This is a completely different sport from marathon running. It requires a massive aerobic capacity to win x-c races at this level, while running economy plays a much bigger role in the marathon. I think it's clear that Bekele has a bigger aerobic engine than Kipchoge, given the differences in their track times, but Kipchoge may actually be the more economical of the two, especially on the roads.
@@randyevermore9323 you are absolutely right.Kipchoge's running form suits the marathon better, while Bekele's superior aerobic engine ensured he ruled the 5k and 10k on the track and also xc. It's obvious from this race, and even as far back as Kipchoge's early running years, that his form was optimized for better running economy, especially for maintaining good speed over distances longer than the 10k, while Bekele's was more dynamic and it looks like he's expending more energy especially in his upper body.look at his arm movement, versus Kipchoge's arm movement.kipchoge's look more fluid and controlled.
@@Kipchoge475 Bekele's running form is far superior than Kipchoge's at anything below marathon pace. Kipchoge is not strong and runs too stiff at those paces. Sure at marathon pace Kipchoge's smaller and stiffer stride is efficient, but Bekele is still right up there and is imo still more efficient at marathon pace. Keep in mind an old Bekele with imperfect training and preparation ran only 2 seconds off of Kipchoge's marathon world record, that is saying something. The angles (falling angle, amount of leg and foot folding, hip extension, etc..) achieved by Bekele are unmatched by any runner in history and his leg swing is imo the most efficient ever. Now Kipchoge's form is definitely good, so good in fact that it can be seen as textbook good running form. The thing is though that Bekele has entirely surpassed that textbook, running in a way that no other human has been able to replicate.
