Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
T&F Analyst
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/6/2012 10:23PM - in reply to does this make sense? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

does this make sense? wrote:

[quote]T&F Analyst wrote:

The WR is 3:43. How is it 24 secs off his PR? Can you please focking tell me that? He's within 8 secs of his own PR. Not bad for April.


Does this really make sense to you? You're telling me that the WR for the 1500 is the same as the WR for the mile. And this makes sense in your mind?[/quote

Ok Einstein, there is very little difference between the 1600 and mile - about 1.3secs. So if you can explain to me what all the fuss is about?
does this make sense?
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/6/2012 10:38PM - in reply to T&F Analyst Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

T&F Analyst wrote:

Ok Einstein, there is very little difference between the 1600 and mile - about 1.3secs. So if you can explain to me what all the fuss is about?


Ok. My bad. I thought you were being serious. Never mind. When you started to pretend that you didn't know that the race is 1500m, not 1600m, you made it obvious to me, though.
The PUNISHA
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 12:18AM - in reply to T&F Analyst Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

T&F Analyst wrote:

Ok Einstein, there is very little difference between the 1600 and mile - about 1.3secs. So if you can explain to me what all the fuss is about?


0.000002/10
critic 100
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 4:34AM - in reply to lukesteer93 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I think Webb should roll over and retire. He breaks every bodies heart. Webb... let it go...
MikeM
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 8:14AM - in reply to critic 100 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
This just really confirms that Webb should not have left Salazar. When he was with him he was running well across the board and competitive with the big boys. I realize he was doing more strength work that his other coaches had him doing, but that was most likely why he was running so well. Webb left Salazar b/c he rean like 4:00 indoors. Now he can't even run that outdoors currently. Go back to Salazar and trust what he is doing.
holbythebear
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 8:15AM - in reply to critic 100 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Anyone else think he might be overtraining? No way he has the strength to beat Rupp in a 5k not too long ago, then run a 3:54 1500 without something seriously wrong. I hear people say it was a workout. Is he training in Gainsville? If not, this was not a pure workout and this should be worrying. I hope his coach knows that it takes a really long time to recover from overtraining.
all that hair weighs him down
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 8:27AM - in reply to holbythebear Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
what is the NCAA 1500 standard this year?
Trial A-3:39
TrialsB-3:43


I think I hear the fat lady is singing!!!
been around ya' know
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 8:30AM - in reply to lukesteer93 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I feel real bad for Robby Andrews. It has to be uncomfortable as hell to have Webb as his trainning partner.

I don't think Webb has any shot at making the Olympic trials let alone the Olympics.
gorney
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 12:01PM - in reply to lukesteer93 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
It reminds me of the problems Jim Ryun had before the 1972 Olympic Trials. He would run some horrible races, including a 4:17 mile, but then Ryun ran a 3:52 mile in Toronto. Webb seems strangely capable of that.
Montlake Mike
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 12:56PM - in reply to gorney Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

gorney wrote:

It reminds me of the problems Jim Ryun had before the 1972 Olympic Trials. He would run some horrible races, including a 4:17 mile, but then Ryun ran a 3:52 mile in Toronto. Webb seems strangely capable of that.


Right now Webb is not even close to where Ryun was in 72. By the OG, Ryun was most definitely in the "running" for a medal in the 1500 had he not fallen. Unless there is miraculous change in the truest sense of the word, Webb has no chance at the WC level.
Crayola
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 12:56PM - in reply to Been There, Done That Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Been There, Done That wrote:

[quote]viginsider wrote:

Webb did a tough cut down track workout this morning. Idea was to "race" on tired legs today. Mission accomplished.


Doesn't matter. An athlete with his pedigree should at least be able to go 3:43, 1:49 after an AM workout.[/quote]

Do you know what pedigree means?
Been There, Done That
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 1:06PM - in reply to Crayola Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Crayola wrote:

[quote]Been There, Done That wrote:

[quote]viginsider wrote:

Webb did a tough cut down track workout this morning. Idea was to "race" on tired legs today. Mission accomplished.


Doesn't matter. An athlete with his pedigree should at least be able to go 3:43, 1:49 after an AM workout.[/quote]

Do you know what pedigree means?[/quote]

Yes, I know what pedigree means. But evidently you don't.
pedigree
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 1:12PM - in reply to Been There, Done That Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
>_<

Yeah, didn't you know, Webb's parents were olympians... his grandad too
Academician
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 1:22PM - in reply to pedigree Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

pedigree wrote:

>_<

Yeah, didn't you know, Webb's parents were olympians... his grandad too


The word can also be used to refer to a person's performance history, not necessarily there lineage.
spellerofwords
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 1:44PM - in reply to Academician Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Academician? Even Phoenix grads can distinguish "their" from "there" or "they're..."
bandwagon time
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 1:58PM - in reply to spellerofwords Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Ive been saying he was done since 2009, when are goofs going to stop dreaming???
joe9090
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 2:15PM - in reply to bandwagon time Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
We still have Centos, who could be at least as good as Spivey was a quarter century ago. The next Steve Scott and Jim Ryun have not arrived yet. Webb really just had 3 or 4 really good years.
Correction Noted
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 2:41PM - in reply to Academician Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Academician wrote:

[quote]pedigree wrote:

>_<

Yeah, didn't you know, Webb's parents were olympians... his grandad too


The word can also be used to refer to a person's performance history, not necessarily there lineage.[/quote]

not necessarily they are lineage.
joecrunner
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 3:17PM - in reply to Correction Noted Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
3:54 is equal to 1:54 in performance...interesting.
joe9090
RE: 3:54 Webb? Really? 4/7/2012 3:50PM - in reply to joecrunner Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
It is either a D2 or D3 time. Those would be decent times for any Rutgers distance runner. Actually, 1:54 is slow for even Rutgers.
Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |