How fast were your parents?

Sorry, Isner is actually 6'9"! He's got a giant serve! His height keeps him from adequately returning low balls and he's slow. Thus, he can't consistently beat the top guys.

asdfe wrote:

It's already been established that he is a troll. He is clearly a troll. YOU are the dim-witted/stubborn one of this thread for allowing him to indulge in his trolling for as long as you have.

Sorry about that. I'm done responding now.

Chino

BMI is a function of diet and exercise.

Your experience of beating your friends in no way indicates some sort of innate ability. There are too many other possibilities that you have not accounted for.

Because guys like Solinsky are rare means nothing. Or even your tennis examples. The mere fact that those outliers exist means that body types are not that limiting. Do you not see that?

East and west Africans? There are plenty of fast east African sprinters (Kenya used to have a wicked 400m program). Sprinting is about muscle which is entirely trainable. I would guess that the difference between the two comes down to cultural differences and potential for money. Marathoning and soccer in Kenya. Football and basketball in the USA.

chinocochio wrote:

Sorry, Isner is actually 6'9"! He's got a giant serve! His height keeps him from adequately returning low balls and he's slow. Thus, he can't consistently beat the top guys.

But of course he'd be able to serve like that if he was 5'4" because it's not a natural thing, it's all about practising.

This is this guy's troll angle isn't it?

My Mom used to train a little when she was younger, ran in the 21s for 5k and a 4:2X marathon. Can still run around 28 minutes.

Dad never ran or trained but played a lot of basketball and was in good shape. Now he is old and fat but likes to go out for a 2-3 mile jog every once in a while. Ran a 29 minute 5k this year.

Dad was a skiing guy in younger years, mom was never athletic. They managed to have two weightlifting type kids and one extremely skinny one (me)

trollism wrote:

chinocochio wrote:

Sorry, Isner is actually 6'9"! He's got a giant serve! His height keeps him from adequately returning low balls and he's slow. Thus, he can't consistently beat the top guys.

But of course he'd be able to serve like that if he was 5'4" because it's not a natural thing, it's all about practising.

This is this guy's troll angle isn't it?

Well there's definitely nothing natural about serving. That is a highly highly technical skill.

A shorter guy would probably have a different technique than a taller guy. Depending on how short he is, he might have to even hop a bit to serve. A short guy would have to incorporate other advantages into his tennis playing to balance out his disadvantages. Just like short guys have successfully done in the NBA.

Do you not agree with this? What's wrong about it?

Dad ran 2:12 880y while a tennis player in HS back in the 60s. Mom was not really an athlete.

I did 2:13 800m, 10:10 2 mile and mid 16s for 5k XC in HS. Never competed seriously after.

dontflushwhileyousit wrote:

My dad did track in high school. He ran just under 6 minutes for the mile. My mom couldn't run 400 meters in 6 minutes. I ran 4:18. There goes the genetics theory.

Hey, spunk up, bud. Your 1200m time could probably beat the average jv high school freshman girl.

Pretty fast, when they were chasing me.

Dad: 5'9, nerdy looking basketball player, but apparently he was alright at running. He ran about a 5:45 mile off of no training in a college phys ed class.

Mom: 5'7, Freaking athletic as he**, but it was the 60s so girls didn't have as many opportunities for sports. She was a swimmer and #2 in the city. also did diving, but there was only club sports back then so she didn't get a chance to try running. at age 55 she started running one mile with me every morning. it was super chill and not real training at all, but we entered a local 5k and I ran about 22 or 23 and she ran 27-28 which I thought was pretty good for a 55 year old women who had only started running a month or two previously.

Couldn't be more wrong if you worked at it.

You really do need to bone up on this as of right now...clue-less.

Avante wrote:

Couldn't be more wrong if you worked at it.

You really do need to bone up on this as of right now...clue-less.

You guys have not debunked any of my statements. I've debunked several of yours. Especially that poor twin example. I mean really???

What exactly have I been wrong about?

My father claimed he finished 2nd in his whole school in a 15km race. The guy who beat him though did by quite a bit.

This is also not in US. Nobody had a car to get driven anywhere. Actually, he came from a relatively wealthy family so he actually had a pair of black rubber shoes that were only somewhat worn out. The only car in town was for moving cows to the market. He said he probably had to run about 6km per day for school.

He finally ran 3 NYC marathon starting in late 60. First one he broke 5 hours but he barely trained. He didn't understand the concept of training. The last one he beat Al Roker (fat former weather guy) by 5 minutes. Zero training. Ran like 20 miles the whole year. He hung up his shoes and he won't be entering this year.

Mom was a recreational runner and never really raced as far as I know, but she was a ballerina who danced professionally. Not sure how that translates into speed. She's the one who got me running.

Dad ran around 2:00 for 880, low 50s 440 and played football in college.

I ran 3:53 (1500), 1:55, 14:55 and 25:00 (8k).

Is "Clue me in" really this stupid, or is he just trolling?

Some things are so OBVIOUS you really don't need to provide an explanation. Do you think the dinosaurs existed? I mean, I've never actually SEEN one, so that seems like pretty shaky ground to me...

My dad played tennis in high school and after falling far out of shape began running in his late 30s, when I was a little kid. Without my worship of my father I would likely have never taken up running. He ran 19:10 for 5k, 40:00ish for 10k and 3:10 for the marathon all in his early 40s.

Unfortunately, our respective fitness never intersected, as he stopped training when I was in 7th or 8th grade. I've run 1:56 for 800, 4:23 for 1600, 16:26 5k and 27:18 8k.

One thing, my father is 5'10" and I'm 6'2.5." I'm built more like my mother's father, who was long, lean and muscular for most of his life, with what looked like a good mid-D build. My mother herself was not athletic, but 5'8" and very thin, and she claims to have run 6:xx for the P.E. mile at a very young age.

Dad played baseball in HS. Actually walked on in track as a junior at a major college kind of on a lark. Ran 100 yard (not meters) dash close to 10 seconds (which was ok back then but still not blazing).

Mom played basketball in HS. Later played tennis, picked it up pretty fast and was towards the top in local city matches but never great. She was always an avid hiker and could go on forever while us kids would be out of breath.

My sister was the number one runner for her HS xc team, In track she ran 4:40ish for a mile. Ran well in college until injured.

I played football first 2 years in HS. Then started xc as a junior could never get better than 5th on team. My fastest track mile was 4:47. 2 mile in 10:33. So yeah, my sister was faster.

However, she's not running now and I'm training more than i did when i was younger. As a 50+ master I am doing OK in my age group in local races (low 18 min 5k)

Don't mean crap to me, I'm easily the most athletic person in my family, and the only thing I can do is run fast. Both my parents weren't athletes, nor were they ever in any good shape... I would say that I on the other hand am at least above average.. I can run a 2:03 800 and a 53.x second 400 within roughly 8 days of decent training. Within 3 weeks I dropped down to 1:59 and 51.4. I ran a 16:45 3 mile off of 5 days of training, and I went from 0-50 in those 5 days, which isn't bad for a 4/8 type like me.