Hicham El Guerouj split 3:28.28 in his mile WR, while his 1500m WR is 3:26.00. I feel like the mile WR is weak in comparison. The extra 109 meters shouldn't add 2+ seconds to the 1500m split. The mile WR record should be more like 3:41.5-3:42 as an equivalent performance.
That's what I've been trying to tell you guys! Blankenship!
Yeah but how many times has the mile been run vs 1500? Does it surprise you that the 2 mile world record is weaker than the 3k world record too? Or the 3 mile world record vs the 5k?
Standard 1.08 conversion from 3:26 gives a mile equivalent of 3:42.48, but given how infrequently the mile is run (particularly in Europe), the current mile record seems about right.
The mile world record is pretty irrelevant. It won't be broken until after somebody breaks the 1500 record and a mile attempt is subsequently set up. But even that might not happen.
80s kid wrote:
Yeah but how many times has the mile been run vs 1500? Does it surprise you that the 2 mile world record is weaker than the 3k world record too? Or the 3 mile world record vs the 5k?
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Take about 35s off the two mile WR to get a 3000m time, in this case 7:23, maybe slightly quicker. How many athletes could run this fast? Two Komen and El G. That is why Geb and Bekele couldn't touch this record, it was too fast for them. This is not a weak record.
MetricMile_vsMileWR wrote:
Hicham El Guerouj split 3:28.28 in his mile WR, while his 1500m WR is 3:26.00. I feel like the mile WR is weak in comparison. The extra 109 meters shouldn't add 2+ seconds to the 1500m split. The mile WR record should be more like 3:41.5-3:42 as an equivalent performance.
This is so silly. By this logic the 1000m record is a hopelessly soft record as well because it's 1:11.96 and should be 1:07 or something similar based on Rudisha. Bekele at his best could run sub-13mins for 5k with ease so based on this logic the world 10k record should be 25:50-something. But seldom or never are shorter world records set en route to a longer record.
The world record for 1500m is run to consume 100% of effort over 1500 metres, the mile race was run to consume 100% of effort over 1609.344 metres. If you consume 100% of effort in a mile race at the 1500m mark you're in trouble. So you are actually running at about 99% effort to go through the 1500m mark in 3:28 during a mile race if you can run 3:26. For the mile record to be broken one would have to at least be as quicking as El G. or quicker.
The gap between the world record for the 1500m and the mile was about 18s fifty years ago and it has hovered about 17-18s and it is currently 17.13s. I expect this gap to slowly drift lower but not by much.
Falling to bits wrote:
80s kid wrote:Yeah but how many times has the mile been run vs 1500? Does it surprise you that the 2 mile world record is weaker than the 3k world record too? Or the 3 mile world record vs the 5k?
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Take about 35s off the two mile WR to get a 3000m time, in this case 7:23, maybe slightly quicker. How many athletes could run this fast? Two Komen and El G. That is why Geb and Bekele couldn't touch this record, it was too fast for them. This is not a weak record.
LoL what? I said the 2 mile world record is weaker than the 3k record you dope.
80s kid wrote:
Falling to bits wrote:Wrong, wrong, wrong. Take about 35s off the two mile WR to get a 3000m time, in this case 7:23, maybe slightly quicker. How many athletes could run this fast? Two Komen and El G. That is why Geb and Bekele couldn't touch this record, it was too fast for them. This is not a weak record.
LoL what? I said the 2 mile world record is weaker than the 3k record you dope.
Hey muppet! And if you had of read properly I just explained that the 2 mile record isn't really weaker than the 3000m because only Mr Komen is capable of breaking it. Just as the mile record isn't weaker then the 1500m record. But if you can break these records then I am willing to stand corrected. Until such a time I stand by my statements.
Falling to bits wrote:
80s kid wrote:LoL what? I said the 2 mile world record is weaker than the 3k record you dope.
Hey muppet! And if you had of read properly I just explained that the 2 mile record isn't really weaker than the 3000m because only Mr Komen is capable of breaking it. Just as the mile record isn't weaker then the 1500m record. But if you can break these records then I am willing to stand corrected. Until such a time I stand by my statements.
Hey goofy, but the 2Miles and Mile WRs ARE weaker then the respective metric marks. You can see this while plotting a regression curve for the standard distances. But unfortunaly I'm not capable of breaking just one of them, so you will stand by your statement. Interesting on what kind of things the opinion of some people depend on.
Falling to bits wrote:
80s kid wrote:LoL what? I said the 2 mile world record is weaker than the 3k record you dope.
Hey muppet! And if you had of read properly I just explained that the 2 mile record isn't really weaker than the 3000m because only Mr Komen is capable of breaking it. Just as the mile record isn't weaker then the 1500m record. But if you can break these records then I am willing to stand corrected. Until such a time I stand by my statements.
No, you are wrong. You proved the 2 mile is weaker than the 3k time-wise like the other poster said.
Also the 1k is weaker than the 800m; why is that idea silly? An event that is rarely run has a weaker WR than an incredibly talent saturated event.
The mile WR is weaker than the 1500m also. It is EASIER to break the mile WR than the 1500m. You 'only' need 3:26.5 1500m ability to run under 3:43.13. Once again the mile is run less often than the 1500.
Makes absolute perfect sense.
One of my funniest memories in coaching: I was sitting in a room full of European middle distance athletes all trying to decide how many meters a mile is. I think the closest guess was something like 1645m.
When I finally told them the correct answer, one guy asked, "But why did they make it 1609m? And before I could explain, the whole group shouts out
"No! It's 1609.344m!"
Actually "bits" maybe technically correct, the disappearance of the mile as an event is a phenomena of the last ten years or so and is the result mainly of European (and American) promoters putting on 1500m events that used to be mile events because these promoters come under pressure from their national bodies to have a 1500m event in their country so that fringe athletes can meet qualifying standards while some of the best runners in the world are present. Prior to circa ten (or maybe fifteen years ago) the mile world record was (in my mind still is) the premier of the two records and athletes Hägg, Bannister, Snell, Walker, Ovett, Cram, Morceli, Guerrouj and Ngeny probably ran their best times over the mile distance. So in short the 1500m WR is held by the same person who holds the Mile WR which is not surprising because this person was in similar shape when they (Hicham El Guerrouj) set both records. Actually a few days before he set the WR of 3:26.0 for 1500m he ran a mile in 3:44.60, to El Guerrouj the mile record was the hardest of the two.Jim Ryun ran 3:33.1 & 3:51.1 an 18 second difference.Filbert Bayi ran 3:32.2 and John Walker ran 3:49.4 in 1974/75 (17.2 seconds difference).Seb Coe ran 3:29.77 & 3:47.33 (a difference of 17.56)Steve Cram in 1985 ran 3:29.67 & 3:46.32 (a difference of 16.65)Noureddine Moreceli 3:27.37 & 3:44.39 (a gap of 17.02)Hicham El Guerrouj 3:26.0 & 3:43.13 (a gap of 17.13)From these historical examples the gap has drifted from 18 seconds to low 17 seconds with a few outliers, Steve Cram's mile record of 3:46.32 was not actually on that day he just did an amazing last lap. Also, Hicham El Guerrouj's 3:26.0 had perfect conditions and Noah Ngeny was the pace maker through 1200m. So folks please keep it civil.
Metric Miler wrote:
Falling to bits wrote:Hey muppet! And if you had of read properly I just explained that the 2 mile record isn't really weaker than the 3000m because only Mr Komen is capable of breaking it. Just as the mile record isn't weaker then the 1500m record. But if you can break these records then I am willing to stand corrected. Until such a time I stand by my statements.
No, you are wrong. You proved the 2 mile is weaker than the 3k time-wise like the other poster said.
Also the 1k is weaker than the 800m; why is that idea silly? An event that is rarely run has a weaker WR than an incredibly talent saturated event.
The mile WR is weaker than the 1500m also. It is EASIER to break the mile WR than the 1500m. You 'only' need 3:26.5 1500m ability to run under 3:43.13. Once again the mile is run less often than the 1500.
Makes absolute perfect sense.
Metric Miler wrote:
Falling to bits wrote:Hey muppet! And if you had of read properly I just explained that the 2 mile record isn't really weaker than the 3000m because only Mr Komen is capable of breaking it. Just as the mile record isn't weaker then the 1500m record. But if you can break these records then I am willing to stand corrected. Until such a time I stand by my statements.
No, you are wrong. You proved the 2 mile is weaker than the 3k time-wise like the other poster said.
Also the 1k is weaker than the 800m; why is that idea silly? An event that is rarely run has a weaker WR than an incredibly talent saturated event.
The mile WR is weaker than the 1500m also. It is EASIER to break the mile WR than the 1500m. You 'only' need 3:26.5 1500m ability to run under 3:43.13. Once again the mile is run less often than the 1500.
Makes absolute perfect sense.
That is why Lagat holds the world record for the mile, oh no he doesn't. The only way someone will break will the mile WR is if they are running the 1500m at similar or faster speeds than El G and the only way someone will break the 2 mile WR is they are running 3k at similar or faster speeds than Daniel Komen.
Ask Komen but I'm pretty sure he earned his biggest bonuses from running the 2 four minute miles back to back, it's a time that the public can easily understand. He basically gave up after doing it a second time in Oz (might have earned a million dollars for his efforts).
Falling to bits wrote:
Ask Komen but I'm pretty sure he earned his biggest bonuses from running the 2 four minute miles back to back, it's a time that the public can easily understand. He basically gave up after doing it a second time in Oz (might have earned a million dollars for his efforts).
Clueless.
80s kid wrote:
Yeah but how many times has the mile been run vs 1500? Does it surprise you that the 2 mile world record is weaker than the 3k world record too? Or the 3 mile world record vs the 5k?
The mile has been run 1000s of more times than the 1500 which is relatively new in comparison.
So the mile record is 1.083 times the 1500 record by the same person.
That's pretty close to the 1.08 standard conversion.
Really good considering how infrequently the mile is run.
Noah Ngeny's mile PR of 3.43.40 is very impressive compared to his 3:28.12 1500m PR.
That's a 15.3s difference and a 1.074 multiplier.
Ngeny has run under 3:50 twice.
Falling to bits wrote:
Metric Miler wrote:No, you are wrong. You proved the 2 mile is weaker than the 3k time-wise like the other poster said.
Also the 1k is weaker than the 800m; why is that idea silly? An event that is rarely run has a weaker WR than an incredibly talent saturated event.
The mile WR is weaker than the 1500m also. It is EASIER to break the mile WR than the 1500m. You 'only' need 3:26.5 1500m ability to run under 3:43.13. Once again the mile is run less often than the 1500.
Makes absolute perfect sense.
That is why Lagat holds the world record for the mile, oh no he doesn't. The only way someone will break will the mile WR is if they are running the 1500m at similar or faster speeds than El G and the only way someone will break the 2 mile WR is they are running 3k at similar or faster speeds than Daniel Komen.
Ask Komen but I'm pretty sure he earned his biggest bonuses from running the 2 four minute miles back to back, it's a time that the public can easily understand. He basically gave up after doing it a second time in Oz (might have earned a million dollars for his efforts).
How don't you understand that the Lagat comment proves my point not yours? Nobody goes for the mile WR.
It's irrelevant outside of the US and UK.
Well then go to the track, run the 1500m 1 second slower than your PB and then try to keep the same tempo for another 109 in the same tempo and let us know how that went.
*fools be trippin'*
Falling to bits is a troll. He thinks the Mile WR is better than the 1500m WR and the 2 mile WR is better than the 3k WR because no one on this board is capable of running those times. Carry on.