Interesting read.

walshb

Runnings most famous record is being lost!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8139994.stm

RoyMcC

walshb wrote: »

Runnings most famous record is being lost!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8139994.stm

Indeed. Fair play to the Dublin Board who offered the Mile in the graded last week. Though they needed to mark the track specially.

thirtyfoot

The Morton Mile, a very historic race in the world of miling, is on next week in Santry

http://www.athleticsireland.ie/content/?p=8351

shels4ever

walshb wrote: »

Runnings most famous record is being lost!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8139994.stm

Good article and a super record , Having such a hard records to break might add to the lack of races too.

Gringo78

Shows how good El Guerrouj was. Article glosses over a bit the fact that the metric mile record is standing longer....kind of just throws it in at the end.

cfitz

There's a lot of nostalgic nonsense around the mile. 1500m is the championship event. I think people should go metric and get over it. And anyway, El Guerrouj has held both records so long because he's been head and shoulders above everyone else, if someone better than him comes along there's a good chance he'll take both records from El Guerrouj.

walshb

I know the distances are so close, but does anyone feel that the extra 109 metres matters for preparation purposes? I know you would feel it when having to go that extra 109 metres, but the fact is, that because the event is not an Olympic or world event, do athletes
NOT train for it? As in, not for the extra 109 metres?

It is a stunning record when you think of the progression of the times
over the years. I vividly remember Cram breaking the record in 1985 and back then, it
was the record that everyone wanted. Not so much now.

What was so amazing about the Morrocan's record win was that
Noah Ngeny also broke Morceli's time in finishing
second. Noah really was a great great runner and still
has the 1km record.

Racing Flat

cfitz wrote: »

There's a lot of nostalgic nonsense around the mile. 1500m is the championship event. I think people should go metric and get over it.

Does this also hold for nonsense non-Championship events like the 3000m? What kind of eejit would waste their time running those? :pac:

Racing Flat

FWIW I love the mile and would take a good time for 1mile over a good time for 1500m any day. I bumped into a fellow at a wedding a few years ago who had run 3.44 for 1500m and he was just gearing up for his last year of competition before retiring. I asked him if he had any goals and he said he just wanted a strong season and possibly a PB. I asked him if he had run a sub 4 minute mile. He hadn't and he wistfully mentioned how he'd love to do it but probably wouldn't get round to it. I'd hate to finish up knowing I was close but not sure whether I would have done it or not. Then I am a sucker for the nostalgia.

@ walshb, you often hear fellows saying things like 'I've ran 3.45 for 1500 so that's the same as a 4 minute mile. It's not. The 9m is going to take about 1.5seconds at that level...I think it's fair enough to say 'I ran x for the mile so that's the same as y for 1500m', but not the other way around.

On records, the mile one should last a while, as El G ran 3.26 for 1500 back then, but when someone ran 3.29 for 1500 the other night they were the first person to do that in the World in a few years I think. So like cfitz said, no one has come anywhere close to being as good. Until they do, we can forget about the record.

So what's the best record? I never thought I'd see Johnson's 19.32 for 200m go, but I think the one that will last the longest might be 7.20 for 3000m, truly phenomenal, surprising that Bekele hasn't had a go at it, but maybe it's too out of reach even for him. The fact that it's not raced that much should give it added longevity.

Gringo78

I think that anyone who breaks 3:26 for the 1500m should be allowed to plug that value into McMillan Calculator and then claim the world record for the mile, there would be no need then for the mile races as McMillan Calculator is very accurate:D

cfitz

Racing Flat wrote: »

Does this also hold for nonsense non-Championship events like the 3000m? What kind of eejit would waste their time running those? :pac:

Getting personal now, eh?! Yeah it does hold for 3000m too. (Personally, I like 3000m races but would hope that I can run some decent times and in the future get strong and run better over 5000m. Or maybe even 10000m).

thirtyfoot

Racing Flat wrote: »

@ walshb, you often hear fellows saying things like 'I've ran 3.45 for 1500 so that's the same as a 4 minute mile. It's not. The 9m is going to take about 1.5seconds at that level...I think it's fair enough to say 'I ran x for the mile so that's the same as y for 1500m', but not the other way around.

The NCAA use a factor of 1.08 for their qualification standards in relation to mile/1500. So a 3:59.99 would be a 3:42.21 by their standards!!

There has also been a demise in the traditional post-season Beer Mile, sad for us for beer drinking nostalgists:(

Stupid_Private

Racing Flat wrote: »

Does this also hold for nonsense non-Championship events like the 3000m? What kind of eejit would waste their time running those? :pac:

What the hell is the deal with all the 3000m races in Dublin?! Last year I ran one or two in London, but the main focus was the 5000m, which were on every other weekend. The last four graded meets all only have 3000m races, same with the IMC. The BHAA also don't have a race over 3000m (€15 for that is a bit steep!).

thirtyfoot

Gringo78 wrote: »

I think that anyone who breaks 3:26 for the 1500m should be allowed to plug that value into McMillan Calculator and then claim the world record for the mile, there would be no need then for the mile races as McMillan Calculator is very accurate:D

Woohoo, McMillan Calculator says I'm a sub 4 minute miler and also a 2:14 marathon man :eek:

shels4ever

Stupid_Private wrote: »

What the hell is the deal with all the 3000m races in Dublin?! Last year I ran one or two in London, but the main focus was the 5000m, which were on every other weekend. The last four graded meets all only have 3000m races, same with the IMC. The BHAA also don't have a race over 3000m (€15 for that is a bit steep!).

I'd say with the Bhaa it maybe a time issue abnd running 6 + 5k on a night might not be an option, the one 5k they do in irishtown goes around the park and finished on the track, Would love a 5k on the track at some point as it would be nice for pacing. But will just have to stick with the 3k's for now.

Racing Flat

cfitz wrote: »

Getting personal now, eh?! Yeah it does hold for 3000m too. (Personally, I like 3000m races but would hope that I can run some decent times and in the future get strong and run better over 5000m. Or maybe even 10000m).

Friday morning mischievness is all!

Just pointing out that the urge to stick with Championship or metric events only might be limiting. There's something great about the nostalgia surrounding the mile, in particular the 4 minute mile. You just have to look at the excitement in the crowd last year the the Morton memorial meeting during two 1 mile races, the b one with a fellow who ran 4.00 and the a where 9 fellows ran under 4. I don't think the crowd would have been as excited if they were even running 3.29 for 1500m...it's just a magical marker (maybe stupidly) like 10secs for 100m; bettering those marks will always be celebrated.

walshb

"@ walshb, you often hear fellows saying things like 'I've ran 3.45 for 1500 so that's the same as a 4 minute mile. It's not. The 9m is going to take about 1.5seconds at that level...I think it's fair enough to say 'I ran x for the mile so that's the same as y for 1500m', but not the other way around."

Good point and really, it's not just as simple as 9 metres multiplied. The whole race tempo
is slightly different and does require a slight change of pace.

If you can guarantee getting to 3 mins 45 at 1500, does this effort not seriously render you almost dead with little left to complete the next 109 metres?

You may need to get to 1500 in say 3 mins 41 or 42 and then that would be a better and ideal situation to go below 4 mins

ecoli

Racing Flat wrote: »

FWIW I love the mile and would take a good time for 1mile over a good time for 1500m any day. I bumped into a fellow at a wedding a few years ago who had run 3.44 for 1500m and he was just gearing up for his last year of competition before retiring. I asked him if he had any goals and he said he just wanted a strong season and possibly a PB. I asked him if he had run a sub 4 minute mile. He hadn't and he wistfully mentioned how he'd love to do it but probably wouldn't get round to it. I'd hate to finish up knowing I was close but not sure whether I would have done it or not. Then I am a sucker for the nostalgia.

@ walshb, you often hear fellows saying things like 'I've ran 3.45 for 1500 so that's the same as a 4 minute mile. It's not. The 9m is going to take about 1.5seconds at that level...I think it's fair enough to say 'I ran x for the mile so that's the same as y for 1500m', but not the other way around.

On records, the mile one should last a while, as El G ran 3.26 for 1500 back then, but when someone ran 3.29 for 1500 the other night they were the first person to do that in the World in a few years I think. So like cfitz said, no one has come anywhere close to being as good. Until they do, we can forget about the record.

So what's the best record? I never thought I'd see Johnson's 19.32 for 200m go, but I think the one that will last the longest might be 7.20 for 3000m, truly phenomenal, surprising that Bekele hasn't had a go at it, but maybe it's too out of reach even for him. The fact that it's not raced that much should give it added longevity.

unfortunately i think that the women 10k is the one that will take longest to break just because of the circumstances that surround it which is sorry to see. Other than this i agree Komens record is astonishing

limerickleader

Tingle wrote: »

There has also been a demise in the traditional post-season Beer Mile, sad for us for beer drinking nostalgists:(

Ah, memories...the lost art of Beer-miling. I remember one particularly unsuccesful attempt in Germany when I was in college there. Not a sight to behold.

All you need to know - http://www.beermile.com/faq.beer#rules

ecoli

limerickleader wrote: »

Ah, memories...the lost art of Beer-miling. I remember one particularly unsuccesful attempt in Germany when I was in college there. Not a sight to behold.

All you need to know - http://www.beermile.com/faq.beer#rules

My college still have this as an annual tradition it brilliant. Won in 6.03 last year though so impressive. Im a 6.34 b/miler myself haha

BeepBeep67

Tingle wrote: »

There has also been a demise in the traditional post-season Beer Mile, sad for us for beer drinking nostalgists:(

Sounds like a potential end of Summer Boards tradition waiting to happen - Tingle can you tee it for end of Augustish?

ss43

ecoli wrote: »

unfortunately i think that the women 10k is the one that will take longest to break just because of the circumstances that surround it which is sorry to see. Other than this i agree Komens record is astonishing

10k record is lasting cos there aren't very many 10k races. If there were more opportunities, it'd go.

ecoli

ss43 wrote: »

10k record is lasting cos there aren't very many 10k races. If there were more opportunities, it'd go.

Utrecht, Prefotaine classic, Stockholm and Madeira are just some of the fast 10ks in the last month that come to mind. There are plenty of opportunites

thirtyfoot

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

Sounds like a potential end of Summer Boards tradition waiting to happen - Tingle can you tee it for end of Augustish?

Sounds like a job for Woddle.

ecoli

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

Sounds like a potential end of Summer Boards tradition waiting to happen - Tingle can you tee it for end of Augustish?

Sounds like a great laugh

ss43

ecoli wrote: »

Utrecht, Prefotaine classic, Stockholm and Madeira are just some of the fast 10ks in the last month that come to mind. There are plenty of opportunites

Longest race at Prefontaine was 2k.
Stockholm started at barely under 31 minute pace.
Madeira was won in 31:34.

Utrecht had a good 10k and got a 29:53.

There are a lot less opportunities for a 10k world record than a shorter one. That's why that record is lasting.

ecoli

ss43 wrote: »

Longest race at Prefontaine was 2k.
Stockholm started at barely under 31 minute pace.
Madeira was won in 31:34.

Utrecht had a good 10k and got a 29:53.

There are a lot less opportunities for a 10k world record than a shorter one. That's why that record is lasting.

sorry you right about Pre i got mixed up with US trials. Are you honestly telling me though that there has not been any fast enough races to get within 30 seconds of the record in the last 16 years?

Pherekydes

ecoli wrote: »

sorry you right about Pre i got mixed up with US trials. Are you honestly telling me though that there has not been any fast enough races to get within 30 seconds of the record in the last 16 years?

There have been 3 performances by 3 different women (all Ethiopian born) less than 25 seconds outside the record in the last 12 months. This record will fall long before the women's 100m, 200m or 400m records or the men's 3000m record.

ecoli

Pherekydes wrote: »

There have been 3 performances by 3 different women (all Ethiopian born) less than 25 seconds outside the record in the last 12 months. This record will fall long before the women's 100m, 200m or 400m records or the men's 3000m record.

22 seconds is the closest. 22seconds is a huge margin by any standards. Melkamu would need to cut close to a second per lap to break this

ss43

ecoli wrote: »

sorry you right about Pre i got mixed up with US trials. Are you honestly telling me though that there has not been any fast enough races to get within 30 seconds of the record in the last 16 years?

Of the top 10 in last year's women's 10k rankings, 8 set their times in the Olympics. That's a sure sign, there aren't the same opportunites for fast times in 10k as there are in other events.

ecoli wrote: »

22 seconds is the closest. 22seconds is a huge margin by any standards. Melkamu would need to cut close to a second per lap to break this

The time came 2 months before the worlds (I presume she's aiming to peak there). She could improve next year. She's already after taking a big step this year and she doesn't necessarily have the best chance of breaking it. Someone would if there were more races though. Dibaba would be capable in my opinion.

ecoli

ss43 wrote: »

Of the top 10 in last year's women's 10k rankings, 8 set their times in the Olympics. That's a sure sign, there aren't the same opportunites for fast times in 10k as there are in other events.

In an Olympic year of course everyone is gearing towards peaking at the Olympics and at these longer distances many runners choose to develop their speed with 5ks and not tire themselves with too many longer runs (much like marathon runners) in such an important year. If you look in the last twelve months the stats arent as distorted with 5 of the top ten times coming from other races and 3 of the top five

29:53.80 Meselech Melkamu
29:54.66 Tirunesh Dibaba
29:56.34 Elvan Abeylegesse
30:11.53 Florence Jebet Kiplagat
30:11.87 Wude Ayalew

ss43

ecoli wrote: »

In an Olympic year of course everyone is gearing towards peaking at the Olympics and at these longer distances many runners choose to develop their speed with 5ks and not tire themselves with too many longer runs (much like marathon runners) in such an important year. If you look in the last twelve months the stats arent as distorted with 5 of the top ten times coming from other races and 3 of the top five

29:53.80 Meselech Melkamu
29:54.66 Tirunesh Dibaba
29:56.34 Elvan Abeylegesse
30:11.53 Florence Jebet Kiplagat
30:11.87 Wude Ayalew

In 2008 8 of the top10 set their times in the Olympics.
In 2007 nobody ran under 31 mins
In 2006 there were 9 sub 31 min runs. They came in 3 races (7 in one).
In 2005 6 of the top 10 set their times in the World Champs.
In 2004 7 of the 10 came from the Olympics.

There aren't many chances to run good quality 10ks for women. The championships are the only races where there's good depth. There's greater depth in the men's races so they can have a few good athletes in races outside the championships. Hence, less seasonal bests in championship finals.

In most events you get a few chances a season to run a fast race against good competitiors. This is not the case for the women's 10k where you get maybe 0-2 chances per season.

ecoli

Defar with another quick time of 29.59.2 in Birmingham