Sure, it makes more sense to just try and win but where is the fun in that? I also believe that you have to truly be on another level as an athlete to be willing to risk the win and go for the record. Look at guys like Bekele and Geb who have slaughtered the previous records and not only gone after the wins. In tri you have guys like Tim Don who are smart racers and then guys like Frodo who will give it his all.
In swimming this is not a problem as essentially every heat is a tt, which is why so many records are broken.
I understand that money comes into play for most of these guys, I just think the whole sit and kick style of racing is just not as fun to watch and also leaves me wondering how fast Mo, Rupp etc could have gone.
Imagine if more people would race like rudisha

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

x2 on that. Agreed 100% on very thing you posted there!

Fast times are transitional in nature. Today's fast time, is tomorrow's slow time. Podiums and particularly wins stand the test of time....oh yeah and Joan Benoit's 1984 Gold medal winning time get's her 4th in Boston yesterday, but her 1983 Boston winning time also gets her a 2nd yesterday. But other than a few idiots like me tracking this stuff, no one cares about the time, Joan won Boston 83 and Olympics 84. This is what casual fans care about.

 I would rather have a world record than a gold medal.

----
You would be in overwhelming minority.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I agree. One is temporary, the other lasts forever.

Let's run a litmus test and ask Frodo which one he would rather have.

This is the ole:
Do you like ice cream or cake question?

With a world record you know at that moment you have beaten everyone else who has ever run your distance, and you are the best there has ever been (excepting the slim possibility that someone did so not in competition). That may change at some point, but until it does you are the very best human in the history of the event.

With a gold medal, you are the best on the day but there are a lot of others out there that might have been able to beat you as well. Look at so many Oly 1500m races, the medalists are often "flukes". It is a great skill to put it all together at the right time on the right stage, but that is less about being the fastest as it is about some other variables.

Some thoughts, analysis and questions.

Thought:
1) One might analyze a tactical race with the following questions:
How hard is it to run the key tactical part of the race the way the winners did?
Analysis KM 30-35 - when I adjust for elevation, I calculate Kirui and Rupp ran this segment at the equivalent of 2:06:xx pace.
KM 35 -40. Kirui ran 2:02:45 pace, Rupp ran 2:05:30 pace. (Net descent but the advantage is offset by climbs).

Questions:
A) How much does the hilly course, the warm weather and the lack of a dedicated pacer take out of them?
B) How much does the slow pacing help them?

My guess Rupp's performance is as difficult as a 2:06:xx performance on a cool and flat course.
Kirui's performance was like a 2:04:00 on a flat and cool course.

This would be a pretty average result for the first two runner at London or Berlin.

Rupp's performance is similar in difficulty to Ryan Halls 2008 2:06:17 London and to Halls 2:04:58 wind assisted Boston.

Lagat is probably the goat of modern American distance running. He has a range of performance (1500-5000). He has US records AND he gold medals.

Rupp has range (1500- marathon). Rupp has medals.
But to equal Lagat, Rupp needs to win a major marathon.

To surpass Lagat, Rupp would need to break a world record.

Rupp will probably win a major marathon eventually. He is probably capable of a 2:04 high (if all goes perfectly) and he is consistently "in the mix".

Rupp will probably not set a world record, however. (That seems to be one level beyond him.)

They do it by focusing so much on their sprint/kick.

Championship races are run much differently than time trial races in which there are pacers and such to keep the pack moving through checkpoints.

Championship racing has been dominated by the sit-and-kick in the last years and no one has done it as effectively as Mo (and Galen has done it well, too).

 
"With a world record you know at that moment you have beaten everyone else who has ever run your distance, and you are the best there has ever been"

Best on that course under those conditions on that day. Also, you can set a world record eating hot dogs. Yeah, Joey Chestnut.

Can you give me an example of a 1500m Olympic Final where there was a fluke and one of the best coming in didn't win? Winning Olympic gold trumps world record every time. Sure, running a world record is an amazing feat. But Jan's long distance WR or Lionels Ironman WR, for them its great marketing and but they both know... until you win Kona or the olympics, you don't earn the title "worlds best" IMO

Rupp, drugs or not is already putting his name as one of the best marathoners regardless of times. Being a medalist at the olympics and now Boston confirms he's legit. Is Ryan Hall a better marathoner than Rupp because he ran a netdown hill 2:03 but no olympic medal?

---

Inside The Big Ring: Podcast & Coaching

I'm not sure what you mean by "fluke" and technically everybody there is "one of the best" but Fermin Cacho had no business winning the 1500 gold in 1992. He benefited from an embarassingly slow pace at the beginning. I seem to recall they were actually being booed because they ran the opening part so slowly

And Matt Centrowitz can thank his 2016 win the a similarly slow early pace. Was he good? Certainly. Would he still have medaled? Quite possibly. But he only had the 21st fastest 1500 m time of the year. He won the lottery with that early pace. It was made for him.

Not to mention the 1996 final in which El G fell early and could never contend though he was picked by most to win. However, at least that case at least one of the greatest of all time (Morceli) still did so it passes your test. But it does go to show how anything can happen.



No argument here, regardless of what I said above. In fact, I think what I said above outlines it.

For all we've heard about a WR being "beaten everyone who has ever shown up", the fact is you if you don't get a WR one day, you can come always back and try again and again. You get many chances. But if you are not ready on day of the one-and-only Olympic final, you never get another chance. Sure you might be able to come back to another Olympics, but the guy who won that day will always be the Olympic Gold Medalist for that year. Forever.

That's what makes greatness. Performing when you must. No excuses. No second chances.

I am thinking primarily of track. And ignoring the slight advantages today's surfaces might have over the ones of the last thirty years (same with shoes), that is the beauty of it - it is a really good comparison of the WR holder against every single person in the event before him or her.

I am not talking about world records in things like triathlon, or possibly even the marathon.

You have noted a number of the 1500m Olympic races that I was thinking of.

As for being the best on the day - I totally agree, that is an amazing feat.

I just prefer the idea of indisputably being the best. I mean who would you rather be Cacho or El Guerrouj (without his 1500m gold medal)?

If El G were just a guy who ran the WR one day and then otherwise was a mere mortal, then I would rather be Cacho. Slow early pace or not, he beat everyone when it counted.

But El G was so dominant, had multiple World records and won not only 1500m Olympic Gold but also Olympic 5000 m gold, calmly sailing away from the 5000m world record holder in the process.

How about this. Fernando Mamede set the 10,000 m WR weeks before the 1984 LA Olympics. He did it with ease, beating his teammate, Carlos Lopes. Yet at the Olympics, Lopes won Olympic Marathon Gold even after losing two weeks after being hit by a car. Meanwhile Mamede dropped out in the middle of a pedestrian 10000 M heat, because he was a notorious basket case who simply could not handle pressure.

Who do you think Mamede would rather be? Himself or Lopes? He was still the 10000 m world record holder but who remembers him today?

The Americans did a great job, from Jordan to Galen and in seeing all those in the top 10...good show for sure. There is a guy who may be joining America's best given his trajectory the past 2 years you haven't heard of in marathon. He may be one of the next front US marathon stars & I am anticipating he will not disappoint. A few years from now, look back on this thread and this post, because you heard it here...Noah Droddy. He is stepping up to try the marathon. An American female you should watch out for is Alia Gray--10th in the Trials (marathon). Both are part of the Roots Running Project & gaining a lot of steam. I wish them the best of luck & adding to the strength of the American distance scene.

Glad for all the Americans at Boston, even the weekend competitors. It's more misery than I am willing to participate in at this time for sure!

You have picked an excellent example. Even I have to admit I would not choose to be the hapless Mamede! To be that fast and have No wins of significance is quite something.

Fermín Cacho was no fluke:

Olympic Games
1992 Barcelona1500 m
1996 Atlanta1500 m

World Championships
1993 Stuttgart1500 m
1997 Athens1500 m

World Indoor Championships
1991 Seville1500 m

European Championships
1994 Helsinki1500 m
1998 Budapest1500 m

European Indoor Championships
1990 Glasgow1500 m

In marathon running there are usually two scenarios for very fast times:

-A star athlete attempts the world record and sets up a fiele for that purpose. His own rabbits from his own training group pace him and shelter and protect him for 20+ miles. He is vocal about his intention. Race organisers and sponsors are in the same boat and promot the race as something special.
Haile started with that in Berlin and made the whole thing about WR and fast times really interesting for the first time. Before it was just about winning and the time was merely a byproduct. Haile even made sure that certain opponents are not invited so that he could solely focus on himself and didn't need to care about racing.
Kipsang etc. adopted that approach to some extent. (And even Frodeno did it in Roth, although the astericks in Tri is multiple times higher.)

or

-fast times are achieved by fearless, young and not yet well known africana. They go out at a freakish pace and risk everything. A hundreds blow up but every once in a while someone clocks a really fast time. They are hungry and they are usually not Aline so groups Form and they push each other. But this is a very aggressive and not so sustainable way.
Sammy Wanjiaru had his breakthrough like that. And Mutai and Mosop raced Boston like that when they clocked 2:03. Maybe even Hall had a racing style like that.

Once Rupp has established himself as one of the besteht, scenario one is possible but unlikely. Scenario two is absolutely not Rupps or Salazars approach to racing.

---

10k - 30:48 / half - 1:06:40

Well we know that scenario 2 was Salazar's approach to his OWN training until, of course, he broke himself! But he did get three NYC wins and one Boston and in theory he held the Marathon world record for a short time achieved on the NYC course in 2:08.xx but it turned out that the NYRRC had measured the course 148 m short....kind of a bummer since NYC is such a hard course anyway.

Kirui looking seemingly unaffected today! Rupp and Osaka looking a bit stiff walking down the stairs.

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

No, but he had no business winning that final

Absolutely. Salazar learned some lessons the hard way and he wants to prevent his athletes from making them. His approach is now very analytical and objective. When he coached himself it often was emotional, filled with anger, fear and obsession.

---

10k - 30:48 / half - 1:06:40