People have argued that if you took any of the top elite American distance runners and trained them for a few months, they could start crushing Ultra records. This past week Jim Walmsley proved that to be false. He ran a half marathon in 64 minutes, the Olympic trials qualifying standard. Let me argue why this means he would likely beat or at least be highly competitive with any elite American distance runner trying to move up to the ULTRA.
This guy ran 1/8th of the distance of his specialty in an Olympic trials qualifying time! Take any of the best Americans and ask how fast do you think they can go at 1/8th of their specialty distance. When you do this, most of them have PRs in those 1/8th distances which are worse than the Olympic trials qualifying standards in that distance. This suggests that Jim Walmsley is better at ULTRAs than the following athletes are at 10K
Shadrack Kipchirchir (3rd all-time 10K for USA - US Olympian 2016) - 1500 PR = 3:49
Sam Chelenga (4th all-time, 6th at Olympic Trials 10K) - 1500 PR = 3:47
Leonard Korir (10K - US Olympian 2016) - 1500 PR = 3:44
Scott Fauble (4th Olympic trials 10k) - 1500 PR = 3:46
Chris Derrick (5th Olympic trials 10K) - 1500 PR = 3:39
With the exception of Rupp, Solinsky, & Jenkins I don't think any of the recent great American 10k runners have achieved the 1500m Olympic trials standard of 3:38 from what I can tell. A similar analysis would hold for the women, very few of the great American female 10k runners have 1500m PRs below 4:09.
Now if you took some of the best Africans in the world, they might crush this guy, but definitely not most of the best Americans. This guy is actually pretty darn good.
Best ULTRA runner would beat every American distance runner at an ULTRA (beside Rupp)
Pro News/Info/Results
Distance
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
For the love of God stop it already. He's a very good runner. He decided to focus his efforts in a running niche that has not really been contested by great runners, and has done well for himself. But Christ he is not the greatest runner the world or even America has ever seen. Competing at traditional distances he *might*be able to make a meager living as a pro for a few years. But it's unlikely he would be much more than a middling elite. You fanboys need to get a grip on reality.
-
By the way fanboy, I bet Camille Herron would kick his rear in a 24 hour race. Chew on that thought for a moment.
-
MatthewXCountry wrote:
People have argued that if you took any of the top elite American distance runners and trained them for a few months, they could start crushing Ultra records. This past week Jim Walmsley proved that to be false. He ran a half marathon in 64 minutes, the Olympic trials qualifying standard. Let me argue why this means he would likely beat or at least be highly competitive with any elite American distance runner trying to move up to the ULTRA.
This guy ran 1/8th of the distance of his specialty in an Olympic trials qualifying time! Take any of the best Americans and ask how fast do you think they can go at 1/8th of their specialty distance. When you do this, most of them have PRs in those 1/8th distances which are worse than the Olympic trials qualifying standards in that distance. This suggests that Jim Walmsley is better at ULTRAs than the following athletes are at 10K
Shadrack Kipchirchir (3rd all-time 10K for USA - US Olympian 2016) - 1500 PR = 3:49
Sam Chelenga (4th all-time, 6th at Olympic Trials 10K) - 1500 PR = 3:47
Leonard Korir (10K - US Olympian 2016) - 1500 PR = 3:44
Scott Fauble (4th Olympic trials 10k) - 1500 PR = 3:46
Chris Derrick (5th Olympic trials 10K) - 1500 PR = 3:39
With the exception of Rupp, Solinsky, & Jenkins I don't think any of the recent great American 10k runners have achieved the 1500m Olympic trials standard of 3:38 from what I can tell. A similar analysis would hold for the women, very few of the great American female 10k runners have 1500m PRs below 4:09.
Now if you took some of the best Africans in the world, they might crush this guy, but definitely not most of the best Americans. This guy is actually pretty darn good.
If it was a matter of fabric shopping during the ultra, my mom would crush -
For the love of God wrote:
... But Christ he is not the greatest runner the world or even America has ever seen. Competing at traditional distances he *might*be able to make a meager living as a pro for a few years. But it's unlikely he would be much more than a middling elite...
I obviously agree with that. If you think my post didn't suggest that I agreed with the above, you need to learn to read.
The post said nothing about him being great at track/road running, the post was about how I think most of the best American road runners could not move up to the ULTRA and crush him. I explicitly said I think there are Africans who possibly could.
Again the post is about people claiming American elites can move up to the ULTRA, and with a little training, crush this guy. That's unlikely. -
For the love of God wrote:
By the way fanboy, I bet Camille Herron would kick his rear in a 24 hour race. Chew on that thought for a moment.
Her personal best for the 24 hr run is 8:50 pace. That is a big feat, but it's lower than Jim ran up and down hills for 100 miles in 8:42 pace. Would be interesting to see what he could do for a 24hr run, but I'd guess surely he could maintain a pace in the low to mid 8s per mile. -
Walmsley took 3 LONG YEARS to crush the course record at Western States. With 3 LONG YEARS dedicated training for a road marathon, he would easily be running in the 203 or 204 range and competing with the best. This should be pretty obvious to anybody that knows anything about distance running.
-
150 mile weeks in the mountains is what makes champions... wrote:
Walmsley took 3 LONG YEARS to crush the course record at Western States. With 3 LONG YEARS dedicated training for a road marathon, he would easily be running in the 203 or 204 range and competing with the best. This should be pretty obvious to anybody that knows anything about distance running.
0/10 on the troll -
MatthewXCountry wrote:
150 mile weeks in the mountains is what makes champions... wrote:
Walmsley took 3 LONG YEARS to crush the course record at Western States. With 3 LONG YEARS dedicated training for a road marathon, he would easily be running in the 203 or 204 range and competing with the best. This should be pretty obvious to anybody that knows anything about distance running.
0/10 on the troll
9/10. I got you to respond!!! -
There is an obvious flaw in this argument. Suprised no one has caught it yet.
A 1:04 half is not nearly as good as the OT standard for the 1500. Yes they are both OT qualifying standards, but they definitely are not equal. Think of it this way --
In a few years we might see a woman challenge 1:04 for the half (it's already at 1:04:51), but there no way we'll see a woman challenge a 3:38 1500m anytime soon. He'd need to run under 1:03 for his performance to be close to those athlete's 1500m performances. I mean he probably is better at the ULTRA than some of those guys if they moved up and didn't train hard, but it isn't a given. -
Maybe Galen will become an ultra jogger with the aqua jogging he is doing now. He will do well in the ultras which involve river crossings and the Tough Mudder races :') :') :') :') :') :') :')
-
why won't it let me post emoticons :')
-
MatthewXCountry wrote:
People have argued that if you took any of the top elite American distance runners and trained them for a few months, they could start crushing Ultra records. This past week Jim Walmsley proved that to be false. He ran a half marathon in 64 minutes, the Olympic trials qualifying standard. Let me argue why this means he would likely beat or at least be highly competitive with any elite American distance runner trying to move up to the ULTRA.
This guy ran 1/8th of the distance of his specialty in an Olympic trials qualifying time! Take any of the best Americans and ask how fast do you think they can go at 1/8th of their specialty distance. When you do this, most of them have PRs in those 1/8th distances which are worse than the Olympic trials qualifying standards in that distance. This suggests that Jim Walmsley is better at ULTRAs than the following athletes are at 10K
Shadrack Kipchirchir (3rd all-time 10K for USA - US Olympian 2016) - 1500 PR = 3:49
Sam Chelenga (4th all-time, 6th at Olympic Trials 10K) - 1500 PR = 3:47
Leonard Korir (10K - US Olympian 2016) - 1500 PR = 3:44
Scott Fauble (4th Olympic trials 10k) - 1500 PR = 3:46
Chris Derrick (5th Olympic trials 10K) - 1500 PR = 3:39
With the exception of Rupp, Solinsky, & Jenkins I don't think any of the recent great American 10k runners have achieved the 1500m Olympic trials standard of 3:38 from what I can tell. A similar analysis would hold for the women, very few of the great American female 10k runners have 1500m PRs below 4:09.
Now if you took some of the best Africans in the world, they might crush this guy, but definitely not most of the best Americans. This guy is actually pretty darn good.
The problem with your reasoning is that there is a gulf between sprinters and distance runners that occurs somewhere around 800m such that even the best 800m runners tend to be mediocre at best 400m runners (there have been exceptions to this but no one has even been world class at both 400m and 1500m). David Rudisha, for example, with a 400m PR of 45.15 is barely under the 2016 automatic standard for the US trials of 45.40 and he's a speed oriented 800m runner, the greatest ever, and that's only half his distance. So expecting milers to be able to qualify in the 200m (1/8th their best distance) is totally unreasonable.
That said, Walmsley is a terrific runner and I'd love to see what he could do if he concentrated his training on the 2020 US Olympic marathon trials. -
MatthewXCountry wrote:
People have argued that if you took any of the top elite American distance runners and trained them for a few months, they could start crushing Ultra records. This past week Jim Walmsley proved that to be false. He ran a half marathon in 64 minutes, the Olympic trials qualifying standard. Let me argue why this means he would likely beat or at least be highly competitive with any elite American distance runner trying to move up to the ULTRA.
This guy ran 1/8th of the distance of his specialty in an Olympic trials qualifying time! Take any of the best Americans and ask how fast do you think they can go at 1/8th of their specialty distance. When you do this, most of them have PRs in those 1/8th distances which are worse than the Olympic trials qualifying standards in that distance. This suggests that Jim Walmsley is better at ULTRAs than the following athletes are at 10K
Shadrack Kipchirchir (3rd all-time 10K for USA - US Olympian 2016) - 1500 PR = 3:49
Sam Chelenga (4th all-time, 6th at Olympic Trials 10K) - 1500 PR = 3:47
Leonard Korir (10K - US Olympian 2016) - 1500 PR = 3:44
Scott Fauble (4th Olympic trials 10k) - 1500 PR = 3:46
Chris Derrick (5th Olympic trials 10K) - 1500 PR = 3:39
With the exception of Rupp, Solinsky, & Jenkins I don't think any of the recent great American 10k runners have achieved the 1500m Olympic trials standard of 3:38 from what I can tell. A similar analysis would hold for the women, very few of the great American female 10k runners have 1500m PRs below 4:09.
Now if you took some of the best Africans in the world, they might crush this guy, but definitely not most of the best Americans. This guy is actually pretty darn good.
Your post is totally flawed logically and also is factually incorrect.
1) Factually incorrect: Ben True has a 3:36 1500 pb. Bernard Lagat has run 3:26/27:49. Maybe you don't consider them to be 'great' American 10k runners but you get my point.
2) Logically flawed: The biggest problem with your logic is their are way more marathon qualifiers than there are track qualifiers. There will be more than 150 Olympic Trials marathon qualifier when its all said and done. How many make it in the 10k? 30? So if you go down to the 150th time on the track for the 1500, then a lot more 10,000 runners could do it.
Look, Walmsley is a pretty darn good flat runner. I doubt there are that many Americans that could beat him but in terms of the world, yes.
On our podcast yesterday, I made the argument that I thought a 2:05 marathon guy could crush Western States. I said something along the lines of I'd love to get a 2;05 marathon guy in top marathon shape and pay him to sit on Walmsley at Western States. Initially, I said I thought he could do it without training specifically for it but as the podcast went on I talked off air with John Kellogg and he said they'd have to train for it.
But the idea that Jim Walmsley would be the best in the world at the ultra if everyone in the world competed at it doesn't make much logical sense to me. As a former math guy, the odds of that just don't work for me. Walmsley is like the equivalent of the best runner in a single state - say Michigan. What are the odds that he's also the best runner in the US if he shows up at nationals. Not very good.
African runners dominate world xc and they dominate the marathon. If you combine the two, why wouldn't they dominate that? Now I"m totally into Sports Gene so maybe David Epstein or someone could explain to me they dont' have that fat stores or muscle strength, etc.
I do think it's interesting as we don't know if it would happen. And it looks like different types of people win Comrades/Western States, etc. Is there any ultra person that can win everything?
I have no doubt about it if it was a 100 mile race on a road. Some trail thing leaves a lot more doubt.
Regardless, Chris Chavez played my comments to Walmsley . When he heard them, he got excited and said he'd LOVEfor a 2:05 Ethiopian to try to sit on him. Go to the 56:00 minute mark or their podcast that just went up.
Here is what Walmsley said after hearing me say I'd love to take a 2:05 Ethiopian and have him sit on him at Western States (They didn't play the clip where later I said I spoke to John Kellogg and he'd have to train for it),
Walmsley said:
Here’s my take on that. I want anyone and everyone at Western States to run on my fucking shoulder. That’s the thing I want the most, because the way I attack the downhills - I’ve learned through this process - I will break your quads and you won’t be able to jog the flats any more.
Give me a 2:05 guy, let me take him in the Canyon, you don’t need (it to be at) Western States.. Call me up LetsRun..… Find your 2;05 guy, give me a couple hours in the Canyon and I’ll be the first one out.
Of course someone could learn to be good at it, but they will need differentiation in their training and how they approach it to have success before they will have success. You can’t take Kipchoge, plug him into Western States and he wins it. It’s enough a differentiation that he’ll make a mistake that will cost him probably finishing more than anything. And then secondly, so when we go for an easy run - and we go and run 10, 15 or even 20 miles - why do you stop? Because you say, ‘That’s all I need today, I don’t want to run any further’. You get into an ultra and there is so much of a mental side of, ‘Why do you run a 100 or why do people consider running an ultra to begin with?’ You have to have a mental motivation and the priority to run the race and be tough and keep running and to attack it. The mind has to want it.
If you bring someone in and you force a 2:0 anything marathoner to come and run an ultra and they’re like, ‘Look they told me this was going to be easy.’ It’s not going to be set up for success.
There are races that they could choose in ultra running that they would find easier for success. Start them in a flatter 50 miler. Start em off in a 50k. Start em off even in Comrades -that would be an easier transition from that background. Start em off in a road ultra but to throw them in a mountain race with hard to sense extreme temperature whether it’s UTMB that gets extremely cold at night or Western States that gets extremely hot during the day and not having done a long run in those conditions, you can’t plug someone into it and have success.
Can someone adapt and learn about the sport and become passionate about it and happen to have that track/marathon background and come to learn how to do it and dominate it? ABSOLUTELY. Will it happen by plugging someone in and doing it? My opinion and my experience says it’s enough differentiation in training and preparation and motivation that it will not happen plugging someone in.
Now I'm sure in this day and age of faux outrage people will try to promote some conflict between me and Walmsley. I actually loved listening to him talk, he was very thoughtful and I actually think we pretty much are in agreement. I underestimated how they'd have to train for it (But Kellogg convinced me in my 20 second talk to him while I muted my podcast) but my argument that someone else would be the best in the world is still one I hold to and one that Walmsley seems to agree with.
(On a similar note, about 8 years ago, I once asked John Kellogg if I got Weldon on drugs could he easily make the Olympic team. He laughed and said it would take a year for Weldon to be able to get his legs back and train enough (100 mpw) to make the Olympic team).
Here is our podcast.
http://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/01/dubai-houston-nbigp-letsrun-2019-podcast-marathon/
Here is Citius Podcast (go to 56 minute mark)
http://citiusmag.com/citius-mag-podcast-jim-walmsley-houston-half-marathon/ -
gallon ripp wrote:
why won't it let me post emoticons :😉 -
I sort of agree with the premise, I don't think any other american distance runner is stepping up to beat him in a 100miler RIGHT NOW without significant training, except maybe Rupp.
The logic is flawed however.
And some of the responses to the logic is flawed as well. A 1:04 HM is about equal to a 3:40 1500m. If the idea was logical, changing 3:38 to 3:40 isn't THAT big of an impact.
I do believe however that a number of distance runners could step up and beat him at ultras if they wanted to and trained for it. Not all of them, but some of them. Hell, there are probably some 1:06 half marathoners out there that would crush him in a 100 miler, but the issue is that the few that could actually have to step up and put in the training to do it, and quite frankly, a 1:06 half marathoner likely has more other stuff going on in their life to want to do that, even if they have the small likelihood (on an individual basis) opportunity to be the best at it. Does this make what he accomplishes less impressive or mean that he should receive less attention and accolades? I don't think so. For being the best at an event, it's not like he's treated or thought of like Kipchoge. Everyone sort of knows its watered down compared to other events, but the fact is he is still the best at it and I think is treated appropriately for it. -
You have a tenuous grasp on what “proved” means.
-
One other thing about ultras. I think they are more interesting than marathons.
Look, we know Kipchoge is the best flat marathoner in the world. But the runs the same race course basically every single time - flat and fast. That's why I'd like to see him in NY or Boston.
Sometimes in a Boston, the conditions win. In an ultra, there is a lot more variance. I dobut the same person is going to be the best if it's hot or it's cold. -
Long winded post by the OP but more simply are we really getting excited about a 1:04 when most at World Class level are running sub 60 mins now? Really?
That's 6.7% off the sub hour standard so are we really celebrating that?!! I mean not to knock the guy but I reckon if you're THAT kind of percentage off the pace that's why you do ultras in the first place... -
rojo wrote:
I do think it's interesting as we don't know if it would happen. And it looks like different types of people win Comrades/Western States, etc. Is there any ultra person that can win everything?
Ann Trason. Granted the sport wasn't that competitive then, but she still holds course records on races that are now competitive and up until recently held American and World records.
