Rupp capable of 12'45 ???

Also, one more quick point...if ventolin's calculator is so bad, why has no one on here ever tried to improve it?? I see alot of hate and rejection, yet no one ever comes up with a "better" calculator for predicting times. If you all think it's so bad, why don't you try being innovators instead of imbeciles. Except there's one problem, ventolin's calculator is already very adequate, so why don't all you haters take a hike and leave the real running discussion to more brilliant minds.

A Duck wrote:

Simons15 wrote:

Lol I just read thru this whole post, and I am still utterly confused as to why ventolin gets so much hate on here. From what I see, his predictons are always pretty damn accurate and his lines of fit are not outrageous by any means. I could definitely see Rupp going sub 12:50 this year, the man is in phenomenal shape. I would say 26:35 is not a stretch either, he already went 26:48 in a race that I believe he could have gone 4-5 seconds faster in. And he's in better shape this year, no doubt. Keep your posts coming ventolin, after all they're more sensible than 99.9% of the other garbage posts that frequent letsrun.

Well put.

And thank you sir. I take pride in my communication skills :)

Or ma'am....lmao

A Duck wrote:

Simons15 wrote:

Lol I just read thru this whole post, and I am still utterly confused as to why ventolin gets so much hate on here. From what I see, his predictons are always pretty damn accurate and his lines of fit are not outrageous by any means. I could definitely see Rupp going sub 12:50 this year, the man is in phenomenal shape. I would say 26:35 is not a stretch either, he already went 26:48 in a race that I believe he could have gone 4-5 seconds faster in. And he's in better shape this year, no doubt. Keep your posts coming ventolin, after all they're more sensible than 99.9% of the other garbage posts that frequent letsrun.

Well put.

Yes, you would say "well put" to anybody who obsequiously got down on his knees for Galen. Ventolin is a fanboy of Galen's, and so you're scratching each other's back. Galen will never break 12:55, so talk of 12:45 is just nonsense.

Warren Weber wrote:Yes, you would say "well put" to anybody who obsequiously got down on his knees for Galen. Ventolin is a fanboy of Galen's, and so you're scratching each other's back. Galen will never break 12:55, so talk of 12:45 is just nonsense.

i'm no "fanboy"

i admire/respect huge talent

bernie was rested & had got his speed back with 53+ in 3'34 & he was fully rested here

rupp had to have exceptional speed to outkick him in a slow race

not only, do i believe rupp now has at worst 3'32 speed, he is also legit contender for gold

12'55 ???

drivel

he's gotta be 5 - 10s quicker now

he has found speed

Agreed Ventolin. I don't know about a gold medal, but everyone counting Rupp off the podium had better do a gut check. The kid is coming into form. Where's Cliff Clavin/Ryan Grote/King Troll? To have said that Rupp's lifetime PR will be that 12:58 he ran while training through reveals sheer ignorance.

Perhaps the most stupid post of the last year--he has no chance-you have really no clue about distance running to make a comment like that.

formula wrote:

Well actually wrote: seriously because (oooh) it comes from a formula.

Yes, Rupp would have to take a special formula run 12'45

12 feet 45 inches is nothing to a 10K guy.

Simons15 wrote:

Lol I just read thru this whole post, and I am still utterly confused as to why ventolin gets so much hate on here. From what I see, his predictons are always pretty damn accurate and his lines of fit are not outrageous by any means. I could definitely see Rupp going sub 12:50 this year, the man is in phenomenal shape. I would say 26:35 is not a stretch either, he already went 26:48 in a race that I believe he could have gone 4-5 seconds faster in. And he's in better shape this year, no doubt. Keep your posts coming ventolin, after all they're more sensible than 99.9% of the other garbage posts that frequent letsrun.

Here are a few examples of why he gets ridiculed. He has claimed:

- The track in Rieti is faster because of the oxygen from the surrounding trees

- Kip Keino was capable of 3:27 for 1500 meters

- He routinely "awards" people several seconds faster than their pr's based on his perception of imperfect pacing, rabbitting, the wind, etc. Even when people have had years of rabbitted European attempts, he will claim they could have run faster. We're not talking attempts are rare distances, think of the guys who had long careers competing on the European circuit. Somehow those guys just never got in the perfect race. Yeah right. They ran what they ran.

- His calculator is garbage for predicting performance. For example, it was completely wrong for Mo Farah's 10,000 last year.

There are others, this is just what I remember off the top of my head. Anyone else remember specifics?

In addition to those listed above, his consistent inability to civilly debate with others. He constantly calls names.

i suggest you go look at the vids of webb's 1'43.8 & 3'46.9 & look at the background

he beat ryun by 3s that day

ryun not capable of 3'30 on synthetic track at sea-level that day ???

idiot

very few races are close to perfect pace

even hicham's 3'26.00wr had shit time at bell of 2'32.8 ( 3'28.4 pace ) & he ran that event quicker & more often than any elite 1500 guy in hx

only komen's 7'20 has come close to even pace

best even pace 5k was komen's 12'39 & even that had a slow km in there

kennster's 26'17wr is acceptable with 13'09/13'08 splits, but even that had some significant lap variations

even pace is what you aspire to, but there have only been a handful in hx

idiot

no one had a clue about mo at the time except his own camp - he came into it with 27'28pb

moron

the calculator predicted rupp's 3'34 spot on, when he had 3'39pb before

what are your comments on that ???

points you've quoted are drivel

post more drivel please

Alive and unwell...as "Warren Weber" etc..

Sagarin wrote:

Where's Cliff Clavin/Ryan Grote/King Troll?

ventolin^3 wrote:

?????? wrote:- The track in Rieti is faster because of the oxygen from the surrounding trees

i suggest you go look at the vids of webb's 1'43.8 & 3'46.9 & look at the background

ROFL!!! Ventolin c'mon man. There's no way you really believe that.

Look at how many trees are in the background of El G's 1500 world record!

Or Bolt's 100 in Beijing!

Just great air quality in one of the most polluted cities in the world!

I don't think we need to be reminded of the Brussels stadium either. You know how many trees are growing there!

Fluffy wrote:ROFL!!! Ventolin c'mon man. There's no way you really believe that.

Look at how many trees are in the background of El G's 1500 world record!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyoRtYr8mdc

he split 2'46.34 in that wr

in rieti in '02 he split 2'44.75 !!!

( he coudn't hold onto it & "faded" to 3'26.96 (!?) as he admitted he lost concentration as had been out in front alone for over 500m )

that's a big difference

Or Bolt's 100 in Beijing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qslbf8L9nl0

Just great air quality in one of the most polluted cities in the world!

we are talking primarily of distance races, but of course you remember safa running 9.74wr in rieti

I don't think we need to be reminded of the Brussels stadium either. You know how many trees are growing there!

brussels times are more to do with it being widest track in the world at ?122m diameter compared to 116m for most every other track

there is much less centripetal force on the curves compared to others, i'd figure worth about 0.1s/curve

( why blake ran 19.26 on it - for sprinters, centripetal effects are more pronounced because of much higher speed affecting v^2/r

blake wouda been more like 19.45 on standard track )

for a 1'43 there, i'd estimate ~ 1'43.4 standard track

for a 3'30 there, i'd estimate ~ 3'30.7 standard track

for a 13'00 there, i'd estimate ~ 13'02.5 standard track

for a 27'00 there, i'd estimate ~ 27'05.0 standard track

Trees block wind.

The added amount of birds and insects giving off CO2 counterbalances any advantages in O2 production.

Trees block wind. Wind slows times for distances above 200m. This is the most overlooked aspect of fast running performances in the sport.

Ventolin the following question has nothing to do with the previous debate we just had but i'm really curious. Do you like me? You never call me a moron or say I post drivel.

Splish Splash wrote:Trees block wind

very good

The added amount of birds and insects giving off CO2 counterbalances any advantages in O2 production

yes

counterbalances to what extent ?

10%? 25%? 50%? 100%? 200%???

Trees block wind. Wind slows times for distances above 200m. This is the most overlooked aspect of fast running performances in the sport.

err...

most modern stadia are well enclosed

the stands do all the wind blocking anyone needs

bump

now will finally posters believe there are 1/2 dozen+ guys capable of running 12'45 given "perfect" pace/conditions/etc

& remember, mo/rupp/bernie weren't in paris & i doubt anyone doesn't believe they woudn't been "right there" to quote the immortal sal

Well done, ventolin. You may not be good at making friends, but you did write a nifty little algorithm.