Man, the 5000m has really gone downhill.

anacondarunner wrote:

Today's race in Stockholm was purportedly "fast," with Barega & Co. sticking to the rabbits ... and the winning time was 13:04 (a world lead, no less).

WTF has happened to this once great event?

While it's easy to attribute the slower times to improved drug testing, marathon times are faster than ever. 1500 times have still been strong, too.

Is it too much to ask for a race in which Barega, Kejelcha, Chelimo, Cheserek, Cheptegei, Gebrehiwet et al. go out with pacers at, say, 12:50 pace and stick to it in the middle kilometers? I mean, the Paris 2012 Diamond League wasn't THAT long ago...

I'm going to assume, as always, that hardly anyone watched the meet. Everyone likes to give their 2p but nobody watches the sport.

It was very hot. In excess of 27C and maybe even hotter in the direct sun and enclosed stadium conditions.

Pace broke down after the pacers dropped out and it became more of a tactical race for the last 2km. Things slowed considerably, a few 65s laps were in there. Last lap was 56/57 from memory.

It was a sub 13, perhaps 12:55 performance on a cooler day with better pacing.

Thanks.

If the course really goes downhill, would it still be record-eligible?

anacondarunner wrote:

Today's race in Stockholm was purportedly "fast," with Barega & Co. sticking to the rabbits ... and the winning time was 13:04 (a world lead, no less).

WTF has happened to this once great event?

While it's easy to attribute the slower times to improved drug testing, marathon times are faster than ever. 1500 times have still been strong, too.

Is it too much to ask for a race in which Barega, Kejelcha, Chelimo, Cheserek, Cheptegei, Gebrehiwet et al. go out with pacers at, say, 12:50 pace and stick to it in the middle kilometers? I mean, the Paris 2012 Diamond League wasn't THAT long ago...

Seriously? It was hot and every bit worth sub 13 in good weather. Not every race is going to have good temperatures.

ex-runner wrote:

anacondarunner wrote:

It was very hot. In excess of 27C and maybe even hotter in the direct sun and enclosed stadium conditions.

This!

The win gets the prize. You secure your place to get paid and hopefully a good time will follow its basic. The only way to make it faster is to dangle a big cash carrot in front and the pace will get real.

Of course we didn't watch the meet. Who is going to pay to watch NOP when we just watched 4 days of great NCAA competition free! No one pays to watch sports anymore.

Goucher Needles wrote:

Slower times are 100% a result of improved testing in Kenya and Ethiopia.

I was thinking this as I watched the Stockholm race.

You, sir, hit the nail on the head.

Now, gentlemen and gentlewomen- sit back and enjoy racing (as opposed to a boring time trial).

The rarity of a sub 13 minute 5km is also what makes it so special in my opinion. I like to see them battling for the win.

There should be more unpaced races (not always) in the circuit to promote raw competition. I don't like to see pacers starting strong only for the group to decide after 300m that they don't want to follow.

If athletes themselves (not rabbits) were given an incentive to split 7:42 for 3000m, that could change their race approach but I understand that they are following the overall money which is the combination of 6 DL races.

They only give out points to the top 3 so I can see why they don't risk too much.

I remember a crazy (unpaced) 3000m race in which Bekele, Lagat and company closed in 51 for a slow 8:01. I like those as well but it was established from the beginning there weren't pacers (voluntarily at least).

When a race is too fast we complain that races are just time trials and that's not interesting.

When a race is slower and tactical we complain that runners just don't run fast these days.

optional wrote:

I was just thinking about this after seeing the Portland Track Festival marks.

1:47 for the 800 meters.

3:40 for the 1500 meters.

13:21 for the 5000 meters.

8:35 for the steeplechase.

It's just not the same game it was in the late 90s / early 2000s.

But, again, maybe that's because of the drug testing. But I think some of it comes from over-complication of the sport and training. From memory...Haile G, Bekele, El-G, those guys they raced and they raced a lot. It seems that we just don't see that very often any more. And we don't see many guys going for fast-times and world records.

It's turned into Mo Farah jogging as long as possible and kicking the last 200-400 meters. Jog / kick.

There is more money than ever supporting two things, training groups and placing at big meets. Big, well funded training groups provide less incentive to race a lot and take a chance while racing. You train as much as possible, hoping to perfect your fitness, because you have a shoe company providing you with a safety net. Shoe companies support more runners than ever because they can. They reward you if you place at a high profile meet but could care less about times. It’s a balance of risk vs reward. Corporatization of running.

To me, a time time trial with a number of people running fast is never boring.

That famous 2012 Paris had 1st place in 12:46.81 and 6th place in 12.49.50.

That's less than 3 seconds separating the top 6.

The spread in this Stockholm race was 13:04 for 1st down to 13:19 for 6th.

I don't see how people can see a quality field at a fast pace as ever boring.

Maybe if the field gets strung out and only a couple can hang with the pace, but that tells you who is clearly fitter.

Has anyone interviewed Bob Kennedy about this?

If Kennedy was clean, it proves how psychology plays a part in racing fast. Guys just wanting to go for it and pushing themselves and having NOTHING to do with drugs.

runjoeyrun wrote:

holy crap those 2012 5k times are nuts. those guys must have been doped to the gills

If I remember right, it was all basically from 1 or 2 races that year too.

Hffdg wrote:

Track is garbage nowadays because most runners go straight to the marathon due to its popularity- more money on the road. This is why a mediocre runner like Farah rose.

This explains the decline of 10,000m, but it's a bit more tenuous at 5,000m. There should still be people around or a bit under 3:30 1500m and 7:30 3000m who can run a fast 5000m (say around 12:50), but couldn't do so well at the marathon.

1972 called and wants their times back... Prefontaine would still be dominant.

optional wrote:

I was just thinking about this after seeing the Portland Track Festival marks.

1:47 for the 800 meters.

3:40 for the 1500 meters.

13:21 for the 5000 meters.

8:35 for the steeplechase.

It's just not the same game it was in the late 90s / early 2000s.

But, again, maybe that's because of the drug testing. But I think some of it comes from over-complication of the sport and training. From memory...Haile G, Bekele, El-G, those guys they raced and they raced a lot. It seems that we just don't see that very often any more. And we don't see many guys going for fast-times and world records.

It's turned into Mo Farah jogging as long as possible and kicking the last 200-400 meters. Jog / kick.

NOP Skeptic wrote:

In all actuality the 1500m is just as slow in terms of talent. The only reason we've had remotely fast times are because Kiprop set them up at Monaco 2012-2017 (and even 2017 Monaco was only won in 3:31). It's a lot easier to set up a fast 800m and 1500m than a 5k, but the talent level in all the events is the same. It would be crazy to think that the talent now couldn't go 12:45-12:55, but people just have to commit. Now a days we have Cheroyout and Manangoi going 3:31-3:32 winning DL races, that's not that much more impressive than 13:00-13:05, if not the same.

Monaco in 2017 was won in 3:28, not 3:31. Big difference. Kwemoi also ran 3:30 at altitude at the Kenyan trials last year and beat Manangoi and Cheruiyot there. Didn’t need Kiprop there either. Cheruiyot also won Stockholm last year in 3:30, which by your equation would be worth sub 13.

Yes, 13:04 so sloooooooowwwwwww Oh maaahhh gaaawwwddd.

Roger Goldwyn wrote:

Hffdg wrote:

Track is garbage nowadays because most runners go straight to the marathon due to its popularity- more money on the road. This is why a mediocre runner like Farah rose.

This explains the decline of 10,000m, but it's a bit more tenuous at 5,000m. There should still be people around or a bit under 3:30 1500m and 7:30 3000m who can run a fast 5000m (say around 12:50), but couldn't do so well at the marathon.

The pacers suck these days. I remember Canova saying that the pacers in one of Moses Kiptanuis WR races made more money than you do if you win a DL 5000 race these days.

Ah yes, let's cherry pick one meet that was unseasonably cold, rainy, and windy the entire day, and b*tch about how slow distance running has become. Sweet.

optional wrote:

I was just thinking about this after seeing the Portland Track Festival marks.

1:47 for the 800 meters.

3:40 for the 1500 meters.

13:21 for the 5000 meters.

8:35 for the steeplechase.

It's just not the same game it was in the late 90s / early 2000s.

But, again, maybe that's because of the drug testing. But I think some of it comes from over-complication of the sport and training. From memory...Haile G, Bekele, El-G, those guys they raced and they raced a lot. It seems that we just don't see that very often any more. And we don't see many guys going for fast-times and world records.

It's turned into Mo Farah jogging as long as possible and kicking the last 200-400 meters. Jog / kick.