Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:48.00

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #46
    Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

    I'm sorry. I just don't see how a guy goes from dropping out of a race at 27:30 pace, trailing behind at that, to running 26:43 less than 3 weeks later, especially given it was his second race in two years. Eight weeks later, yes. Why didn't he run in London? Did the heat in Daegu affect him? Is Brussels just a place he associates with running fast?

    I'm so pleased for Rupp though. He's been on the verge of sub 27 a couple of times. His being pally with Mo Farah has helped us Brits get to know him.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

      Originally posted by kuha
      Originally posted by 26mi235
      Because there are more suitors for that top spot, it will be harder to control the race.
      But, in general, championship races are the easiest things in the world to predict: the pace for the first 60%-70% will be very modest, with a gradual increase from there on, and an all-out last 800/600m. Everyone knows this and everyone is (or should be) prepared for it.

      What would truly interest me would be some deviation from this predictable scenario: something along the lines of Halberg, Ngugi, etc., or another Bedford-style from-the-gun blast.
      12:57 for the last 5k is a pretty effective tactic. Only employed once and got the desired result.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

        Bekele didn't look at his absolute best but I'm sure he'll be better next year. His form looked reminiscent of his post-Mombasa track form in the early part of 2007. So many people were writing him off and saying he might never be the same athlete but after a few unconvincing victories in May/June, I saw him blast to an almost solo 7:26 3000m in the rain in Sheffield.
        http://twitter.com/Trackside2011

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

          Originally posted by nevetsllim
          Bekele didn't look at his absolute best but I'm sure he'll be better next year. His form looked reminiscent of his post-Mombasa track form in the early part of 2007. So many people were writing him off and saying he might never be the same athlete but after a few unconvincing victories in May/June, I saw him blast to an almost solo 7:26 3000m in the rain in Sheffield.
          Look out, you are in danger of being accused of smittenity! :P
          phsstt!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

            Originally posted by SQUACKEE
            Originally posted by nevetsllim
            Bekele didn't look at his absolute best but I'm sure he'll be better next year. His form looked reminiscent of his post-Mombasa track form in the early part of 2007. So many people were writing him off and saying he might never be the same athlete but after a few unconvincing victories in May/June, I saw him blast to an almost solo 7:26 3000m in the rain in Sheffield.
            Look out, you are in danger of being accused of smittenity! :P
            Don't get me wrong I don't think he'll ever get back to his peak but I think he can still challenge for global titles especially at 10,000m. He's still not that old and while Bekele has been injured for two years, Gebrselassie still enjoyed a very good season in 2003 despite missing nearly all of the 2001-02 track seasons through injury. Geb still came back to win silver behind a close-to-peak Bekele in Paris before his second fastest time ever in Brussels. I don't think Bekele will be facing anyone as good as he was in 2003-05 next year.
            http://twitter.com/Trackside2011

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

              They may not be as good, but they will be comparable. I think that if a rested Mo Farah is in that race he keeps up with/ahead of Bekele and wins the race. Rupp trailed off at the last 400 or so meters, just where the difference between Rupp and Mo becomes apparent.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                Originally posted by IanS_Liv
                I'm sorry. I just don't see how a guy goes from dropping out of a race at 27:30 pace, trailing behind at that, to running 26:43 less than 3 weeks later, especially given it was his second race in two years.
                The difference in conditions between Daegu and Brussels, combined with another three weeks of training, including the "race practice" in the WC 10K, explain the difference in outcome. Or are you implying something else?
                Cheers,
                Alan Shank
                Woodland, CA, USA

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                  [quote=Alan Shank]
                  Originally posted by "IanS_Liv":l97zad1x
                  I'm sorry. I just don't see how a guy goes from dropping out of a race at 27:30 pace, trailing behind at that, to running 26:43 less than 3 weeks later, especially given it was his second race in two years.
                  The difference in conditions between Daegu and Brussels, combined with another three weeks of training, including the "race practice" in the WC 10K, explain the difference in outcome. Or are you implying something else?
                  Cheers,
                  Alan Shank
                  Woodland, CA, USA[/quote:l97zad1x]
                  If he is implying something sinister, you must explain to me why Bek wouldnt do what he did for the worlds, why would he wait for brussels?
                  phsstt!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                    [quote=Alan Shank]
                    Originally posted by "IanS_Liv":9ji2j30y
                    I'm sorry. I just don't see how a guy goes from dropping out of a race at 27:30 pace, trailing behind at that, to running 26:43 less than 3 weeks later, especially given it was his second race in two years.
                    The difference in conditions between Daegu and Brussels, combined with another three weeks of training, including the "race practice" in the WC 10K, explain the difference in outcome. Or are you implying something else?
                    Cheers,
                    Alan Shank
                    Woodland, CA, USA[/quote:9ji2j30y]

                    When someone is injured--or coming off a long layoff from injury--inconsistency is pretty much a given for a while.
                    .

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                      Also, we need to remember these guys are professional athletes. Pride and country do of course matter, but I'm sure Bekele had thousands of more reasons to hang tough through the discomfort at Brussels. When we're talking livelihood and taking care of your family, these things matter a lot.
                      .

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                        I'm not particularly implying anything sinister, I just find the turn around in such a short time puzzling. It's just that I've always understood that it's your endurance work in the winter that gives you the form and strength to run so hard for so long in the summer, with tapering and speedwork to give you your edge. Maybe he had time to do catch up on the latter aspect and Daegu was too early?

                        I am a little sceptical about the long distances though, in general terms.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                          By the way Rupp is the first American to break 4:20 per mile for 10k, ie 13 flat for 3. A time when I was growing up was still a big deal.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                            So who ran the last 5000 in 12:57? Bekele, Farah, or Rupp?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                              Originally posted by Conor Dary
                              By the way Rupp is the first American to break 4:20 per mile for 10k, ie 13 flat for 3. A time when I was growing up was still a big deal.
                              Yes! I remember the T&FN cover of Paul Geis breaking 13 for the 3-mile, sometime in the '70s.

                              Makes Bekele's feat of back-to-back 13:08 5ks seem even more impossible.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: ¶Brussels m10K (non-DL)—Bekele 26:43.16 WL, Rupp AR 26:4

                                Rupp-like breakthroughs (from 27-minutes to sub-26'50 and lower), including Rupp:

                                Sammy Kipketer (28'16"2A to 26'49"38); Josphat Bett (28'18"0A to 26'48"99); Imane Merga (27'33"53 to 26'48"35); Assefa Mezgebu (27'18"28 to 26'49"90); Mo Farah (27'14"07 to 26'46"57); Lucas Rotich (27'12"24 to 26'43"98); Galen Rupp (27'10"74 to 26'48"00); Salah Hissou (27'09"30 to 26'38"08); Moses Mosop (27'08"96 to 26'49"55); Boniface Kiprop (27'04"00 to 26'39"77); Moses Masai (27'03"20 to 26'49"20)

                                (All-time Athletics)
                                Fire Impossible.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X