Moraghan Training - Stevie G

19609619639659661616

Comments

  • I think Vernon made one valid point later about the "races" in question - some have been set up, others not. I think his intial tweet was ok as a little dig but as a professional a big no no. And a response from Mo was silly



    It's been mentioned before that Mo is obviously fast but not WR standard which is what that next break would have to be to class him as worlds best. Which in my opinion the public seem to think he is.. Without doubt though class runner and sun 13 5km and 60 min HM is not easy whether he was gifted the win he ran the time



    Top Repping Dachs big volume session! and as mentioned top run Matt - both well capable of sub 32
    Pain is weakness leaving the body
  • DeanR7DeanR7 ✭✭✭

    If anyone thought they were faster than mo over 5 or 10k they had the worlds and Olympics to demonstrate it. mo has proved in a number of championships he is the best.  He is a championship racer, How he chooses to race in between champs is a minor point.

  • As Dean says, the exact point about Mo is that he has chosen to run head to head and he has gone to the Olympics in 2012 and won gold in 10,000m and 5,000m and then in 2013 he has gone to the world champs and won gold in 10,000m and 5,000m.

    If you look at his times compared to the world record then oddly his 1,500m is actually the best distance for him compared to the world record.

                   Mo      WR       %
    1,500 03:28.81 03:26.00 98.65%
    5,000 12:53.11 12:37.35 97.96%
    10,000 26:46.57 26:17.53 98.19%

    I suspect that if he decided that a world record was needed he could get one, but things are stacked against him. Look at e.g. the 10,000m record. It is set at the Memorial Van Damme event in Brussels and the purpose of the meeting is to set up world record attempts so they have pacers and all the other stuff (so the meeting is timed to be a cool summer evening etc) and if anything goes wrogn you have lost a period of training.

    Obviously the best thing to do is to win gold and set the world record but there is only one David Rudisha.

     

    Stevie G wrote (see)

    you wanna try doing your session on your own, in freezing cold winter on a Friday night on a blustery track like I used to for depressing son! image

    Track session is tomorrow for me: day off work so down to the new green track for 4x1200m.  Plan is a 3.5 mile jog to the track, session and then hopefully daughter #1 will drive me back after her session.

  • DachsDachs ✭✭✭

    I understand totally why Mo does what he does between Championships.  Watch what happens in Championship races.  The others are intimidated by him, and give him huge amounts of respect.  He has an air of invincibility about him these days.  If he raced and lost between Championships that psychological advantage he has would be lessened.

    It's the same reason he doesn't go for fast times in his main events, I think.  Imagine he sets himself up to run a fast 5,000 in the Diamond League, and ends up running 12:49.  Bloody fast of course, and a PB/British record, but Gebremeskel, Alamirew, Koech and Gebrhiwet have all run faster.  They know if they make it a fast pace in a championship race they may be able to beat him.  So that's what they do.  At the moment, though, they have no idea how fast he can go, and the risk to them is, not only do they not beat Mo, but they end up being outrun by other rivals and end up out of the medals.  So it becomes a slow kickers race, and Mo wins again. 

    It makes no sense for Mo to expose any weaknesses by chasing times or getting beaten in races at his main distances, so why should he do it?

  • Dachs wrote (see)

    They know if they make it a fast pace in a championship race they may be able to beat him.  So that's what they do.  At the moment, though, they have no idea how fast he can go, and the risk to them is, not only do they not beat Mo, but they end up being outrun by other rivals and end up out of the medals.  So it becomes a slow kickers race, and Mo wins again.

    All the time championship race ban pace makers you can't beat Mo, or indeed any other fast finisher, by running a fast race, as it is takes more effort to lead a race than it does to sit in the pack and follow the race. A 100m race is run in lanes and is a solo effort, so Bolt wins and sets WRs. As the distance goes up, the benefit of being in a pack is greater so you get tactical champ races with no pace makers which are won by fast finishers and you get WRs set in carefully choreographed events with pacemakers doing their bit to launch the nominated winner in the final section.

    If you had enough athletes form one country in the final you could set off a couple early doors to see if he would follow or if he would sit in the main pack.

    Anyhow back to the initial twitter spat: yes Vernon's first text was a little pointed but fair comment and you have to allow Mo a reply which was maybe a little overboard, but after that it was all just nonsense: even I am faster than Taylor Swift (I just checked powerof10 and she doesn't even have an entry: looser!)

    Seems the official fastest musician over the marathon is Björn Ulvaeus from ABBA with 3:23:54 and some debate over Joe Strummer from the Clash with 3:20ish with training that was "Drink 10 pints of beer the night before the race. Ya got that? And don’t run a single step at least four weeks before the race." Rock'n'roll!

     

  • DachsDachs ✭✭✭
    PhilipMJones wrote (see)

    If you had enough athletes form one country in the final you could set off a couple early doors to see if he would follow or if he would sit in the main pack.

     

    Well, precisely.  You have three Ethiopians who have run under 12:50 in the last 3 years.  If they know Mo is beatable in a fast race (which they currently don't), it has to be worth a three-person breakaway, which might take a couple of Kenyans with it as well.

  • Any thoughts on Thyroid treatment and the Salazar camp?

  • Dachs wrote (see)
    PhilipMJones wrote (see)

    If you had enough athletes form one country in the final you could set off a couple early doors to see if he would follow or if he would sit in the main pack.

     

    Well, precisely.  You have three Ethiopians who have run under 12:50 in the last 3 years.  If they know Mo is beatable in a fast race (which they currently don't), it has to be worth a three-person breakaway, which might take a couple of Kenyans with it as well.

    That's different though. A breakaway with 3 out of 3 Ethiopians and a couple of Kenyans is just a fast pack to follow. Could Mo follow a fast pack for 4,500m and then drop a fast last 500m and win? I would not bet against it.

    Send 2 out of 3 Ethiopians off from the gun and they could run fast all the way to the finish so Mo would have to follow them, or they could get to 8 laps and step off the track and Mo would be out front on his own and exposed. I think that Mo has a good chance in both a fast race and a tactical race, what he can't do is cover two approaches in one race and you have to present him with a choice and then ensure he has taken the wrong choice.

  • PhilipMJones wrote (see)
    , but after that it was all just nonsense: even I am faster than Taylor Swift (I just checked powerof10 and she doesn't even have an entry: looser!)

     

    for perhaps the most intelligent fella on the thread, you have a real difficulty with the difference between lose and loose don't you image

  • DachsDachs ✭✭✭

    Not saying Mo couldn't win a fast race.  My point is that, because he doesn't chase times, no-one actually knows whether Mo could win a fast race.  And this doubt plays right into his hands.  Which is exactly why he should do as he currently does.

  • Stevie G wrote (see)
    for perhaps the most intelligent fella on the thread, you have a real difficulty with the difference between lose and loose don't you image

    In my mind, loser is always pronounced loooooser so more o's seem better. (Lit, is that OK to use an apostrophe there?)

  • PhilipMJones wrote (see)
    Stevie G wrote (see)
    for perhaps the most intelligent fella on the thread, you have a real difficulty with the difference between lose and loose don't you image

    In my mind, loser is always pronounced loooooser so more o's seem better. (Lit, is that OK to use an apostrophe there?)

    Yes, to avoid ambiguity. Please sort out the lose/loose thing though.

  • Dachs wrote (see)

    Not saying Mo couldn't win a fast race.  My point is that, because he doesn't chase times, no-one actually knows whether Mo could win a fast race.  And this doubt plays right into his hands.  Which is exactly why he should do as he currently does.

    Agree 100%. What Mo does and why he does it makes sense. What the others do and why they do it doesn't. As Einstein didn't say: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

  • PhilipMJones wrote (see)

    Seems the official fastest musician over the marathon is Björn Ulvaeus from ABBA with 3:23:54

     

    *ahem*

    I was secretly hoping I could pace Bernard Butler to a sub-3 off the Green/celebs start at London last year, but his target according to the pre-race PR was 4 hours.  (Finish time: 4:30:12, halfway 1:51:59.  Ouch!)

  • Mo is a child. 

    He is lucky that the 10,000m is in a fallow period. Ten years ago, he'd be scrapping for bronze. He therefore needs a fast time to validate any aspirations he may have to be one of the greats.

    When he ran the GNR last year, I reckon the guy he beat could have easily won but was too polite to overtake him. Either that or he was on a bung to lay down.

  • Andrew, does double gold medallist winning Olympian not count as particularly great these days?

    Mo isn't some geezer turning up at the Cock and Biscuits Village 10k and beating a bunch of chumps. There aren't that many that can beat him, so he might as well save battles with the top dogs for the real big time events

  • Stevie G wrote (see)

    Mo isn't some geezer turning up at the Cock and Biscuits Village 10k 

    I did this last year just for the goody bag.

  • DeanR7DeanR7 ✭✭✭

    there are people nowadays who have times comparable to the best of 10 years ago. They get in a race with Mo and their bottle goes.  they spend the whole race mesmerised with him waiting on his every move.  As Dachs has said he has them convinced to settle for 2nd or trying to beat Mo doing it Mo's way 

    How many of the legends of 10yrs ago had a 1500m as fast as Mo?  i believe Mo has every trick covered. 

     

  • DachsDachs ✭✭✭

    It's unfair to compare Mo to the times being run 10 or 15 years ago - i.e. the times run by arguably the two greatest distance runners of all time, in Bekele and Gebreselaisse. He's not in the class of those two, nor does he claim to be.  Nor is anyone else, for that matter.  I don't think the 10,000 is in a fallow period, it just isn't at the ridiculous heights it was at 10-15 years ago.

    Which, incidentally, was also the EPO era.  I don't have any reason to particularly believe that Bekele or Geb doped, and I would like to think that they didn't.  But there are certain to have been plenty in those races who did.

  • /members/images/707907/Gallery/10k_0.PNG

    You make a good point, Dachs.

  • All time 10,000m current runners (this decade)

    23rd Rotich, 24th Rupp, 28th Mo, 37th Tanui, 47th Gebremeskal

    This is based on multiple performances by the same athlete. Still, none of these get in the top 10 of all time on PB's. We can't point the finger at drugs, this is just as likely to be a factor in current performances. 

    My point is that with his medal haul, he needs to step up amongst the greats, I don't think he does this unless he's got one of the top 5 times. Races are great for tv but the best runner is the fastest. We all know Bekele was the best and Geb was second, what we don't know, is where Mo ranks, because he won't put it on the line, the chicken.

    There's a difference between being one of the greats, and being great. I used to be great at pool when drunk. I am not one of the all time great pool players. image

  • That graph is about as compelling as Phil Neville, it's based on a sample of one performance of one athlete per year. You would need an average best of at least 10-20 athletes. Otherwise it could be explained by Gebrselassie getting achilles problems or Bekele taking a gap year to live with Gorillas.

     

  • I'd prefer to have an Olympic gold then have a top time.

    Times can be beaten, golds can't be taken back

    (obviously barring any later drugs failures!)

     

  • Andrew G wrote (see)

    That graph is about as compelling as Phil Neville, it's based on a sample of one performance of one athlete per year. You would need an average best of at least 10-20 athletes. Otherwise it could be explained by Gebrselassie getting achilles problems or Bekele taking a gap year to live with Gorillas.

     

    is it not the best time in the world each year? If so, it surely factors in every runner's time that year?

    It looks depressing. Times dropping when extra drugs tests are brought in!

  • Yes it is the best time of the year, but that does not represent a trend. Statistics require a reasonable sample size.

    Stevie G wrote (see)

    I'd prefer to have an Olympic gold then have a top time.

    Times can be beaten, golds can't be taken back

    (obviously barring any later drugs failures!)

     

    I'd prefer to have both, and if I had both, I would prefer to have the world record. What is best, being the fastest in one specific race, or the fastest human over a distance in history?

  • RobT - Check out therapeutic use exemption formimage several British atheltes on it too, some say they use one do to family history



    I get the debate vs Mo. No doubting his times, agreeing slightly about record chasing Dachs bit surely you want to as an athlete? Running for medals SG? Yeah I guess it's fair, your were fastest on the day when duty called, there's other times people can record break in "set up" races with pacers..



    It's a hard one to call though too with Mo - he's currently running the (some) fastest times and winning the races but still way behind others in terms of ability- then again whose to say whose doping now or then?



    Look at Paula Radcliffe - her time is equivilant to a male sub a hour marathon. A women running 6 minutes slower. Pinged for EPO - very said to see better drug tasting and a lesser improvement in times



    Not isolating particular groups but the Kenyan group and the Oregon project really does seem like something could happen..



    I think it would be relatively easy to dose cycle drugs avoid detection and that'll bring up 90% of the year training boosting, "racing" clean when in the off period -



    Who knows! Lots of athletes would take drugs to enhance performance at many levels
    Pain is weakness leaving the body
  • DachsDachs ✭✭✭

    Drugs are clearly a factor, because there was a period after EPO came into useage where there was no test for it.  I have no doubt it's still in use now, but the trick seems to be small doses taken at the right time, rather than just whacking it into your system willy nilly.

    I don't have a graph based on 10-20 runners to share I'm afraid.  But I would be astounded if it looked much different.

    What, precisely, is the point of Mo going for fast times, other than to entertain us punters?  I suspect he is fully aware that Bekele's records are well out of his reach.  He already has the European 1500 and 10,000 records.  You say he needs the times to join the pantheon of greats like Bekele and Geb.  But if he knows deep down that he isn't in that league, why should he not instead try to amass as many medals as possible?

    I wonder whether Ron Clarke would have swapped all his world records for a single Olympic gold.

    We're a funny lot, us British.  We finally get a world class distance runner, picking up medals for us left, right and centre, and somehow that's still not good enough.

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    Watch the 5000m and 10000m races at the World's that Mo is running. The other runners are looking at him and thinking 1500m, 3:28.81. He's run 3:28 ffs only last week. 3:28! jeez, he should be running the 1500m. 3:28 in our dreams. How can you beat a guy who can run a 1500m in 3:28, in a 5000m race, its jogging.

    PhilipMJones wrote (see)
     As Einstein didn't say: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

    That's encouraging, clearly I'm not insane.

  • Andrew G wrote (see)

    Yes it is the best time of the year, but that does not represent a trend. Statistics require a reasonable sample size.

    Stevie G wrote (see)

    I'd prefer to have an Olympic gold then have a top time.

    Times can be beaten, golds can't be taken back

    (obviously barring any later drugs failures!)

     

    I'd prefer to have both, and if I had both, I would prefer to have the world record. What is best, being the fastest in one specific race, or the fastest human over a distance in history?

    so you'd want the best runners to have done 5-6 peak performance 10ks each over the year?

    Slightly unrealistic

    Give it 20years and most likely you wouldn't be the fastest over the distance, records come and go. Medals don't.

    The Olympics is the pinnacle. Setting a world record is lovely, but doesn't necessarily win the biggest prize.

     

     

     

Sign In or Register to comment.