I reckon most people would struggle with boredom when it comes to running 1hr on the track versus on the road, so I don't see why this shouldn't be taken into account when comparing the two surfaces?
I reckon most people would struggle with boredom when it comes to running 1hr on the track versus on the road, so I don't see why this shouldn't be taken into account when comparing the two surfaces?
'That's what you get when you suffer - you get results'
I think most people's 10k road PBs would be faster than track PBs. This is mainly on the basis that most people run the distance more frequently on the road so more chance of running a faster time. I'm a good example of this having never run a 10000m track race in my life (maybe next year!) Another example of this is comparing 1500m and mile times. The world lists at 1500m is far stronger than the mile list, mainly because the mile is relatively infreqently run these days.
I don't have much knowledge of longer distances (which epocian has belated told he/she is specifically referring to) but over distances of 10k or less there can be no doubt that the track is quicker. Enough class acts have raced over 5k and 10k on the road when in good form to show that their track times will almost always be considerably faster (take Zersenay Tadesse and Haile G over the manchester 10k the last few years as examples of this.
Boredom - yes - weaker, less experienced runners struggle on the track even at 5000m through boredom. World class distance runners are different animals to the rest of us and very obviously don't!
Leeds City AC: "Pure Sporting Delight"
Don't think I did belatedly tell you - I was referring to the original comment by Alwaysinjured - over the hour record (ie over 20kms+)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote