Coe would finish a series of 200s in training in 21.7, and jogged a 14:06 5k in 1980. I'd say he could run sub 14 anytime over 5000m, and would have been close to 10.7 for 100m in 81.
Coe would finish a series of 200s in training in 21.7, and jogged a 14:06 5k in 1980. I'd say he could run sub 14 anytime over 5000m, and would have been close to 10.7 for 100m in 81.
Welsh Wizard wrote:
Coe would finish a series of 200s in training in 21.7, and jogged a 14:06 5k in 1980. I'd say he could run sub 14 anytime over 5000m, and would have been close to 10.7 for 100m in 81.
46.87s
Probably Arzanov 72 800m silver medallist
CHRIS SCHRADER wrote:
Probably Arzanov 72 800m silver medallist
Do you have some numbers for him? I would be very interested.
kartelite wrote:
Not Nomar wrote:Bruce Jenner ran 10.7 for 100m. His 4:12 for 1500 is probably closer to 14:50-1500 range but trying to prop the guy up, he's been through a lot.
4:12 1500m is not worth that or anything near it. More like 15:30-16:00 for someone who doesn't weigh 230.
He did that as the final event of the Decathlon and his balls were killing him.
curtis beach
10,5
with 2.23 1k
with training for 5 k, maybe
What about Ashton Eaton? I know he's run stupid fast for the 100, but what has he run in the 1500?
Curtis Beach would be a more likely candidate than Eaton probably. Beach finished a Decathlon with a 3:59 for the 1500m . So I'm not sure what that suggests completely fresh, only running a 1500m, but I conservatively I'd guess low 3:50s. And that's without training specifically for a distance race. I think 14:30 would be a possibility. He still has some wheels too. I saw him on tv run 49.8x for the 400m IH last summer. IAAF lists his 100m best as 10.52.
29:19 PB (300) 3 BUPA Dublin 9 Apr 2006I don't think Mark Carroll was in San Diego running a 100 & 200 two weeks before getting ready for a 10km road race in Dublin!Just like the 10.64 t listed for Marcin Lewandowsk
My Man Mark Carroll wrote:
http://www.all-athletics.com/node/45217Not quite, destroys the 5000m with a 13:03 but is a bit off on the 100m with an 11.17 although he was 36 when he ran that. Pretty incredible range though considering he ran 2:10 for the marathon too.
I think you've set up interesting parameters for debate.
I lean towards your roommate that it is unlikely but would not say that it is impossible.
I've run 11.2 (hand timed) and 14:55 (several years apart).
I know I could have run 14:30 if I took a year of racing that event.
10.7 was never going to happen, even hand timed.
I'd start with runners who either ran 10.7 or showed they could have.
Like someone that ran 21 point.
45 point may be a safe assumption of 10.7 ability.
It's gonna be hard to find someone who has run a legit 10.7 that ever evolved to do the necessary training to go for 14:30.
No one who's run 14:30 is going to take up the 100 and run 10.7.
It is possible because many 1:43 800 runners have that ability.
But no 1:43 runner is going to alter their training and waste their time trying to run either 10.7 or 14:30.
I want to run fast wrote:
Lewandowski has a 10.64 100m pr and 3.37 1500m pr.
No 5000m listed but 3.37 for 15 has to be decent endurance, right?
Oh, thise times are from the iaaf website by the way
This. If you can run 337, you can run 14:30 no problem. Probably faster.
Within the last year, Emmanuel Korir has run 44.67 400m, 1:43.73 800m, and 25:44 8K XC. My guess and a pace calculator predicted a ~14:50 5k based off of these times. I don't know much about sprint conversions, but I'd guess that if you can run 44.67 you can run 10.7, as 10.7 x 4 = 42.8 which is less than 2s faster than 400 time.
So, I doubt there will ever be a 100m for Korir, but I'd be more surprised if he couldn't hit the times than if he could (given some more distance training).
Polish powa wrote:
I want to run fast wrote:Lewandowski has a 10.64 100m pr and 3.37 1500m pr.
No 5000m listed but 3.37 for 15 has to be decent endurance, right?
Oh, thise times are from the iaaf website by the way
This. If you can run 337, you can run 14:30 no problem. Probably faster.
Wrong, see Leo Manzano's 5k attempt.
Lewandowski, as mentioned twice, does not have a 10.64 100m PB.
thedub wrote:
I am having a heated discussion with my roommate. He is under the impression that it is IMPOSSIBLE to run a 10.7 100m and also be able to run a 14:30 5k.
I believe that someone with a 1:44 800 PR could accomplish both of these times.
You might pull a hammy trying to come out of the block attempting the 10.7.
I could see someone able to do the 14:30 towards the end of CC then do the 10.7 at the end of track if he switches to running 400s, 200s, and 100s.
Cliff West of Cal Berkeley in 1972 was supposed to have run
1:48.2, 3:44.9, 4:02.7. Then in 1977 he ran a 20.53 200 meter!
So over a career it's possible but certainly not in the same meet!!!
seems doable wrote:
Within the last year, Emmanuel Korir has run 44.67 400m, 1:43.73 800m, and 25:44 8K XC. My guess and a pace calculator predicted a ~14:50 5k based off of these times. I don't know much about sprint conversions, but I'd guess that if you can run 44.67 you can run 10.7, as 10.7 x 4 = 42.8 which is less than 2s faster than 400 time.
So, I doubt there will ever be a 100m for Korir, but I'd be more surprised if he couldn't hit the times than if he could (given some more distance training).
Short XC courses don't count
He ran 25:4x on 3 separate occasions, including Notre Dame Invite and Pre-Nats.
In any case, there is more people on this planet who ran under 14.30 for 5k than below 10.7 for 100m.
It has to come from a sprinting background guy who is then building his endurance
JRinaldi wrote:
29:19 PB (300) 3 BUPA Dublin 9 Apr 2006
I don't think Mark Carroll was in San Diego running a 100 & 200 two weeks before getting ready for a 10km road race in Dublin!
Just like the 10.64 t listed for Marcin Lewandowsk
My Man Mark Carroll wrote:http://www.all-athletics.com/node/45217Not quite, destroys the 5000m with a 13:03 but is a bit off on the 100m with an 11.17 although he was 36 when he ran that. Pretty incredible range though considering he ran 2:10 for the marathon too.
John Higham a former Aussie 800 man was a tall skinny dude who ran 10.6, 21.2, 45.?, 1.45.?, 3.44. He ran plenty of mileage for a 400/800 guy so a 14.30 5 wouldn't be completely out of his reach. Don't know if he ever ran any interclub 5s maybe JRinaldi might know.
BBl wrote:
JUHA VAATAINEN FINLAND
His records from shorter distances were 10.9 (100m) and 22.1 (200m), both apparently hand times from the early 1960s. Not bad at all for someone who ran 5K at 13:28.4 a decade later.
What a beautiful transformation of type IIb muscle fibers into more fatigue-resistant IIa fibers...
I just found an athlete who recorded both 100m and mile times when he was 19 years old. He has since become a dedicated and much faster, sub-10 sprinter, and probably couldn't run a mile today if his life depended on it.
Also, I don't know how mile times correlate to a 5k, but his mile was decent.
Andrew Fisher
Born 15 December 1991
2010 100m: 10.62 (+1.7)
2010 mile: 4:24.68
His 100m is an honest FAT 10.7 required by the OP, at least. It's rare to find a mile result for a guy who has gone on to be sub-10.
4:25 doesn't sound like it will be anywhere near as good as 14:30, though...maybe 15:30?
Here's an old thread on 5k vs mile time: