seasoned ranker wrote:
so inconsistent wrote:
So winning doesn't matter now that you realize how miserable Farah's record against Kipchoge was? Now you fall back on Farah's medals and denigrate Kipchoge simply because he was washed up by the time Mo really became successful? Keep in mind that Farah was completely irrelevant during the same period that Kipchoge was contending for medals against all-time greats.
When did I ever say winning doesn't matter? Why are you trying to make everything one dimensional when there are a lot of factors in play on what makes a runner better? Are you only able to comprehend one thing?
Do you think Selemon Barega, Hagos Gebrhiwet, Dejen Gebremeskel, Isiah Koech, Yenew Alamirew, Thomas Longosiwa and John Kipkoech are better than Mo Farah? Times are all that matter, right?
You implied it by blowing off the fact that Kipchoge has a phenomenal win/loss record vs Farah. You said earlier that Mo is better than Kipchoge on the track. It's clear that the results of their head-to-head races don't matter to you.
If runner A runs 12:46 and runner B runs 12:53, runner A is better. If runner B beats runner A in a tactical championship race, runner A is still better. Finishing time actually matters. It amazes me you think there's an argument to be made that Farah > Komen.