YourBrainsAreDiseased wrote:
Rojo's wejo wrote:Don't be mad because you are slow and can't wrap your head around how easy a 5 min mile is.
Fact still stands.
Now 3/10. Should have quit while you were ahead.
And you're still mad
YourBrainsAreDiseased wrote:
Rojo's wejo wrote:Don't be mad because you are slow and can't wrap your head around how easy a 5 min mile is.
Fact still stands.
Now 3/10. Should have quit while you were ahead.
And you're still mad
whattheheck wrote:
rojo wrote:Tell that to Michael Jordan. The GOAT wasn't able to make the majors in baseball.
You think Bolt could be great at tennis. Are you crazy? Tennis players have incredible quickness side to side.
Bolt isn't a great athlete. He's a great runner. The number of guys that ran for me at Cornell that told me that they started running because they "got cut from baseball, soccer, etc" is a long one.
MJ in the NBA: 3:45 miler. MJ in baseball: 4:05 miler . He was very,very good. Just not close to his level
Correct. Rojo, is somebody mixing something into your cookie batter? Do you realize how amazing MJ's minor league performance was, suddenly taking up baseball at the age of 30, after playing nothing but b ball since he was 18? Did you see him play? He mastered the Walt Hriniak swing immediately and perfectly, even though it probably didn't suit his height, build or abilities. Making the majors would have been very hard for him, but had he started at 18, the sky would have been the limit.
And I said Bolt could be a good tennis player after 2-3 years, not Roger Federer. The world's best tennis players usually start playing full time as young children. James Blake was a multi-sport star who didn't focus entirely on tennis until he was 16, but he never reached no. 1, did he?
And I know fast runners aren't always great athletes. But the very best ones, like Carl Lewis or Bolt, are. It takes great coordination, timing, reflexes and form to be a world champion sprinter. As you well know.
Despite these silly statements, your basic point is correct. It takes an entirely different kind of muscle strength and body build to sprint as opposed to running long distance. I read about a top marathoner who could not jump vertically more than six inches. But soon after he retired and stopped training, he could jump much higher, though his overall fitness level plummeted. Bolt would likely not be able to run longer distances very well without completely changing his training regimen and losing a lot of those heavy muscles.
Rojo's wejo wrote:
YourBrainsAreDiseased wrote:Now 3/10. Should have quit while you were ahead.
And you're still mad
0.5/10
The half point for persistence.
We have no idea if Bolt could be a good tennis player based upon his ability to sprint. He could be a great astronaut for all we know. We don't know and it is irrelevant.
His eye-hand coordination could be terrible.
MJ has no relevance to Bolt either. MJ spent his career playing skill based sports, Bolt has not.
This website is a joke.
What...? wrote:
We have no idea if Bolt could be a good tennis player based upon his ability to sprint. He could be a great astronaut for all we know. We don't know and it is irrelevant.
His eye-hand coordination could be terrible.
MJ has no relevance to Bolt either. MJ spent his career playing skill based sports, Bolt has not.
This website is a joke.
As I said to begin with, the greatest athletes are generally pretty good at all sorts of sports, even those with no close relation to their specialty. I had a friend who was one of the nation's top field-goal kickers in college, and was drafted and in training camp for an NFL team, though ultimately he didn't make the cut. You would not believe the things he could do in all sorts of other unrelated sports, seemingly without trying. Just a very good athlete who decided to specialize in field-goal kicking because he knew he wasn't big or strong or fast enough to play major college football any other way. Obviously we don't know what Bolt would do on a tennis court. But don't sell track and field athletes so short. Herschel Walker was a top sprinter in college. Wilt Chamberlain was a top high jumper.
That's all. Peace, brother.
Wanna see how a world-class 100 man does in a mile:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7541349&page=3
Correct me if I am wrong (and I have not read every page of this thread, so forgive me if I am repeating someone):
Doesn't the fact that Bolt is so well made for sprinting make him LESS likely to do well at the mile? Folks keep mentioning their sub-11 buddy in college who almost broke 5:00 in the mile... well, great, the reason your buddy was *only* sub 11 is that he had too many slow twitch muscle fibers to be a great sprinter, but that helped him break 5:00 in the mile.
The more suited you are for one, the less suited you are for the other, *up to a point*
One thing I have learned on this thread:
There are no fewer than 5 posters on this thread that completely missed their calling in life. They ran a time in the mile as a 95lb middle schooler who never played organized sports that the greatest sprinter on Earth cannot run in the mile.
Instead, they joined the band, I guess. Hopefully, they excelled.
If he could maintain his 200m speed for 4 laps is would be approx.
8 x 20 sec = 160 sec, or a 2:40 mile.
That would be fun to watch.
Using Carl Lewis' 2:16 800m (WTW) as proof Bolt couldn't break 5:00 is weak.
Lewis' 400m PR is :48. Bolt's is :45 - a big difference in speed endurance as moving up. Wariner ran 1:53, way past his prime, showing he'd easily break 5:00. And Bolt for sure couldn't? Wariner's coach said he's a speed-side 400m guy too.
If Bolt trained seriously, he could easily break 2 hours in the marathon. All the calculators agree: http://runcalc.net/#predictor
ttc wrote:
Using Carl Lewis' 2:16 800m (WTW) as proof Bolt couldn't break 5:00 is weak.
Lewis' 400m PR is :48. Bolt's is :45 - a big difference in speed endurance as moving up. Wariner ran 1:53, way past his prime, showing he'd easily break 5:00. And Bolt for sure couldn't? Wariner's coach said he's a speed-side 400m guy too.
I thought it's ridiculous to think Bolt could break 5:00 until I saw the evidence that LR purports "contradicts" that speculation.
Well, apparently Lewis ran 2:10 in the preliminaries, and given that he probably isn't familiar with the event or optimally paced it makes me think that 2:05 could have been in the cards. Bolt seems to have better speed endurance than Lewis.
James Lofton, a pure fast twich NFLer who didn't even train for running and ran by himself in the heat at the end of a long competition, ran 2:03. Which means with just a little bit of training and a good race he could easily be in the 1:55 range.
And despite Mo's 12.98 100m, which frankly did surprise me and I do think he could probably be in the 12-low/mid range, that's really not much objectively "worse" than a 5:00 mile.
Wariner should easily break 5:00, especially in light of his untrained 1:53, but he's a pure long sprinter, not a shorter sprint specialist like Bolt. However, Wariner's time does support Bolt's cause a bit.
Now, some extreme "short sprint" 10-flat guy like John Teeters or Richard Kilty is never gonna sniff 5:00. Bolt on the other hand is more of a natural 200m runner and in his limited 400m experience has shown to have some real ability there. He's not short and stocky but fairly lean and gangly despite his musculature, and has a stride that looks more like David Rudisha's than Maurice Greene's.
I'm not saying I would expect Bolt to break 5:00 in a mile if he went out and just time trialed tomorrow. My guess is that he'd be in the vicinity of 5:30-6:00, perhaps a little faster with good pacing, but that breaking 5:00 with actual training and a good race would be more possible than not.
NBA Jrue Holiday ran 5:03. Bolt with his :45 400m, 100% couldn't break 5:00??
guy on the internet wrote:
Mo's legs are flailing all over the place!
Add It Up wrote:Let's flip the script and have a top miler (3:28 1500= 3:45 mile) run 100m:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJMIwlQB-2812.98, which equals about 5:15 mile performance level. And Farah runs a lot more 100m in training than Bolt runs full mile.
With no mile training: 5:30+
WIth a year of mile training, not sprinting: 4:50-5:10
Great video. Man, Mo looks like a short scrawny little kid there in lane 4.
You can pretty much take anything that rojo says or writes and know that it is incorrect. Consistently betting against rojo would provide a very nice income.
Vegas wrote:
You can pretty much take anything that rojo says or writes and know that it is incorrect. Consistently betting against rojo would provide a very nice income.
That's an excellent point. Rarely has someone been so wrong, so often.
Look, let me start by saying, when Bolt is 100% training for peak performance in the 100/200, he *might* not break 5:00 (it would be damn close though). But...
a) being supremely confident that he would not would be a mistake, and
b) give him literally just a few weeks of training, and I would bet a lot of $ he would break 5:00
But here was the funniest part about Rojo's "logic" -
ROJO WROTE: "Ashton Eaton is an incredible athlete. He's going to be much better at the mile than Bolt. Eaton runs ~4:35 for the mile. So there's no chance Bolt's that fast. So we know it has to be significantly slower than that."
Um.....
a) Bolt is not "an incredible athlete" too??? Maybe not as good an ALL AROUND athlete as Eaton, but the best 100/200 guy EVER, who could have also likely been the greatest 400 guy EVER....isn't "an incredible athlete" ???? He might have been a brilliant LJ'r too. He likely could have been a great decathlete. C'mon rojo.
b) And bringing up Eaton HURTS your point. You guys interviewed him (or reported an interview) and he claimed he did virtually NO endurance/distance training. And after 9 events, he ran a 4:35 mile. He is world class sprinter/LJ'r. A total SPEED-POWER-JUMP-EXPLOSIVE POWER based athlete. With a slight bit of distance training, and going the mile only, be likely breaks 4:30. And plenty of other speed-based decathletes run sub 4:40 miles. Bolt with a touch of mile workouts would break 5:00.
Wejo gave evidence against his own argument.
So Bolt would be somewhere in between Eaton (4:35) and Collins (8:00), yet you are so very sure that he would be under 5:00 with a few weeks of training? If I were you I wouldn't put any "ouch!" money on that one.
Tyrone ReXXXing wrote:
Vegas wrote:You can pretty much take anything that rojo says or writes and know that it is incorrect. Consistently betting against rojo would provide a very nice income.
That's an excellent point. Rarely has someone been so wrong, so often.
Look, let me start by saying, when Bolt is 100% training for peak performance in the 100/200, he *might* not break 5:00 (it would be damn close though). But...
a) being supremely confident that he would not would be a mistake, and
b) give him literally just a few weeks of training, and I would bet a lot of $ he would break 5:00
But here was the funniest part about Rojo's "logic" -
ROJO WROTE: "Ashton Eaton is an incredible athlete. He's going to be much better at the mile than Bolt. Eaton runs ~4:35 for the mile. So there's no chance Bolt's that fast. So we know it has to be significantly slower than that."
Um.....
a) Bolt is not "an incredible athlete" too??? Maybe not as good an ALL AROUND athlete as Eaton, but the best 100/200 guy EVER, who could have also likely been the greatest 400 guy EVER....isn't "an incredible athlete" ???? He might have been a brilliant LJ'r too. He likely could have been a great decathlete. C'mon rojo.
b) And bringing up Eaton HURTS your point. You guys interviewed him (or reported an interview) and he claimed he did virtually NO endurance/distance training. And after 9 events, he ran a 4:35 mile. He is world class sprinter/LJ'r. A total SPEED-POWER-JUMP-EXPLOSIVE POWER based athlete. With a slight bit of distance training, and going the mile only, be likely breaks 4:30. And plenty of other speed-based decathletes run sub 4:40 miles. Bolt with a touch of mile workouts would break 5:00.
Wejo gave evidence against his own argument.
Victor Alexander wrote:
Bolt has run 45' for 400; should be able to run sub 2 for 800. I don't know anyone that can run sub 2 for 800 but can't break 5 for the mile.
That´s because you don´t know Bolt.
Vegas wrote:
You can pretty much take anything that rojo says or writes and know that it is incorrect. Consistently betting against rojo would provide a very nice income.
Truth.
Well well
Jaysuma Saidy Ndure 19,89/200m challange Norways best female distance runner these days over 3258m long course. She beat him with more than 4min. She is just over 10min.........