Mo Farah - Greatest Range of Any Distance Runner Ever?

VIPAM wrote:

No comparison, Kenenisa Bekele owns the WR in the 5000m , 10000m, and 2nd fastest ever in the marathon. Throw in his 3:32 1500m and he is no hands barred the best range ever, how is there any discussion.

All time list:

1500m.......top 100

5000m.......1st

10000m.....1st

Marathon...2nd

3:31 for Haile vs 3:32 for Bekele.

However Haile has 2:03:59 vs 2:03:03.

Is it a minute at the marathon worth more than 1s in the 1500? I'd say so. Which as you say makes it pretty clear to Bekele.

However, guys like Choge (Augustine) and Farah keep it interesting. Farah isn't there yet. 3:28 and 2:06 is not as good as 3:32 and 2:03 flat, but it's in the "picture" if he can improve at the marathon. If Farah drops 2:04, especially 2:04 low....then I'm leaning Farah. Same if Farah drops 58:3x or better.

Actually I was going to say Augustine Kipchoge but not anymore. He's 1:44 high and 59 high. If both of those were low, that would have been some pretty serious stuff, but not quite there. I'd be thinking something like 3:28-3:29/12:45/26:50/59:30 for him, which is good but not as good as say 1:46/3:31/12:39/26:21/58:55/2:03:59

Estoy medio mamede! wrote:

I know of no other human being who has competed in both an Olympic 10,000m and 4×400.

How about competed in an Olympic 4 x 400m and WON an Olympic gold in the Marathon along with a bronze in the marathon and silver in the 10,000m?

You now know about Ethiopia's Mamo Wolde.

Takinadump wrote:

Carlson Tucker wrote:

Bekele v Farah.

1500m - Farah

Mile - Farah

3000m - Bekele

5000m - Bekele

10000m - Bekele

Half marathon - Farah

Marathon - Bekele

Greatest range? Bekele.

Farah was defeated by Bekele in a half in their only head to head matchup at that distance and his prs from 5000 and up are significantly better. Kipchoge is also better at the 5000 and MUCH better at the marathon. Also convincingly beat Farah in the indoor 2 mile.

Kipchoge is indeed MUCH better at the marathon. Tbh Farah is MUCH better at 1500, but not by the same amount that Kipchoge is better at the marathon. Farah has Kipchoge by about 5s at the mile, but Kipchoge by over 3:00 at the marathon, and realistically Kipchoge could probably be a minute faster at marathon and also realistically should have run 3:31/3:32 in 1500.

Kipchoge can only be in the conversation if you want to go to the realm of speculation and assume he coulda/shoulda/woulda run 3:31/2:02:00, in which case he has the edge over Bekele, but right now it's a clear win for Bekele at:

3:31/2:03:03 vs: 3:33/2:03:05

So in strict PRs Bekele wins. If you go speculation route then it's still better at both for Bekele. If injury Bekele 10 years past his zenith can run 2:03 low there is no doubt that prime Bekele was good for 2:01:xx. Guy much WAY better across the board 10 years ago, and is obviously suited for the marathon since this version of Bekele runs 2:03 when the best he can manage on the track is 26:4x.

For me though, the real potential elephant in the room is Farah. That 2:06 was impressive. I certainly don't find it hard to think that in Berlin conditions he runs 2:05 low. It's still his second marathon. There exists decent chance he can get better. If Farah runs 2:04 the range conversation gets interesting. If he runs 2:03:xx then there is no way it's anybody but Farah.

More importantly, if he runs 2:03:xx there is no way the guy couldn't have run sub 12:40. Geb ran sub 12:40 off of 3:31 high and 2:03:59. If Farah is faster at marathon and significantly faster at 1500, then you certainly have to think he coulda woulda shoulda pulled out 12:3x and 26:1x if he had gone for it.

The Fokus wrote:

ThatAverageRunner wrote:

The argument isn't saying Mo is the greatest distance runner of all time, just the greatest range. Range would imply doing well at shorter events and the long event. His 1500m is far superior to all of his marathon competitors. He doesn't have GOAT range right now with only a 2:06 marathon, but it is clear that after today he can probably manage 2:04:XX which, in my opinion, would get him into GOAT range territory. 3:31 and 3:28 are pretty far apart. None of the other top distance guys can hold a candle to 3:28.

Who cares what he can "probably manage"? How about what he's "managed" which is not as good as Bekele or Geb or Kipchoge.

Get back to us when Farah gets through "managing".

It isn't as good. Right now Farah isn't in the conversation.

Who cares about what Farah could "probably manage"? Anyone that follows the sport. If some new young Kenyan stud came out and ran 12:42, you don't think we'd all be interesting and talking about what he could "probably manage" if he keeps training well? Isn't discussing who might win the Olympics or WCs just a discussion of what different runners can "probably manage" depending on how different races might play out? Wasn't there a ton of speculation on what Kipchoge could "probably manage" at Breaking2? Or Berlin last year? Or London this year?

uppity wrote:

It isn't as good. Right now Farah isn't in the conversation.

Who cares about what Farah could "probably manage"? Anyone that follows the sport. If some new young Kenyan stud came out and ran 12:42, you don't think we'd all be interesting and talking about what he could "probably manage" if he keeps training well? Isn't discussing who might win the Olympics or WCs just a discussion of what different runners can "probably manage" depending on how different races might play out? Wasn't there a ton of speculation on what Kipchoge could "probably manage" at Breaking2? Or Berlin last year? Or London this year?

Right. So the poster I responded to including what Farah could "probably manage" shouldn't have mentioned it since he hasn't done it (whether yet or not) and therefore you should have stopped with the first sentence which is the only current truism.

ok let me make a list

I=indoors r=road

Bekele

1500-3:32

2000i-4:49(converted to 3:49.4 indoors)

3000-7:25-7:30i

2miles.i-8:04

5000-12:37-12:49i

10000-26:17

half-60:09(beat mo)

marathon-2:03:03

Geb

800i-1:49

1500-3:31i

mile-3:52

2000i-4:52

3000-7:25-7:26i

2smiles-8:01-8:04i

5000-12:39-12:50i

10000-26:22-27:02r

half-58:54

marathon-2:03:59

Mo

100-12.9

800-1:48

1500-3:28-3:39i

mile-3:56-3:57i

2000-5:06

3000-7:32-7:33i

2mile-8:04i

5000-12:53-13:09i

10000-26:46

half-59:32

marathon-2:06:22

Kipchoge

1500-3:33

mile-3:50

3000-7:27-7:29i

2miles-8:07(beat Mo)

5000-12:46-12:55i

10000-26:49

half-59:25

marathon-2:03:05

feel free to add more to this list

Alone Ranger wrote:

I have to make a case for Kipchoge: 7:27 (not far from either Geb or Bek)and 12:46, which are as good as 3:28; and clearly, somewhere south of 2:02:50 for a marathon. He is in a league with both Geb and Bekele here, with a comparable 3K and better marathon by far. If 50K were an Olympic distance he would dominate that even more.

His marathon is not better "by far". In fact, it's worse. 2:03:03 vs 2:03:05.

"but but but conditions" and "Breaking2".

Fair.

But now we are in the realm of speculation. We don't know exactly what breaking 2 is worth, we don't know exactly what Kipchoge can do in marathon. However, the same is true for Bekele, and if you're going to speculate down faster for Kipchoge you have to do so for Bekele.

Injured/Past Prime Bekele that struggled to run higher 26:xx on the track was suited enough to the marathon to produce a 2:03:03. I think this makes it pretty clear Bekele is a runner that translates very well to the marathon. With that in mind, I assert that Bekele of today is a MUCH weaker runner than Bekele of 10 years ago. If "modern" Bekele can run 2:03 flat, you're going to have a very hard time convincing me that a Bekele that was 30s+ better at 10k wouldn't have been able to run something high 2:01s at a minimum.

By this logic we shouldn't ever discuss if a runners race could have been better, what implications it might have for future races, whether or not runners can improve their times and what level they might improve to, or what the outcome could be for future races. Definitely wouldn't have letsrun previews with speculations on what certain results might mean.

Hard to believe the poster is serious - but if so: wow, even for letsrun standards this would be close to some all-time-low comment. I've never heard of these "definitions", maybe someone has a link to them?

The Fokus wrote:

Estoy medio mamede! wrote:

I know of no other human being who has competed in both an Olympic 10,000m and 4×400.

How about competed in an Olympic 4 x 400m and WON an Olympic gold in the Marathon along with a bronze in the marathon and silver in the 10,000m?

You now know about Ethiopia's Mamo Wolde.

How about wining the 800/1500, a bronze in the tennis, and competing in the marathon (Edwin Flack)

3k time matters not. Conversions matter not. A range is defined by the boundaries and so all that matters are the boundaries which in Farah, Kipchoge, Bekele, and Geb's case are 1500 and the marathon.

By definition is the wrong way to state it. Very poor choice of words on my part.

At the same time, you know what it is I'm trying to say.

Stated more clearly, let's take three distances A, B, C and take A as the shortest, B as the middle, and C as the longest. If an an athlete is faster as A and C than another athlete, they will also be faster at B.

Fitness has two components, anaerobic fitness and aerobic fitness. You can run at a certain speed/power purely off of your aerobic contribution. Beyond that speed, aerobic processes cannot supply enough energy to sustain a faster pace. Where do you go to run faster? Anaerobic glycolysis. Perhaps you can run at 300w aerobically. If you want to run at 330w, then you need to generate 30w from anaerobic contributions.

If you're faster at a longer event that suggests more aerobic capacity. Faster at a shorter event means more anaerobic capacity. In other words, if you have two athletes that both run 3:30, but one has a 59' half and the other has a 62' half as their best ability, you know that the guy with 3:30/59' will be faster than 3:30/62 guy for events between 1500 and half marathon. Conversely, the athlete running 3:30/62' will be the better 800m runner.

Why? Because in order for a guy with 62' half marathon ability to match a guy with 59' half marathon ability the 62' guy must have much greater FRC (anaerobic capacity). He doesn't have the aerobic fitness, so it must come from elsewhere. Where? Anaerobic capacity. Anaerobic capacity is a finite amount of energy, i.e. 15kJ, 20kJ, etc. So it's extension in terms of power is linear. If you get 600w from anaerobic capacity for 1', you'll get 120w from anaerobic capacity over 5. Same 1500 speed, so the 3:30/62' guy has enough anaerobic capacity to match a guy with 59' endurance, and at a shorter event that anaerobic capacity becomes even more significant and that 3:30 guy might be a 1:44 800 guy as opposed to a 1:46 800 guy for 3:30/59.

There are caveats here at distances beyond about 40-60', or distance shorter than about 60". Over 60' and you bring in a fatigue resistance factor (one of the reasons Tadese struggles at the marathon), and shorter than about 30s and you're bringing in a very legitimate ATP:CrP system + speed component, and aren't guaranteeing full utilization of anaerobic capacity.

Tying back to the original point, if Farah can run say 58:30 and 3:28, it means he has both more aerobic power (given his faster half) and more anaerobic capacity (given his 3:28) than Geb. If you have more of both aspects of fitness...you're going to run faster.

Hardloper wrote:

3k time matters not. Conversions matter not. A range is defined by the boundaries and so all that matters are the boundaries which in Farah, Kipchoge, Bekele, and Geb's case are 1500 and the marathon.

I agree, but could see some interesting edge cases. Imagine for example a "super Tadesse", who perhaps ran 3:26/57:52/2:09:45

Just not a guy with with fatigue resistance. Do you still give the edge to Bekele given the massive advantage by Super Tadese up to half marathon? I can see arguments for both yes and no.

I'd be inclined to say that when talking about range fatigue resistance and marathon ability are part of what make range interesting, so Bekele > Super Tadese, but I could also understand where people would be happy to say yea but...3:26/57:52 is still ridiculous so even though Super Tadese can't run the M he is still more impressive in his range.

The GROAT is defined either by:

1) absolute times

2) times relative to existing WRs

for 1), the answer is Bekele.

for 2) the answer is Dixon.

uppity wrote:

By this logic we shouldn't ever discuss if a runners race could have been better, what implications it might have for future races, whether or not runners can improve their times and what level they might improve to, or what the outcome could be for future races. Definitely wouldn't have letsrun previews with speculations on what certain results might mean.

When discussing who has the greatest range speculation is just that. Speculate away but you really are a boob for not understanding this. Well done and par for the LetsRun course.

Hardloper wrote:

The Fokus wrote:

How about competed in an Olympic 4 x 400m and WON an Olympic gold in the Marathon along with a bronze in the marathon and silver in the 10,000m?

You now know about Ethiopia's Mamo Wolde.

How about wining the 800/1500, a bronze in the tennis, and competing in the marathon (Edwin Flack)

Well done.

Ian Stewart said that he has seen Mo run a 1:45 800m time trial

I like Choge's claim but he hasn't run a good marathon yet. The question regarding the half marathon, it isn't an Olympic event, though there is a separate World Championships. Aouita, Choge, Silva have/had 800m times that would win medals at Olympics/WCs (though Olympics are key), from 1500m up Dixon was good as was Geb indoors. Dixon never ran a good 10,000m opting for roads and was very good at x country (probably the world's best in the mid 1970s). 2:08 in NY. We all know Geb, Bekele and Mo's range. Mo is extremely fast over 1500m. Aouita was dominant over all the track distances but not the longer road events. Choge has done 59 for the half. There was probably guys in the 1920s and 1950s that are being overlooked.

Alan Webb has slightly better PRs at 800 and 10k than Said Aouita. His RANGE also extends to triathlon where he finished on 3rd in a World Cup event, plus he never got caught telling his athletes to take drugs.