i believe that makes her the 3rd fastest american.
i believe that makes her the 3rd fastest american.
2nd fastest. Drugenia's record shouldn't count.
Go Jen!!
PRs for Pavey and K. Smith as well.
Pavey 14.39! Finished ahead of all the top africans bar defar and dibaba. Only 10 seconds off Radcliffes british record.
Wow, who'd have thought Rhines would go that fast?
Is she the second best current US women's distance runner? Sub-15 5,000 and sub-2:30 marathon, two-time Olympian. I vote yes.
To think I so naively cheered for Regina when she broke that record in Maine...I still feel like such a fool. I wish Regina's records could be taken away; it's so unfair. What a cheat!
I hope Rhines or Kastor can break this record. These are are the runners who work hard and honestly and truly deserve records.
what makes you think they're clean?
uh, yeah, so . . . wrote:
what makes you think they're clean?
So, I guess you're pretty much done as a track spectator? If the first thought that comes to a person's mind when someone improves is that it must be drugs, why is that person even reading the results anymore? Is it the mystery of what drug they're on? Betting on when they'll be caught? That seems like pretty thin fare compared to the enjoyment of athletic excellence.
Really, I'm not trying to be critical of "yeah", I just don't see why someone who thinks like this is even on a running board anymore. If I thought that way, I'd find another sport to follow. Which, of course, is why track and field is in such danger from druggies driving away the audience. But an audience of people betting on which one is on drugs just seems weird to me.
While I've never been world-class, or even local-class, I do know that most of my PRs have come in bursts, often after a plateau. And I was still setting PRS in my 30's. So I can still get excited over Rhines' improvement, and be disappointed if her (or anyone's) progress is due to drugs. But I don't jump to that conclusion in the first hours after reading the results.
this is a great reflection on Team USA CA, go Mammoth!
i don't necessarily think they're dirty. i just get really sick of people thinking that pretty blonds are always clean and the non-whites/not as attractive people are dirty. long before regina EVER tested positive people took her to task. made no apologies for it. now that some pretty white people are having success, everyone seems to defend them. lance, floyd, jenny rhines, warriner, doesn't matter. "pretty blonds don't take drugs" seems to be the sentiment.
oh, yeah, i'm a pretty blond. i'm really clean, btw.
Pavey's due to run in Great North Run (half marathon) on 1 October. It's her first move up in distance so could be quite interesting.
uh, yeah, so . . . wrote:
lance, floyd, jenny rhines, warriner, doesn't matter. "pretty blonds don't take drugs" seems to be the sentiment.
oh, yeah, i'm a pretty blond. i'm really clean, btw.
Lance and Wariner are blond?
sure, dark blond. gets all highlited when it grows out.
Californian wrote:
uh, yeah, so . . . wrote:lance, floyd, jenny rhines, warriner, doesn't matter. "pretty blonds don't take drugs" seems to be the sentiment.
oh, yeah, i'm a pretty blond. i'm really clean, btw.
Lance and Wariner are blond?
Floyd is pretty?
Regarding Jo Pavey, what do people think she can run for the Half Marathon - Any guess's?
Humbuggy wrote:
Floyd is pretty?
His wife thinks so.
Just Wondering wrote:
Regarding Jo Pavey, what do people think she can run for the Half Marathon - Any guess's?
hmm she has run very few 10k races so it could be hard for her making such a big step up in distance. I think she ran a 10k in 32 minutes on the roads. I think she could do about 69/70 minutes.
cockwhorejessicasimpson wrote:
rhines is sailin on the EPO cloud
The opinion of someone whose name includes the word cockwhore should be automatically dismissed as tripe.
yes she ran 32.34 on the road in 2004 when her best 5k track time was 14:49 so 69/70 looks a good estimate, but maybe she will surprise us. A lot depends on the weather as its not an out and back course.