420 ... Mile? wrote:
[quote]Arbitrary nice round numbers wrote:
I just don't understand why you got to be so picky about those numbers to begin with. Are you assuming that those times are equivalent?
Don't get me wrong it's an interesting question nonetheless.
Being that 8:30 and 15 are in a complete different league from 2 and 4 (2 being the weakest), I can assure you that pretty much all of the gals running sub 8:30 and 15 (Ayana, Defar and company) would absolutely crush 4 minute in the 1500m without changing a thing in their training.
The sub 2 would also be achievable but most likely would require a few tries beforehand, since it's a hard pace if your body isn't used to it.
Still a sub 4 is normally harder than a sub 2, especially at high school level.
Also that russian Galkina is roaming around those times (2:00, 4:01, 8:42) except at the 5000m (14:33) but really I doubt that those times reflect her real ability (8:58 steeplechase).
1:58, 3:56 and 8:25 sound more realistic to me.
You think 15 is in a completely different league than 4? Not really....at all. Sub 4 is more impressive than sub 15.[/quote]
Yea, by a long shot. In order - 1500, 3000, 800, 5000[/quote]
Whoops, switch 800 and 5000