Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question about Athing Mu's limits...

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Davidokun
    replied
    Originally posted by cigar95 View Post
    Years ago, in the Red/Blue/Gold/Green/Black Book, T&FN used to publish an article on projecting possible times at other distances from knowing an athlete's PR at two others. (*Two* was crucial - we often here try to do it using *one*, but that's obviously a fool's errand.) Maybe the article is still published - are those books still in print?
    There is no such article in the Big Gold Book, 3rd printing (updated), 2011.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by 79 View Post
    I've been a little bit too much optimistic about Athing Mu's limits in the 400m yesterday, I think. I see a 48"50 more than an unrealistic 48"10... Too much French wine effect. 😉
    She's still so young. I can easily see 48.0 with more strength work. She is a uniquely gifted athlete. There seems to be lots more there.

    Leave a comment:


  • 79
    replied
    I've been a little bit too much optimistic about Athing Mu's limits in the 400m yesterday, I think. I see a 48"50 more than an unrealistic 48"10... Too much French wine effect. 😉

    Leave a comment:


  • scottmitchell74
    replied
    Mu's physique also lends to the thought experiment. No one imagines SAFP running 1500s and noone thinks of Hassan running 100/200/400, but Mu has an all-rounder physique. You can see her getting a bit leaner and doing well at 1500/1600 and even beyond, and you can see her muscling up a bit and being a 200/400.

    Leave a comment:


  • cigar95
    replied
    Years ago, in the Red/Blue/Gold/Green/Black Book, T&FN used to publish an article on projecting possible times at other distances from knowing an athlete's PR at two others. (*Two* was crucial - we often here try to do it using *one*, but that's obviously a fool's errand.) Maybe the article is still published - are those books still in print?
    The idea was that two events gives an estimate of both the overall speed and the athlete's slowdown as distance grows, and the concept was that time, when converted to 400m pace, increases with the log of the distance. (They didn't phrase it that way, but the notion was that 400m pace increases by a fixed increment each time distance doubles.) And some examples (Jim Ryun is the one I remember being used, but I also used the technique on the uniquely-talented Aouita) showed this notion to be reasonable, if the starting data points were representative of the runner's actual abilities.

    Well as it turns out, aaronk's time estimates, starting from 600m and up, all lie very close to the straight-line logarithmic behavior. That makes it conceivable to carry out those projections even farther.
    And this model then points to 5:14 for 2000, 8:13 for 3000, 14:29 for 5k, and 31:04 for 10k.

    Since the original times all assumed an optimal focus on each event, these longer distances presumably would as well. And as young as she is, it's not likely that Mu has the time to move her focus around like this - nor the interest. But it's still a fun exercise to do on paper.

    Leave a comment:


  • KevinR
    replied
    Without doubt, Mu is an enormously talented athlete. While I understand the entertainment we all get from positing what she might be able to do at other distances, I hope she does what almost every other athlete in any sport does; focus on her primary events. After she loses a step or two in the shorter distances, then move up to the next longer distance. I would greatly prefer seeing how far she can go in her primary events rather than coax her into others.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wiederganger
    replied
    Originally posted by aaronk View Post
    A lot is based in which event or events she chooses to train for!

    22.5
    49.0
    1:21.00
    1:52.00
    2:24.00
    3:48.00
    4:06.00

    Sounds crazy
    It will depend on what she decides to train for...because it is crazy to think her talent could be spread over those events and reach those performances.

    She is looking like once in a generation talent, certainly, although it remains to be seen how she progresses and whether she can continue to PB into her mid and late 20s. Sounds obvious I know, but she may plateau age 21-22, we just don't know yet. However, she is an amazing talent.

    I tend to lean on history and what people have done in the past, to make comparisons. No woman has achieved the 22.5/49/1:52 above, the closest of course being Kratochvilova with 21.97/47.99/1:53.28, but no way could she run 4:00 for the 1500m. I just don't think it is possible in terms of training to get the best out of your talent to be able to be spread over 200 to 1500m. You have to pick a fight, and that's generally 200/400; 400/800, or 800/1500. You can't do 200/400/800/1500, be great at all, and achieve your potential at all. (I think this is what you are saying too?)

    She may be able to do a Kratochvilova and do 200/400/800, but as soon as she starts ramping up 1500m, she wont be performing at her best in the 400m, so she'd need switch to a 800/1500 runner.

    Personally, I believe she should - and will - stick to the 400/800, with the occasional outing at 200m and 1500m. In which case, she will struggle to run faster than 22.5 unless she runs it more often (and of course she will remain way outside 4mins, most likely in that 4:06 range). Note though, if she wants to run 49.0 for the 400m, she needs to be able to run 22.5 over 200m: of the 11 women that have broken 49 seconds for the 400m, the slowest 200m PB is Naser's, at 22.51 (note I can't find a 200m PB for Anna Guevara, only a 35.3 over 300m)

    Some other points:
    Of those 11 sub 49 women, only 3 appear to have 800m marks: Kratocvilova (1:53.28) SRR (2:10.74) and Guevara (2:01.12).
    The 30th best 400m performer ever, Jearl-Miles Clark, has 23.03/ 49.40/1:56.40/4:31.41 PBs

    There's a reason why the fastest women over 400m have fast 200ms PBs but only 2 have 800m PBs: the 400m lends itself to sprinters. unacceptable comment removed. I think Mu will simply not be able to be elite in more than 2 events in this day and age.
    Last edited by gh; 09-24-2021, 02:40 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • aaronk
    replied
    Originally posted by NotDutra5 View Post

    This is Aaronk's suggestion. I think there is an auto 5 or 6 sec buffer which needs to be put in place to at least start on the way back to reality.

    She's not running under 3:50 for 1500m and I'd be surprised if she ran under 4:00.
    My predictions above aren't for tomorrow or 2022, or even 2023!
    First, she'll most likely stick to the 400--800 events for another 2 years or more, maybe dabbling in the 1000 or 200 and 600.

    But many agree she's capable of at least 49 & 1:52, right?
    Now check out the slowdown rate for many middle distance runners.
    Ten to 12 seconds is a very common slowdown per 880 in a mile!

    Look at the top 2 women in the 1500--Hassan and Kipyegon.
    Neither have run as fast an 800 as Mu--about 1 to 1.5 seconds slower, yet both are running 3:51's for the 1500.
    Which amounts to an easy sub-4:10---maybe 4:08!!

    So why couldn't Mu---given solid mile training, health etc--run FASTER than those 2??
    If (when??) she runs that 1:52, then add 10 to 12 seconds per 880, and you've got a 4:06 mile---and a 3:48 1500 enroute!1
    It's simple math, with a lot of history tossed in the mix!
    Last edited by aaronk; 09-24-2021, 06:13 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    One thing that might keep Mu from taking the 1500/mile seriously any time soon is the chance to rack up global 4x400 medals. It seems like a tall order to maintain the foot speed to split sub-49 while building the aerobic capacity to challenge the likes of Kipyegon, Hassan and Muir at the 1500.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by gh View Post
    see her in the 1500 before I do the 200
    She and Mboma could vie for the 'Worst Start' title.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by treadwater1 View Post
    I can’t see how the predictions for the 1500 and mile are relevant, if she’s going to branch out it would be in the other direction. 48.5 is certainly possible
    i see her in the 1500 before I do the 200

    Leave a comment:


  • treadwater1
    replied
    I can’t see how the predictions for the 1500 and mile are relevant, if she’s going to branch out it would be in the other direction. 48.5 is certainly possible

    Leave a comment:


  • NotDutra5
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist View Post

    3:48 is no joke either.
    This is Aaronk's suggestion. I think there is an auto 5 or 6 sec buffer which needs to be put in place to at least start on the way back to reality.

    She's not running under 3:50 for 1500m and I'd be surprised if she ran under 4:00.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    Originally posted by gh View Post

    d'oh! of course not.... i read the 4:06 as 1500 time.
    I did too....then I saw 3:48....crazy...

    So OK....we are on the same page....definitely 4:06 1500.
    Last edited by Conor Dary; 09-23-2021, 08:29 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist View Post

    That's the way I read it but I wanted to make sure understood you correctly that you see her as a future world record breaker in the 1500 and mile?
    d'oh! of course not.... i read the 4:06 as 1500 time.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X