Bummed for him he didn't go 7:29.99 - you know he's thinking he could have run ~0.2 seconds quicker!
Bummed for him he didn't go 7:29.99 - you know he's thinking he could have run ~0.2 seconds quicker!
"I really wish I could have watched this. I think Flotrack is ruining the sport."
-you could have watched it, you cheap POS. i wish i could drive an F430...ferrari is ruining driving. idiot.
Pretty good
masked marauder wrote:
"I really wish I could have watched this. I think Flotrack is ruining the sport."
-you could have watched it, you cheap POS. i wish i could drive an F430...ferrari is ruining driving. idiot.
In what way was Flotrack's coverage anything like a Ferrari?
Mush wrote:
I really wish I could have watched this. I think Flotrack is ruining the sport.
You're a nonsense. Sort your life out.
will they put the race on replay?
masked marauder wrote:
"I really wish I could have watched this. I think Flotrack is ruining the sport."
-you could have watched it, you cheap POS. i wish i could drive an F430...ferrari is ruining driving. idiot.
Yeah, but Ferrari didn't buy the rights to every car in the entire world and then charge the usual Ferrari price to anyone. Last time I checked I can still CHOOSE to buy a Honda if I want.
This meet wouldn't have been broadcast in the U.S. w/out Flotrack anyway.
Mush wrote:
I really wish I could have watched this. I think Flotrack is ruining the sport.
is itunes ruining music because they make you pay for songs?
Mush wrote:
I really wish I could have watched this. I think Flotrack is ruining the sport.
rupp-certified saladbar wrote:
It's called "TUEing."
Getting the meds just right. Med science is make progress.
Good point. The Ferrari analogy was terrible. It is sad that Flotrack has to charge $20 FREAKING DOLLARS to watch the meet!!!!!!!!!!
word on the street wrote:
1 Galen Rupp 86 USA 7:30.16 WL MR PB
What an awesome run! I am very impressed.
Mush wrote:
I really wish I could have watched this. I think Flotrack is ruining the sport.
Flotrack is definitely ruining the coverage of the sport.
The free internet gives us the chance to come out of the dark ages and parochial corporate coverage. FT is trying to insure the crappy coverage continues forever.
A better solution would be to provide their coverage, but with no restrictions on anyone else doing the same. Service should be based on value, not exclusionary practices.
That equates to a 7:58 2mile. Unbelievable.....and it was done indoors.
Princeton U. Distance wrote:
That equates to a 7:58 2mile. Unbelievable.....and it was done indoors.
No it doesn't.
So Komen Runs 7:20 OUTSIDE and is widely accepted as a massive user of performance enhancers. Rupp runs ~9 seconds slower indoors, and we no one brings "it" up here? lolololol
It was indeed brought up. The posts questions whether something is enhancing performance have been perma-deleted.
7:30 for a 3k is exactly 30 second 200s, so no it is not sub 8 for the 2mile. It equates to 8:00 for 3200, so roughly 8:02-8:03 for 2miles
It must have been a ploy
The Waterboy wrote:
It must have been a ploy
^Nice!
IAAF tables give it as right on the cusp of 8:04/05 for two miles.