Hey Stupid wrote:
I bet you five bucks that Kennedy could run around 50"-51" for 400m, and that his 1500m is a lot weaker then you think.
Kennedy was likely a 51" and 3'35"5 runner if he trained for it during his peak.
Changing it to 50"-51" would have put him at 83.5%-81.9%
Bekele is more likely a 48"-49" runner as well.
Basically, you numbers don't mean shit.
I wonder why it is you need to speak so foolishly?
Perhaps you haven't learned so yet, but it is quite possible to disagree civilly. I therefore suggest you take note of your own moniker and repeat it slowly to yourself many times.
Apparently, you also envision yourself to be a better authority on Kennedy's 400 ability than Kennedy himself. The 52 time was straight from his own mouth. All out, at his fastest, a 52 second 400. He ran plenty of 1500's and miles and came up with 3:38 and 3:56. That is his fastest, at his peak.
As for Bekele, again you miss the point. If Bekele could run 48 then he should be significantly faster than 12:37 and 26:20. His endurance would, relative to the most aerobically fit on the circuit, be POOR if he could run one lap in 48 and 12.5 laps in 60.5 per lap. He should not slow down than much. A 50 is far more likely.
So, to not coin your own phrase, your numbers also do not mean anything (I'll spare the bad language. It is a sign of weak vocabulary and a small brain).