All-time Top Ten USA Women's 10000m

formerbosox9yo wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

Do you not know the difference between a time trial vs a championship race?

Example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_2012_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_marathonhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_World_Championships_in_Athletics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_marathon

Certainly a difference. But are you saying because Kipketer ran fast he couldn't win championships? Kipketer won 3 world titles. No olympic golds, but he's certainly better than Wohlhuter. Kipketer aslo had to miss the olympics at his peak due to changing countries. If Wohlhuter had to miss his olympics for same reason he'd have zero medals. Wohlhuter would finish 6th in the all-time USA olympic time machine time trial.

With your previous comments you seem not to know there is differences between eras. Now a sub 28 minute 10k is nothing, back in the 70s that would've made you world class at that event. And, different conditions will effect how fast one runs. For example, Peter Snell 800m world record time was on a grass track which would mean he could've easily ran a sub 1:42 on modern tracks.

Sand Dunes wrote:

formerbosox9yo wrote:

Certainly a difference. But are you saying because Kipketer ran fast he couldn't win championships? Kipketer won 3 world titles. No olympic golds, but he's certainly better than Wohlhuter. Kipketer aslo had to miss the olympics at his peak due to changing countries. If Wohlhuter had to miss his olympics for same reason he'd have zero medals. Wohlhuter would finish 6th in the all-time USA olympic time machine time trial.

With your previous comments you seem not to know there is differences between eras. Now a sub 28 minute 10k is nothing, back in the 70s that would've made you world class at that event. And, different conditions will effect how fast one runs. For example, Peter Snell 800m world record time was on a grass track which would mean he could've easily ran a sub 1:42 on modern tracks.

There is a huge difference between eras. Obviously a 28min 10k was great back then, but that was for a few reasons. People were slower, talent pool was a lot smaller (smaller population, less access for some countries), people didn't know how to train (yes, if you're not as smart back then, that factors in to you being slow - i'm not sure if Snell would magically be smarter or better trained from a time machine - a time machine just brings him to the future, doesn't change what training he's had). Nothing to me proves Snell could compete with Duane Bang unless he demonstrates he is as fast. He might not succeed on a modern track, I'm not even certain he'd finish the race!

And Uhl and Macgregor would have had like twenty each right?

Yeah, you don't know how to compare eras and runners from different eras.

let's get real wrote:

Here's your list. Jennings won an Oly Bronze and ran 31:19. Infeld should bumped up a bit based on the WC medal.

1. Shalane Flanagan

2. Molly Huddle

3. Deena Kastor

4. Kara Goucher

5. Lynn Jennings

6. Emily Infeld

7. Amy Cragg

8. Lisa Uhl

9. Jennifer Rhines

10. Katie McGregor

10. Elva Dryer

No. McGregor and Dryer both come off and Amy Begley comes on. I think she finished as high as 6th or 7th at Worlds and has a PR in the low 31s. I'd slot her in at 7th.

1. Shalane Flanagan

2. Molly Huddle

3. Deena Kastor

4. Kara Goucher

5. Lynn Jennings

6. Emily Infeld

7. Amy Begley

8. Amy Cragg

9. Lisa Uhl

10. Jennifer Rhines

Hector2 wrote:

And Uhl and Macgregor would have had like twenty each right?

Uhl has twice run under Jenning's PR. Mcgregor is a seasoned pro who has broke 32min 8 different times.

formerbosox9yo wrote:

Hector2 wrote:

And Lynns AR lasted ten years, she also won seven outdoor USA titles at 10k I believe

Imagine how long Shalane's AR would last and how many titles she would of had if she ran then!

If she'd run back then, some aspects of her training (and nutrition and recovery etc etc) would have been different, and she may not have even set an AR.

How many times do we have to tell you that you aren't properly taking the era into consideration?

This list fails to take into account that Cragg is the 5th best woman 10k runner in american history. Top ten is ELITE, and quite simply jennings and begley aren't up to it. All aspects must be considered.

qwefsafdagasdf wrote:

formerbosox9yo wrote:

Imagine how long Shalane's AR would last and how many titles she would of had if she ran then!

If she'd run back then, some aspects of her training (and nutrition and recovery etc etc) would have been different, and she may not have even set an AR.

How many times do we have to tell you that you aren't properly taking the era into consideration?

If she had a time machine to race one race, she'd be going back with her modern training and knowledge on nutrition. She would DOMINATE jennings. You aren't properly taking into consideration what a time machine is capable of.