ESPN's Colin Cowherd Claims to Have Run a 6:11 Mile

Doesn't look right to me either, but I agree...why would they lie? I would like to see the whole thing in real time.

Here's a thread on here where you all were discussing his chances before hand:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4537035

Interestingly he said he's run 6:11 and that's what he ran.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4537035&page=2#4541810

I may try this tomorrow.

Definitely need a re-run if it wasn't a Full Mile. Stephen A. Smith should be up in arms that Colin was 9 meters short!

We'd love to see a Jackie Joyner vs. Colin Cowherd Mile. Promote, Promote, Promote!

Webb Watch '12 wrote:

Haha, Yeah, I like how jackie joyner was giving expert advice on the mile. That really cracked me up. I wonder how many people who saw this actually thought she was a miler...

She did cap off her WR hep with a 2:08 800m. I bet she could have been a fairly useful miler if she had trained for the event.

yep. just because you can sprint doesn't make you a terrible miler. i'm willing to bet she could have been sub 4:40 easy with about 3 weeks of some specific training.

Graeme McDowell wrote:

Doesn't look right to me either, but I agree...why would they lie? I would like to see the whole thing in real time.

Judging it by the "look" of how fast he's running is pretty tough.

Brightroom Race Photography now includes short videos of you running past their camera with the photos they take of you during the race. I ran a half marathon this weekend at 5:50 pace, and when I saw the video posted online, I looked like I was walking.

At 1:44 he goes through the 20m exchange zone in 4.8s -> 96 pace for 400.

Kicking for home, at 2:54 he goes through the last exchange zone in 4.1s -> 82 pace.

That 6:11 looks legit, except it was likely 1600m.

Get him some racing flats, a rabbit, and nice weather, and he's sub 6 right now.

Do it, Cowherd!!

Nothing against jackie; I just thought it was sort of funny that she was the one commenting. That is all.

And if that's what a 6:11 looks like... then, jesus, that is walking.

i did an 'all-out' mile last year and did it in 5:54. i felt like i was hauling major @$$. i was out of breath and gave it everything i had. he looks like he's barely hitting 8-minute pace in that video. maybe i'm just that slow..

1600 who cares. I think he could've covered the 9.3 meters in under 19 seconds.

wejo wrote:

Then I think, he's 48. I'm 38, used to be able to run six miles back to back at 4:30 pace and wonder how much faster I could run right now.

He could go for sure sub 6. What about 5:30? How fast do guys run at that age?

Think what would have happened if Roger Bannister had stopped after running 4:11.

not sure if this is what you're asking, but there are a few 50 year olds out there that would lap him...

1600m at best

1600 who cares. I think he could've covered the 9.3 meters in under 19 seconds.

Woulda

Coulda

Shoulda

But didn't.

Sub 6 MILE, Cowherd. It's your destiny!

ronner wrote:

I think the "Bring back the Mile" campaign folks need to get some celebraties to do some miles kind of like this. That would stir some interest, Probably more than the Olympic trials. Instead of Dancing with the stars, Mileling with the stars. Bill Clinton vs. George Bush. Chris Johnson vs. Lebron James.

This is an awesome idea. Celebrity mile races. A "1mi Challenge." Now we could finally answer the question, "how fast could an NBA player run a mile?"

It was 1600m.

Do the math with the video.. he is hitting anywhere from 82-second pace (end) to 96-second pace (start).

They started from a garbage can because these non-runners don't even know there was a starting line on the damn track and it was best for camera angle.

He ran 6:11, which is why he was pumped. He nailed his prediction.

Dyestat gets the live feed!

wejo wrote:

2) Why the hell did they start in the middle of the straightaway?

Based on his age, the last time he had anything to do with being on a track, that was probably where they started them. I remember In Jr High we always started in the middle of the straight.

that looks like he is on around just over 6 pace.

the thing that throws off the appearance is the horrible stride.

But when you look at how much ground is being covered in that time, it looks right.

Judging my kids' 6-flatish 1600's in track this season I'd say that's right on low 6-minute pace he's running.

Starting in the middle of the straight used to be very common. I'm 36 and remember my HS coach, who'd been coaching since the late 50's insisted we start and end our track intervals halfway through the straights despite the track being all marked up for end of straight start/finish/stagger.