Assuming he allows himself a full recovery, what could Eliud go in the 15? His PRs are 3:33 and 3:50... from 15 year ago.
I'd give him 3:39
Assuming he allows himself a full recovery, what could Eliud go in the 15? His PRs are 3:33 and 3:50... from 15 year ago.
I'd give him 3:39
Faster than me for sure!
I am playing this guessing game:
In real fast races (not Ineos freakshow)
1500m : 3:42
5000m: 13:10
10000m: 27:08
He current PRs are faster than this:
1500m : 3:33 from 2004
5000m: 12:46 from 2004
10000m: 26:49 from 2007
Out of curiosity, I plugged a 2 hr marathon into the popular online pace calculators. They are very optimistic across the board.
Mcmillan: 3:17, 3:32
JDaniels: 3:22, 3:36
Tinman: 3:24, 3:40
dznuts wrote:
Assuming he allows himself a full recovery, what could Eliud go in the 15? His PRs are 3:33 and 3:50... from 15 year ago.
I'd give him 3:39
I like this guess. With the performances getting stronger with each distance.
3:39 (3:55 pace)
7:40 (4:05 pace)
13:00 (4:09 pace)
26:40 (4:16 pace)
58:00 (4:25 pace)
1:59:40 (4:35 pace)
TheXCrunner wrote:
He current PRs are faster than this:
1500m : 3:33 from 2004
5000m: 12:46 from 2004
10000m: 26:49 from 2007
Of course, Kipchoge physically declined and I assume he would fall short compared to all his PB from 1500 to 10 000m.
Track is a young man sport, no way he is doing better than he was in his atheltic prime. You can succeed at Marathon at a later age because speed is not the first quality.
EssosLindi wrote:
TheXCrunner wrote:
He current PRs are faster than this:
1500m : 3:33 from 2004
5000m: 12:46 from 2004
10000m: 26:49 from 2007
Of course, Kipchoge physically declined and I assume he would fall short compared to all his PB from 1500 to 10 000m.
Track is a young man sport, no way he is doing better than he was in his atheltic prime. You can succeed at Marathon at a later age because speed is not the first quality.
+1, well said
There's no way Kipchoge could come within a mile, let alone equal his past PBs. Except maybe the 10000 if he put some specific work in to it, it is comparatively slightly weak and does not align with his other times.
Eh, he's still probably a little sore from Ineos
This Eliud Kipchoge is more more stronger than the Kipchoge of the track!! We are talking of 2:01:39 and 1:59:40
the value of this performance are HUGE what kind of transfomation has the body to reach that invulnerable career in the marathon. Yes the Kipchoge of the track was a great athlete but nothing to compare with the Kipchoge of the marathon.
His last km in the Ineos at 2'40"/km after 2 hours at 2'50/km is something that goes beyond every reasonable logic.
And after the finish line he had the same energy of the start, like he can go on forever with that insane pace.
Is a moment now that people watch at all these world record breaking race and really dont know what is happening. Cos it goes beyond any logic. Brigid Kosgei not only break Radcliffe WR of a little margin but she does it with a 1'20", and in the last part of the race if i mnot mistaken there was also an head wind. When it comes to 1500 the kind of things you need to go fast are different from the one you need in the marathon , in every sense.
But in 5000 , 10000 , and half this Kipchoge is a lot stronger than the Kipchoge of the track and can benefit of his extraordinary shape.
You make me laugh.
Bekele is only at 2 seconds from Kipchoge world record in marathon, that's awfully close over 42.2km, and we know he is far from his prime , far from his level of 2003-2008 on track.
Kipchoge is no different. Older people can still succeed at marathon because it needs different qualities. Kipchoge would get squashed on track and would do worse than he was doing when he was young.
EssosLindi wrote:
I am playing this guessing game:
In real fast races (not Ineos freakshow)
1500m : 3:42
5000m: 13:10
10000m: 27:08
I have a hard time believing someone like Woody Kincaid would smoke Kipchoge in a 5k.
I would guess:
3:36
12:54
26:35
He'd be able to run a time that some idiots would say "could have won the gold in Rio". He'd have no kick whatsoever compared to actual milers...but I'm sure if he lined up at the Monaco DL he'd get dragged along to a 3:36.
The reason he left the track in 2012 was he couldn't kick with the best any more. He was still running close to his best times at 5000 and 10,000 but couldn't win a race.
TheXCrunner wrote:
He current PRs are faster than this:
1500m : 3:33 from 2004
5000m: 12:46 from 2004
10000m: 26:49 from 2007
Running 4:34 for 26.2 is about rhythm and consistency.
Running those PRs was about being fast.
At this time, he’d be hard pressed to run 4:05 for the mile.
Maybe with some time he could go sub 13/27, but no chance today or within a few months.
Well he just ran a new world record and broke 2 hrs at the hardest event in running. So I think he'd run another world record - 3:19 maybe?
I heard he had a heck of a workout.
28x1500 at 4:15 with 0 mins rest.
I don't get it, why would he be faster at track events today than when he was training specifically for track events?
He's an endurance machine and perhaps the greatest mental grinder ever. That's why he's great at the marathon. Not because he had some Farah-esque explosion in his overall running ability and would all of a sudden run 12:45 and 26:20.
The Dingo^3 wrote:
I don't get it, why would he be faster at track events today than when he was training specifically for track events?
Maybe because the extra endurance ability also turns out to help in the shorter distances, something they didn't train quite as well when they were focused on the shorter distances only.
Radcliffe was in the 14:43-14:51 range from 1995 to 2000, then started training for half marathons and popped a 14:32, then set marathon WRs and popped a 14:29.
Sang said for Kipchoge 26:1X is possible. Not a chance. He'd still be competing at 10000m if he could do that, he would just run away from the field.
3:35