Tweet
That's the goal this weekend:
-
-
†he answer would be no:
1 Wheating, Andrew SO Oregon 3:58.16
2 Leer, Will Oregon TC Elite 3:59.46
3 Woolhouse, Jason New Balance NZ 4:01.58
4 Chapa, Joaquin SR Oregon 4:02.44
5 Sage, Don Oregon TC Elite 4:02.54
6 Rupp, Galen Unattached 4:03.13
7 Graham, Sean Oregon TC Elite 4:04.78
8 Elliott, Kevin Oregon TC Elite 4:05.08
9 Bak, Ryan Oregon TC Elite 4:05.88
10 Jefferson, Sean Oregon TC Elite 4:12.42
(Sage's fastest mile since '04) -
Wheating is a very interesting talent. First year of track was as a 12th grader (3:54). This is only his 3rd year of running????Originally posted by gh
He's 6ft 5 inches! Who is the tallest sub 4 miler? That has to be very close.
His bio shows him as a 6'2" frosh, but a 6'5" soph - a 3 inch growth this late?
Maybe the bio is wrong?
Regardless of his height, he is apparently a bright young talent to watch and showing Rupp how its done in the shorter distance. Quite impressive.Comment
-
Andrew Lemoncello (UK/FlStU) is about 6'6" [apparently not...] while Stu Eagon is at least 6'5" now. Both of them did some longer stuff, but Lemoncello had some pretty good miles too
[from Wikipedia and McMillan Elite]
* 1500 m 3:47.52
* 3000 m Steeplechase 8:23.74
* 5000 m 13:45.69
* 10000 m 28:28.04
* Half-Marathon - 1:03:13
[I note the correction of Coach Rod below]Comment
-
Wheating is American No. 309. The new compilation is now published in our Archive.
Note that this is now already the year with the most new members of the club, 14 (old was 13 last year, before that, 12 in '91).Comment
-
Correction: Andrew Lemoncello (FSU/Sco) is not 6'6" tall... he's more along the lines of 6'2"-6'3"... you're probably thinking about Luke Beevor (FSU/Eng) who is 6'9", but not near 4' mile personal bests... I had the pleasure of training with them both.Comment
-
Dumb me -- I'm still scratching my head over Galen's competing in the mile. Haven't he and his coach heard this is an Olympic year? Rupp isn't a miler, there are only a limited number of opportunities left to ramp-up in his event(s) before the OT, etc. Maybe he's sharing training notes with that other notable peaking expert, Alan Webb. :wink:
Was also interested in the training runs by Rupp, an asthmatic. Running the halls of Nike corporate headquarters, heigh-ho! Now, why didn't I think of that when I was trying to deal with asthma and train for competition?! :roll:Comment
-
to be world class in the 5/10k nowadays requires one to be capable of 335 or better for 1500.
the 5k is now being run at about 61 per quarter and the 10k is about 63 per quarter and count on going sub 55 minimum on the last lap.
rupp definetely has to improve his 1500 to be where him and his coach want him to be in the 10k.Comment
-
Ok, I sort of agree. But from the article linked above, my impression was this that race was more or less a whim of Rupp's, which Salazar went along with. But the press often gets things wrong, or only gets part of the story. Hope that's true in this case. In any event, Rupp is still a very long way from a 3:35.Originally posted by doug091463Comment
-
Anyone know of a sub-4 miler taller than 6'5"?Comment
-
Webb da 1500 dude goes to Stanford and runs a 10,000 that ruins his season. Then 2 years later Galen a 10,000 dude goes to Stanford and runs a mile that ruins his season.....mmmm Marlowe curse anyone?phsstt!Comment
-
I feel it may be a bit premature to say running a fast mile has "ruined his season." I see no problem in the effort as long as no injury occured during the race.
I also feel that women are much more likely to attempt and be successful at a wider range of distances than men. This is an observation, without a long list of supporting evidence. I am not sure why this is, but I do feel that it is to their benefit to do so. I see no problem with a 5k-10k runner dropping down to an occasional 1500/mile as an idication of how thier training is going.
What think ye?Comment
-
This sounds like a time trial for Mr. Rupp. I suspect he had to do the rest of his workout afterward.Originally posted by Helen SComment
-
The reason for their relative success at a wider range is probably related to the difference in depth.
Originally posted by Helen SComment
-
[quote=ed gee]The reason for their relative success at a wider range is probably related to the difference in depth.
[/quote:3kye37d0]Originally posted by "Helen S":3kye37d0
Right. For a given event, the difference between the top guy and the tenth guy is not very much. That's less the case for the women. Which means the top 3 or 4 women can more easily move away from their best event and still be very competitive.
Some day maybe the talent pool for the women will be similar for that for men. But don't expect it any time soon. (One big reason for this is that big chunks of the world still don't give their girls and woman proper athletic opportunities.)Comment
Comment