ScottEvil wrote:
dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:
If you can run 12:49, you can run 26:40 and 26:30 isn't much of a stretch either. The toughest part would be finding a race.
Maybe you're right, but in the past decade, we've had handful of 12:43-12:48s but nothing faster than Rupp's 26:44 for the 10K. Do you think this is entirely about the lack of races? It seems to me that the comparative difficulty of < 26:40/10K and < 12:50/5K is also a factor.
In the last 10 years we have had the following sub 12:50 performances
12:45.82 Hagos Gebrhiwet
12:46.81 Dejen Gebremeskel
12:47.53 Hagos Gebrhiwet
12:48.77 Yenew Alamirew
12:49.50 John Kipkoech
4 were in one race.
Bekele ran 26:43 and Lucas Rotich ran a faster 26:44 than Rupp. But look at Rupp. Dude is a 12:58 guy who runs 26:44. Do is it really shocking that someone 8s faster over 5k can run the 10k 5-10s faster? And Rupp isn't some crazy outlier.
And yes it is mainly about races and opportunties. Joshua Cheptegei ran 26:48 last year splitting 13:33/13:15 at the world championships Was the weather ideal that day or were those the ideal splits? Probably not. If he was running 5 10k/years in good conditions, we would likely see times a bit faster.
Obviously all the times Chris is talking about are fast but they are in the same rough range of possibility.