The Women’s Events are WEAK: that explains Sifan Hassan’s Triple medals

Doping is not relevant here. Unless Hassan is the only doper. Why do you have tunnel vision? The triple was made easier by the overall weakness of the women which meant the races were slowish (for Hassan) and easier to recover from, thus enabling a triple, which was not so challenging for her, as her recovery from the races was easier due to them being relatively slow for her. This is rudimentary stuff.

The 5k was closed in 57 seconds. Chebet ran her last 600m in 1:28 (faster than what Keely ran for the last 600m in her 800m win).

You've never raced if you think running an even paced "fast time" is easier on your body than a constantly changing pace, where your stride is frequently chopped, and you have to close the last 600m at basically 800m race pace.

You should probably step out of that basement and try it sometime.

Yes slowish tactical races made it easier! But that was not the original message of your post!

You said it was weak! WEAK! NOT EASIER!

ALMOST ALL CHAMPIONSHIP RACES ARE RELATIVELY SLOW AT THE 5K AND 10K.

YOU FORGET TO MENTION THIS LITTLE DETAIL

In other words every olympic runner has the benefit of usually running in fairly slow 5Ks and 10Ks

How many of them have double back and ran the marathon?

And how many of them have won it?

And how many of them have done it by setting an Olympic record?

Nothing was weak about it, The competition was not weak, the conditions were not weak,...

I am not sure I can lower myself to address such mediocre minds. The weakness and “easier” are inextricably intertwined. I addressed both when I said in the opening post “Imagine Galen in his prime running 13:15, 28:22 and 2:15:18 to win Bronze, Bronze and Gold.” This is so elementary yet many of you cannot grasp it. So it is pointless to discusss it.

Your argument is weak, and accusing those who disagree with you having low IQs is symptomatic of your inability to make your point.

First, your "Galen" hypo is specious. You're picking times that are too slow. In the 10,000, the WA point value of Hassan's 30:44 time corresponds to 27:12 in the men's event. Her 14:30 in the 5,000 corresponds to 12:56. Her 2:22:55 corresponds to 2:07:17 on the men's side.

While your argument about women's fields being weak may or may not make sense in the abstract, in this case it's bunk. I don't think there's much of a case to be made that East African women aren't participating in distance running, and these fields were stacked.

All three of these races featured the world record holder in their field, with the 5000 containing the three fastest competitors ever. The fact that she ran these times in strategic races in hotter than optimal conditions makes them harder, not easier.

There isn't much depth on the world side for the women. You have Kenyans and Ethiopians still way ahead of everyone else, much like the men were a decade ago. But a lot of countries have caught up to the east african men but not yet for the women. When you only have 3 Kenyans and 3 Ethiopians, there's a real chance a few of them have a bad day and someone significantly slower can slide up. But that is not the case for why Sifan Hassan is medaling, she is just as fast as anyone from anywhere. She's like 3rd or 4th all-time in 10k, 2nd all-time in marathon, and pretty high up on the 5,000 list as well, and 1500m. She's legit and not medaling due to any lack of competition, no one is ever blowing her doors off.

It makes no sense to complain about depth of a race where the holders of the top three times in history are competing, as in the 5000, or one that has the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 6th and 7th of all time, as in the 10,000, or a Marathon in which 6 or 7 women have run under 2:18.

You really have no clue. In what world is a 30:44, which is 1:38 slower than Hassan’s 29:06, worth a 27:12 for a man? So what is Hassan’s 29:06 worth? I do not care about WA points because they are meaningless, as evidenced by your absurd example. The reason I chose the times in the opening post is because they were the equivalent in terms of being slower than their respective personal bests, 17 seconds at 5000m, 1:38 at 10000m and 9:11 in the marathon. You show that you are a moron.

In an era when the men's 1500 was won in 3:50 two Olympiads ago, nobody should be talking about weakness in women's Olympic finals.

The greatest joke of a generation in running came from a men's field.

Hassan's 29:06 is the equivalent of 26.16 on the men's side, as befits a time that is a few seconds short of WR.

Hassan beat the Marathon world record holder to win that Marathon title. Extrapolating minutes and seconds from the PB of a male B-lister like Galen makes no sense whatsoever.

OK so you can run 29:06 and it is worth the same as 26:16, which must mean that the women’s world record of 28:54 gets you more WA points than the men’s, and furthermore you can run 30:44, which is 1:50 off the women’s world record and it is worth 27:12, which is only 1:01 off the men’s world record. So this proves the weakness of the women overall and also shows how absurd it is to place any stock in the WA point system.

What a horrible take

It is litmus test in terms of who can think with rigorous analysis and who cannot. You know where you are categorized, as most of you are.

She outkicked a 2:11 marathoner in the last 400 meters of the race, AFTER running 5k and 10k heats and finals all week long. I've never seen a tougher competitor.

I missed the 10K heat. How fast did she have to run that one?

The Men's WR gets you 1305 points. The women's gets you 1300. You just keep digging yourself deeper because your "X second differential from Galen Rupp's PB" calculation doesn't mean anything.