Craig Virgin and Fam have interesting comments on Rupp and NOPe

My thoughts on this whole thread without reading too much of it...

NOP is not doing anything the general public does not know about, and that is why nobody has released everything. As people have said, NDAs don't hold for illegal activities so nobody has any incentive to not rat and EVERY incentive to do so - I certainly would rat if I could. Anyway, I think that NOP is just using what we are aware of, which is quite the laundry list, but is nothing technically 'illegal.' I'm surprised that Rupp's post-race WO has ignited so much controversy.

I think it's a good hypothesis that he ran 99% instead of 100% in the race (or something like that) because he anticipated the workout, and thus could run a bit better in the WO. Even so, the workout IS impressive, but not insane.

I experienced similar psychological effects when I was combining very hard races and workouts, or just a workout itself - let me tell one story about that because it's interesting. Once, way back when, did a 8 x 1k workout on a crappy track, hitting 3:13s (as a target). I hit everything 3:09-3:12 for the first six, and even though I went as hard as I could for the 7th, I ran something like 3:20. For the 8th I returned to 3:13 or so and averaged 3:13 overall. My point is that the psychological barrier of having another rep can affect performance (and could've affected Rupp, and potentially is a reason for why he ran 4:01 afterwards).

That's sort of a conspiracy though and I think Rupp is just in good shape. As many people have said, it's not insane given what he ran.

How many times was Lemond tested? He beat guys who admitted to doping. How many time was Virgin tested? He was beating dopers too.

Greg lemon wrote:

For years Greg Lemond raised suspicions about Lance Armstrong and people said it was sour grapes. Now Lemond is drinking wine.

Also, how many time was Lance Armstrong tested and how many time did he test positive?

llort wrote:

How many times was Lemond tested? He beat guys who admitted to doping. How many time was Virgin tested? He was beating dopers too.

Greg lemon wrote:

For years Greg Lemond raised suspicions about Lance Armstrong and people said it was sour grapes. Now Lemond is drinking wine.

Also, how many time was Lance Armstrong tested and how many time did he test positive?

Somehow in that little mind of yours, in an imaginary world filled with unicorns and pixies, your comment is relevant to something.

Here in the real world it does not seem to be relevant to anything.

I've been able to handle some really tough workouts with lots of volume. Have done 10 x mile on the track with 2 min rest at 4:55s.

Could I run a PR 2 mile(8:50s), then do 4 x 1600m @ 4:45(my 10k pace), followed by another 4:25??

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

I could do that without the 2 mile PR race though.

Not to mention the 15 minute rest????? I think it's sketchy as hell.

yep, spot on. if you quit focusing on the times he ran and just take the workout for what it is, it's just one hell of a quality day.

kijhjj wrote:

is there any serious runner on lrc who couldn't do this workout:

___

Two mile PR

rest an hour

4 x mile at 10k pace

1 x mile at 3k pace, 12 seconds off his one mile PR

___

That is a tough day, but I could probably do that without much strain, and I run only 50 mpw and am not that talented. A guy running 100 mpw and has world class talent - that's probably not a huge workout.

ITBS wrote:

I've been able to handle some really tough workouts with lots of volume. Have done 10 x mile on the track with 2 min rest at 4:55s.

Could I run a PR 2 mile(8:50s), then do 4 x 1600m @ 4:45(my 10k pace), followed by another 4:25??

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

I could do that without the 2 mile PR race though.

Not to mention the 15 minute rest????? I think it's sketchy as hell.

Long ago Did 5 x 1600 at 4:20 - 4:24 w/ 1 lap jog rest between.

Then 10 minute run.

Then 7 laps at 13:40 pace controlled. Told to stop at 7 with a handful of other 13:30-13:50 runners.

Not world beaters, just another tough workout on the farm long ago now. Can Galen do a helluva lot better than that? He better be able to. He ran 10k averaging faster pace than we could race for 5k.

ITBS wrote:

I've been able to handle some really tough workouts with lots of volume. Have done 10 x mile on the track with 2 min rest at 4:55s.

Could I run a PR 2 mile(8:50s), then do 4 x 1600m @ 4:45(my 10k pace), followed by another 4:25??

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

I could do that without the 2 mile PR race though.

Not to mention the 15 minute rest????? I think it's sketchy as hell.

You are light years from Rupp's level. You yahoo's don't understand you can't simply scale down Rupp's post-race workout based on your 2 mile PR. You don't have Rupp's volume of training, and you don't have Rupp's ability to recover.

My 10k PR is 2 minutes slower than Rupp and my 2 mile is about 25 seconds slower. I could not have done Rupp's 5x1600 following my 2 mile PR, but I could have done 3x1600 with the last 1600 under 4:15. Your logic is flawed if you think that we can match Rupp's volume.

ITBS wrote:

I've been able to handle some really tough workouts with lots of volume. Have done 10 x mile on the track with 2 min rest at 4:55s.

Could I run a PR 2 mile(8:50s), then do 4 x 1600m @ 4:45(my 10k pace), followed by another 4:25??

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

I could do that without the 2 mile PR race though.

Not to mention the 15 minute rest????? I think it's sketchy as hell.

I think almost all of the good runners on this site agree that what Rupp did is insanely difficult. Those calling it an average elite workout are not in the know.

1. Rupp ran faster at Stockholm last year when he went 7:30.16, which converts to about an 8:05.87 depending on the calculator.

2. The more fit you get, the faster you clear lactate.

3. If you clear lactate sooner, you'll be able to run fast again sooner.

4. Swimmer's and cyclists do workouts before and/or after "B" level races all the time.

5. Just because there was a roof was over his head doesn't really mean it was nearly a WR. Komen's 7:20 is the WR, and that converts to about 12 seconds faster than Rupp ran.

6. I have to give NOP the benefit of the doubt; someone has to be the fastest and right now it seems to be them, big deal.

7. Doping or not, doing that workout after the race seems "greedy" in an immature sense more than it looks suspicious. It's hard to understand what the point of such a workout can be in late January.

8. Good for Salazar and Rupp, they probably were thinking "let's give them something to talk about."

9. Bonnie Raitt is a pretty solid guitar player...for a girl.

Salazar helped pace lance Armstrong to a 2:40 finish in a full marathon several years back. They must have talked performance enhancement techniques at some point

Jools Holland wrote:

tuioq wrote:

Salazar worked with Armstrong.

and Mary Slaney

Si Rupp Puede wrote:

7. Doping or not, doing that workout after the race seems "greedy" in an immature sense more than it looks suspicious. It's hard to understand what the point of such a workout can be in late January.

It's not the LE way, but let's give Rupp the benefit of the doubt for a second.

It's possible that he really is fitter than ever, but not sharp enough to really go deep into the well. Then maybe an 8:07 is as fast as he can run right now, so Salazar had him do more strength-type work following the race to ensure that Rupp was throughly wrung out.

We'll get an answer at world indoor.

If Rupp is not on peds I wonder what would happen if he was on epo or something. Also found this. Vid of lance competing in a tri as a teenager. Just click "play it" on the left of screen

http://lancearmstrong.me/triathlon/87_88_89.cfm?thumbnail=qLcwsAquN2Y

If its true then its true wrote:

Okay can we all understand and the actual workout and quit making up false facts:

2 mile 8:07

15 min rest

1600 4:21

3 min rest

1600 4:20

2:45 rest

1600 4:20

3:00 rest

1600 4:16

4 min rest

Mile 4:01

I sat and hit the split watch during the live feed.

I think it's interesting to reconceptualize this workout as being a little over 21 minutes of running at 10k pace with a fast final interval. I haven't made up my mind yet as to whether that's significant. 5x4 minutes at 10k pace sounds a lot less daunting to me than 5xmile at 10k pace because my 10k pace is barely under 5:30 pace. The former sounds like a moderate session that I would do early season that wouldn't be too taxing. The latter sounds more like something that would be an "A" workout for the week; something I would want to be sure I have time to recover from afterwards.

The Rocket. wrote:

ITBS wrote:

I've been able to handle some really tough workouts with lots of volume. Have done 10 x mile on the track with 2 min rest at 4:55s.

Could I run a PR 2 mile(8:50s), then do 4 x 1600m @ 4:45(my 10k pace), followed by another 4:25??

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

I could do that without the 2 mile PR race though.

Not to mention the 15 minute rest????? I think it's sketchy as hell.

I think almost all of the good runners on this site agree that what Rupp did is insanely difficult. Those calling it an average elite workout are not in the know.

I don't think it's that people are saying it's average, meaning that it's not tough. Any runner who ran at the D1 college level or post collegiately knows that their "average" hard workout was tough, maybe even worrisom in the hours leading into it.

That being said, the workout has to be thought of relative to Rupp, not ourselves. For example, I did workouts geared towards at 13:40 5K. That was the goal of my workout. People who could run a 17:45 5K might have thought my workouts were insane if they didn't have a much info on what other guys were doing that were training for a 13:20 or 13:40 5K.

But Rupp, hell he closed out his first 10,000 his freshman year under 14:00. Something like 13:56 or 13:58 to run 28:15. He ran that alone, and then went out for a workout. That was in 2005 and he was a teenager.

So was Rupps recent workout tough? Certainly. But why should we think it's not within his ability? From 800-10,000 he is really amongst the best in world history in his range. He was the best in US prep history, the best in US collegiate history and he's now one of the best in the world. He's a 6 time USA champ at 10K, and was 2nd behind Abdi before he started winning them. He started winning them in college when he was doubling and tripling at conference and NCAA championships.

He's always been phenomenal.

[/quote]

I think it's interesting to reconceptualize this workout as being a little over 21 minutes of running at 10k pace with a fast final interval. I haven't made up my mind yet as to whether that's significant. 5x4 minutes at 10k pace sounds a lot less daunting to me than 5xmile at 10k pace because my 10k pace is barely under 5:30 pace. The former sounds like a moderate session that I would do early season that wouldn't be too taxing. The latter sounds more like something that would be an "A" workout for the week; something I would want to be sure I have time to recover from afterwards.[/quote]

this an important point.

time and distance

don't forget about the time.

an extra minute at 10k pace for each rep is not to be miscounted. then you factor in the decreased volume and intensity over 10 years and rupp's workout is more like 3:45 @ 10k pace for somebody of lesser fitness.

as you get faster, your races are different.

a 10k in 26:48 is an entirely different animal than a 10k in 40 minutes, or even 33 minutes.

This is exactly why these elite runners keep their training and routine such a secret. He's probably done similar workouts countless times and it's nothing big to him. But now the whole internet is screaming "cheater"! It sucks because it's going to lead to more secrecy and less access for us fans.

Some NBA players have a 50" vertical. Think if they kept that a secret because people would say they're doing things illegal. It's not fair and it's hurting our sport.

But this all stems from the tainted past of our sport and is unavoidable. It just sucks the state we are currently in. Skeptism comes with the game I guess. It's really unfortunate.

As I said before, healthy questioning/skepticism is almost a necessity in today's world. However, in reading these posts, I can't help but be reminded of an underlying anti-Rupp bias that began when he did things different in high school and has continued in some ever since.

Case in point,

1. Rupp is criticized for using gadgets, gizmos, etc. and his performances are questioned.

2. Rupp goes after an American 10k record.

3. A guy who has never run a 10k before, blows by Rupp (whose methods etc. have already been questioned) with an amazing last 800-1000m becoming the first non-African under 27 minutes and crushing the American record.

4. Said athlete is praised for his amazing performance with very little, if any, questioning of his unprecedented performance.

I have no doubt that because Rupp has never been perceived as some as a true "blue collar" runner who relies some on gadgets and gizmos that when he does amazing things people somehow assume it is because of some possibly/likely shady gadget/gizmo/method. When someone that the jaded "due it the old fashioned way only" crowd lays down a similar performance they get the benefit of the doubt because they've always been in the "true blue collar" club.

Again, I don't know who is clean and who isn't. Who is doing things that are illegal or unethical. However, I am 100% convinced that there is a general behavioral/methodology/personality bias from some regarding Rupp versus others.

Did a quick search and found this from Dec. 2012 at altitude.

http://www.flotrack.org/speaker/98-Galen-Rupp/video/652294-WOW-of-the-Year-Rupp-Olympic-Workout-Best-of-2012

Running in reverse direction on a banked 200 track and hitting 4:21 is pretty legit.

After 6 x mile between 4:30 & 4:21 he makes :26 200's look relaxed.

Why hasn't Malmo weighed in on this? Is he still posting on this site? This is in line with that big argument a few months back.