#@#$@#! - ROWBURY 4:01!!!!

.....Take Regina Jacobs off this list and Miss Rowbury is the 4th fastest at this distance for an American woman . . .

3:57.12 Mary Decker Slaney

3:57.40 Suzy Favor Hamilton

4:00.18 Ruth Wysocki

4:00.35 Regina Jacobs (cheater)

4:01.61 Shannon Rowbury

4:01.79 Diana Richburg

4:02.61 Janice Merrill

4:02.85 Marla Runyan

-------------------------------------

take Suzy off the list...she only ran fast during the EPO era.

If Shannon were in a situation where she needed to cheat to stay competitive, she would quit running without thinking twice. She has too many other things going for her to need to stoop to that level.

what the hell happened to Hall?

Phil K. wrote:

what the hell happened to Hall?

God's will.

great to see someone run so fast, but i hope she isn't planning doing well at the o games - peaking way too early imho

Peaking to soon?

What a joke. This is her 3rd race of this season. I think it' safe to say that she's just getting started.

Go Shannon! You are beyond amazing!!!

The crush I arleady had on her in college is now growing more and more!! Is she single???

I keep looking at this picture of her stretching. It's making my randy.

http://www.letsrun.com/photos/2008/adidas/thumbnails/tnRowbury_ShannonPre-Carson08.JPG

notachance wrote:

You telling me that she drops from 412 to 407 to 401... in three races... legitimately....

NO way... does this actually happen??

Wysocki's 4:00.18 done at '84 Olympic trials bettered her PR by 11 seconds.

Golden Bear wrote:

I really think she's more of a 5000m runner. That is her better event. I think her PR for the 1500m is somewhere around 4:09 while her 5000m is 15:20

I love how people make times for longer races seem more impressive, and use them as reasons to move up. 15:20? please...that's slower then her 4:08.99 1500 pr and makes her less competitive. Since when does running a time that could get almost so close, get you lapped by the best runner in the world make it your event? Maybe if she ran 15flat then you'd start to have a point.

The girl went out to fast, who knows if she's in PR shape or not.

mrr82 wrote:

Since when does running a time that could get almost so close, get you lapped by the best runner in the world make it your event?

Are you parodying stupid (if so, not the best I've seen but not shabby either) or are you just as dumb as you seem to be?

1. The above sentence is unintelligible in multiple ways.

2. In order to lap a 15:20 runner, someone would have to drop about a 14:10. How many women have done that?

3. By your own logic, 15-flat is really no better than 15:20 by global standards.

A 4:09 1500-meter runner is close to a straightaway behind the winner in a fast, championship-caliber race. A 15:20 5000-meter runner is about 300 meters behind the winner under similar conditions. Three times a straightaway is about 300 meters, and a 5K is a little more than three times as far as a 1500.

Hm. Looks like we have a quandary. Oh, wait! I know! Sara Hall should just quit running altogether! Then she can be just as relevant to track and field as mrr82, but with a nicer "bum," a more spiritual bent, and a degree from a school with a name fellows like you can't spell.

Shannon ran amazing!!! Wow that is fast!!!

As for Hall; she is the smart one!!! People sit around and post on a running board about how she is in the wrong event(I totally agree) but the chick has it made. She travels around the world running, gets free gear, health insurance, rides on the pace cars, is coached by one of the best coaches in the world, trains with the some of the most talented runners in the world and gets PAID to do it!!! What a great life!!!

She currently can't make an Olympic team unless she moves up to the 10,000 and be real, she can't beat the top US 10,000 runners in the 1500, Goucher, Flanagan and Rhines. Maybe in 4 yrs she will have developed as a contender to make a team as she certainly has the support to do it.

I prefer the big photo:

http://www.letsrun.com/photos/2008/adidas/images/Rowbury_ShannonPre-Carson08.JPG

Phil K. wrote:

what the hell happened to Hall?

She went out with the "rabbit" Korene Hinds in which Hinds came through the first 200, sub-30. Hinds then came through the 400m in a "ridiculous" 51.1 and Hall was right behind her.

Highly stupid mistake.

EDIT: 61.1 for the first 400m

Steve Austin Powers That Be wrote:Three times a straightaway is about 300 meters, and a 5K is a little more than three times as far as a 1500.

Before you start busting out the furlongs and cubits to compare performances, why don't you use some simpler benchmarks. Hall's primary goal for now is to make the Olympics, yes? She's 2 seconds off the 1500 standard of 4:07, and (if her best is indeed 15:20) 11 seconds off the 5000 standard.

Depending on what the decimals are on her PRs, it might be a pretty close comparison. But a decision to go for the 1500 standard certainly isn't totally incomprehensible, viewed in that light.

and... wrote:

.....Take Regina Jacobs off this list and Miss Rowbury is the 4th fastest at this distance for an American woman . . .

3:57.12 Mary Decker Slaney

3:57.40 Suzy Favor Hamilton

4:00.18 Ruth Wysocki

4:00.35 Regina Jacobs (cheater)

4:01.61 Shannon Rowbury

4:01.79 Diana Richburg

4:02.61 Janice Merrill

4:02.85 Marla Runyan

-------------------------------------

take Suzy off the list...she only ran fast during the EPO era.

Regina Jacobs went in to her "nutrition" coach after settuing her PR and said, "Doc! You gotta help me! While I'm happy with the great times, I think these pills you've prescribed are causing hair to grow on my chest." The pensive doctor considered the moment and replied, "how much hair and how far down does it grow?" Ms. Jacobs responded, "alot of hair and it goes all the way down to my dick!"

hold the phone wrote:

Before you start busting out the furlongs and cubits to compare performances, why don't you use some simpler benchmarks. Hall's primary goal for now is to make the Olympics, yes? She's 2 seconds off the 1500 standard of 4:07, and (if her best is indeed 15:20) 11 seconds off the 5000 standard.

Depending on what the decimals are on her PRs, it might be a pretty close comparison. But a decision to go for the 1500 standard certainly isn't totally incomprehensible, viewed in that light.

Agreed.

But her foolishly going out with Korene Hinds' absurd pace (61.1) was quite telling . . .

ah way too early to be running this fast. maybe if this was trials, but it is mid may only - stupid ncaa collegiate system influences north american training