.1 seconds between 2010 and 2012 and he hasn't run within ~2 seconds of his PR in quite some time.
Surely if Kipketer was correctly paced to 600m he would have ran faster and probably still be the WR holder.
Juice Springsteen wrote:
A sub 1:40 won't be done by anyone in the immediate future. .91 seconds is a lot of time in the 800 meters. Sub 1:40 requires averaging under 50 seconds per lap.
How. What an insightful post. Bold prediction, too.
Salvatore Stitchmo wrote:
Posting nonsense? Your splits don't even add up to his time you certifiable moron.
I could be mistaken but doesn't 23.4, 25.9, 25.0 and 26.9 = 1min41.2?
So what are perfect 800 splits then Einstein? I think for 1min40.9 what Rudisha did in London was pretty darn good.49.3-51.6
Certainly much better than Kipketers 48.4, 52.8 in Zurich 1997 who is probably one of the two 800m runners in history (along with Coe) that could compare as a front runner to Rudisha
You are an absolute idiot. I am betting that you have never raced or coached a high-level 800.
First of all, obviously the splits I wrote are rounded to the tenth of a second, and bringing the hundredths in would make it add to 1:40.91. Was that not clear to you? Go look them up yourself, moron.
Second, it is OBVIOUS that a 2.5 second positive split from first to second 200 is not optimal. Rudisha got out too fast, then pumped the breaks to slow the second 200 down. He then got faster again for the third 200! Plainly this isn't the most efficient distribution of energy.
You seem like a total simpleton, stating that because Rudisha'a positive split was smaller than Kipketer's, it must be "better." Rubbish. Here's a hint: every runner has a different ideal split in the 800. Elite PRs are set with a variety of them.
What NEVER happens in a ideal race is a 2.5 second difference between consecutive 200s. Getting faster in subsequent 200s is also nearly unheard of in elite 800 PR efforts, especially 400/800 guys.
As Ventolin would say, go learn something.
Hey wrote:
rupp-certified saladbar wrote:23.4 / 25.9 / 25.0 / 26.9
Those look like pretty good splits for a time trial 800m race. Maybe not perfect
"Pretty good splits" you say?
"PRETTY GOOD SPLITS"???
This isn't a high school meet, you damn idiot, we are talking about the ceiling of the world-record holder. "Pretty good" is not the benchmark of interest.
A 2.5 second difference from first 200 to second is NEVER ideal. That is ridiculous to even suggest. 23.4 is too fast of an opener even for Rudisha.
Getting FASTER from the second 200 to the third is NEVER expected or ideal for a speed-oriented 800 guy. It is a controlled slowdown, EVERY SINGLE TIME. This is just more evidence that Rudisha coasted the second 200 after going too fast. (He had to in order to get the pole position from Kaki.)
If you want to believe those were perfect splits, I wish you luck in your mediocrity.
Salvatore Stitchmo wrote:PI think for 1min40.9 what Rudisha did in London was pretty darn good.49.3-51.6
ventolin^3 wrote:
no
you are only looking at 2 splits
the 800 is a 4-split race
200 / 400 / 600 /800
each needs to be near "perfect" for an individual to realise ultimate 800
it is akin to stating that 1'52.0 / 1'38 are stated ideal splits for a 3'30.0 when the actual splits maya been
~ 53.5 !! / 58.5 !! / 54.0 !!! / 44.0 !!
those are ridiculous splits & akin to what Rudy actually ran for his 800 "extrapolated" to a 3'30.0
Great correction of Salvatore Dipsitchmo.
How he could be so idiotic as to only look at the 400 splits is amazing.
The first 200 is always going to be the fastest though isn't it. How can you determine what is optimal?
If we looked at every 10m split we would have something to work with.
The bioenergitics is such that the energy systems go from anaerobic to aerobic right? Not the other way round, so optimal splits for a guy who can run sub 11 for 100 meters are going to be different for someone with less speed and more endurance, but even Coe started fast.
Better than 100 seconds wrote:
Thoughts?
Well, once the powers that be told him and his handlers that if he was caught with varied and high levels of PEDs again he would be exposed and suspended, it's safe to say that it won't happen. The fake knee injury was a nice touch, reminded many of the "car crash" the super-cheat Ngeny offered up as part of his agreement.
I don't think it's "safe" to say that he won't do it before he's done. While around a second is a lot in the 800m, to wit:
1) he's got upside, as he's been running for 10 years and he's 26 now. Many runners hit their peak after 12 years, so while the window for improvement is not wide open, it still has some light coming through it. Granted, he'll have to avoid the injury bug to make the most of his remaining career.
2) echoing on the point above, while his raw speed is likely topped out, he still has room to increase other energy systems with the right training.
3) Monaco and Rieti ovals>London
4) while the adrenaline can only pump that way in the Olympic Final, as some have mentioned, he had to run rounds, and the splits he ran were to win the race, and not to consciously set a record. The third 200, as discussed, was a bit hot, but he did it to win a Gold Medal.
5) he's motivated as hell now, because Amos has been routinely beating him, and the naysayers have their swords out (as this thread indicates)
rupp-certified saladbar wrote:
Salvatore Stitchmo wrote:PI think for 1min40.9 what Rudisha did in London was pretty darn good.49.3-51.6ventolin^3 wrote:
no
you are only looking at 2 splits
the 800 is a 4-split race
200 / 400 / 600 /800
each needs to be near "perfect" for an individual to realise ultimate 800
it is akin to stating that 1'52.0 / 1'38 are stated ideal splits for a 3'30.0 when the actual splits maya been
~ 53.5 !! / 58.5 !! / 54.0 !!! / 44.0 !!
those are ridiculous splits & akin to what Rudy actually ran for his 800 "extrapolated" to a 3'30.0
Great correction of Salvatore Dipsitchmo.
How he could be so idiotic as to only look at the 400 splits is amazing.
Who would have guessed rupp-fuuckified dude was fuuckolin!
Star wrote:
If you have a bet where you win a million dollars if he doesn't do it by age 40 or you lose your life if he does, do you feel confident making that bet?
Can I contract with Rudisha? Can I say that I'll pay him 500,000 if he never runs under 1:40?
I might take that. In fact I might be able to induce him to retire for that much.
klubkip1 wrote:
Surely if Kipketer was correctly paced to 600m he would have ran faster and probably still be the WR holder.
Yes.
banana splits wrote:
The first 200 is always going to be the fastest though isn't it. How can you determine what is optimal?
Yes. Obviously. 1st
kjgkuyg wrote:
rupp-certified saladbar wrote:Great correction of Salvatore Dipsitchmo.
How he could be so idiotic as to only look at the 400 splits is amazing.
Who would have guessed rupp-fuuckified dude was fuuckolin!
No. I just respect other thinking posters.
Star wrote:
If you have a bet where you win a million dollars if he doesn't do it by age 40 or you lose your life if he does, do you feel confident making that bet?
What a stupid illogical post. If you're trying to make a point, you failed.
If you have a bet where you win a million dollars if he does do it by age 40 or you lose your life if he doesn't, do you feel confident making that bet?
See how meaningless that exercise is?