NO. I don’t think the exceptional talent of high school distance runners phenoms is explained by PED.
But PED's also tend to show as "exceptional talent" - and especially with exceptional improvement in an otherwise good but not outstanding athlete.
Otherwise good but not outstanding?!? You really are crazy, aren’t you?
Within just a couple of years from when she took up running as a Freshman in High School, Parker Valby set the 3200m State Record her Junior year in one of the most populous and competitive states in the country!
What kind of athlete does something like that? That is not just ‘good’ or even ‘exceptional’, that is the signature of what some are referring to as ‘generational talent’.! (And she was a lot heavier than she is now, when she did that.)
But PED's also tend to show as "exceptional talent" - and especially with exceptional improvement in an otherwise good but not outstanding athlete.
Otherwise good but not outstanding?!? You really are crazy, aren’t you?
Within just a couple of years from when she took up running as a Freshman in High School, Parker Valby set the 3200m State Record her Junior year in one of the most populous and competitive states in the country!
What kind of athlete does something like that? That is not just ‘good’ or even ‘exceptional’, that is the signature of what some are referring to as ‘generational talent’.! (And she was a lot heavier than she is now, when she did that.)
So no, Armstronglivs, one cannot purchase that kind of talent in a bottle! You should be banned immediately from this forum due to your repeated, slanderous accusations against select athletes!
You talk in circles and never answer. So Tuohy is poorly coached for not running more? She should run 3morehours per week and ditch the lifting if more running is better. She should do what the best do which is 125 MPW.
No, she isn't poorly coached for not running more. But since Valby clearly isn't doing 125mpw you would conclude she, too, is poorly coached.
But PED's also tend to show as "exceptional talent" - and especially with exceptional improvement in an otherwise good but not outstanding athlete.
Otherwise good but not outstanding?!? You really are crazy, aren’t you?
Within just a couple of years from when she took up running as a Freshman in High School, Parker Valby set the 3200m State Record her Junior year in one of the most populous and competitive states in the country!
What kind of athlete does something like that? That is not just ‘good’ or even ‘exceptional’, that is the signature of what some are referring to as ‘generational talent’.! (And she was a lot heavier than she is now, when she did that.)
A state record is a "generational talent" - but not a national title or age group record? By your definition it seems there are a lot of "generational talents" out there - who never made it to world championship or Olympic level. You set the bar pretty low for a "generational" talent i.e. an athlete that only comes around once every twenty or so years. Since she's now so much better than when she was a freshman I wonder how she can improve on being a "generational" talent?
Otherwise good but not outstanding?!? You really are crazy, aren’t you?
Within just a couple of years from when she took up running as a Freshman in High School, Parker Valby set the 3200m State Record her Junior year in one of the most populous and competitive states in the country!
What kind of athlete does something like that? That is not just ‘good’ or even ‘exceptional’, that is the signature of what some are referring to as ‘generational talent’.! (And she was a lot heavier than she is now, when she did that.)
So no, Armstronglivs, one cannot purchase that kind of talent in a bottle! You should be banned immediately from this forum due to your repeated, slanderous accusations against select athletes!
It is that kind of talent that also dopes, or Olympic and world championship athletes would not be busted. And they are. Talent is no bar to doping. It is probably an inducement.
.Talent is no bar to doping. It is probably an inducement.
I’m not going to go round-and-round arguing with you, as that is something you seem to enjoy, while I simply don’t want to waste my time.
That said, I kind of regretfully agree with you on this unfortunate point. Drugs of today can work, and when running at the highest levels of sport, the temptation to take an aid is probably tremendous when trying to keep up with the competition.
Your problem, and why you should be banned, is you pick out select targets in order to sully their reputation. You have no concrete evidence, and you present no concrete evidence, but still keep arguing like a donkey.
Well, you know what they say about arguing with a donkey.
A state record is a "generational talent" - but not a national title or age group record?
Sure, if it is displayed within two years of taking up the sport.
Two years is quite a lot. There are runners who have gone on to win an Olympic title in a little over two years - as Snell did at Rome. There are a lot of state record holders at a junior level. If she was winning national titles and setting national records at her level you might have an argument. But not yet.
.Talent is no bar to doping. It is probably an inducement.
I’m not going to go round-and-round arguing with you, as that is something you seem to enjoy, while I simply don’t want to waste my time.
That said, I kind of regretfully agree with you on this unfortunate point. Drugs of today can work, and when running at the highest levels of sport, the temptation to take an aid is probably tremendous when trying to keep up with the competition.
Your problem, and why you should be banned, is you pick out select targets in order to sully their reputation. You have no concrete evidence, and you present no concrete evidence, but still keep arguing like a donkey.
Well, you know what they say about arguing with a donkey.
No one has "concrete evidence" unless an athlete is busted but with the amount of doping in sport today there will be speculation about athletes doping. What you also don't get is that the very best athletes have often doped - and they still are. There are many on these boards who would be of the view that there isn't a clean world mark today.
Sure, if it is displayed within two years of taking up the sport.
Two years is quite a lot. There are runners who have gone on to win an Olympic title in a little over two years - as Snell did at Rome. There are a lot of state record holders at a junior level. If she was winning national titles and setting national records at her level you might have an argument. But not yet.
You have a point about Snell; I’m going to go fact-check that.
Unfortunately for Valby, by the time she started getting really good in high school, she got a bad injury from non-related running activity (doing a back-flip, or other.). The injuries continued her freshman year of college, and per her own words, at that point she was close to exiting the sport entirely.
I’m not going to go round-and-round arguing with you, as that is something you seem to enjoy, while I simply don’t want to waste my time.
That said, I kind of regretfully agree with you on this unfortunate point. Drugs of today can work, and when running at the highest levels of sport, the temptation to take an aid is probably tremendous when trying to keep up with the competition.
Your problem, and why you should be banned, is you pick out select targets in order to sully their reputation. You have no concrete evidence, and you present no concrete evidence, but still keep arguing like a donkey.
Well, you know what they say about arguing with a donkey.
No one has "concrete evidence" unless an athlete is busted but with the amount of doping in sport today there will be speculation about athletes doping. What you also don't get is that the very best athletes have often doped - and they still are. There are many on these boards who would be of the view that there isn't a clean world mark today.
So my point is, you agree you have no concrete evidence, so let it lie, already. But no, you single out Cook and Valby but get others that look even more suspicious, a pass. You are not out to clean-up the sport. You’re out to crucify select athletes.
No, she isn't poorly coached for not running more. But since Valby clearly isn't doing 125mpw you would conclude she, too, is poorly coached.
Without knowing more details, she actually could be doing an amount of aerobic training work that exceeds a 125mpw equivalent.
The Arc Trainer burns over 10 calories per minute, which works out to what is burned when running a little slower than 9min/mile, which is 6.7 miles/hr. So 15 hrs per week on the Arc Trainer would consume the same amount of calories as a 100mpw of easy running.
Why doesn't Tuohy run more? Why doesn't Valby run more? Why doesn't Gidey run more? One runs 40 MPW, one runs 70 MPW, one runs 100 MPW. Two must be doping accoring to the loginc that some have laid out becuase they are running at a high level without doing as many miles as other elite runners. And tow are supplementing running with other activities which means they must be doping because they could substitiute runnig for the cross training which would automatically make them faster. But surprisingly, the 2 being accused of doping by many posters are the one on the low end and the one on the high end. So there really is no logic at all if the one in the middle is the honest one.
No one has "concrete evidence" unless an athlete is busted but with the amount of doping in sport today there will be speculation about athletes doping. What you also don't get is that the very best athletes have often doped - and they still are. There are many on these boards who would be of the view that there isn't a clean world mark today.
So my point is, you agree you have no concrete evidence, so let it lie, already. But no, you single out Cook and Valby but get others that look even more suspicious, a pass. You are not out to clean-up the sport. You’re out to crucify select athletes.
No, I'm not. I don't expect to clean up the sport either. If we relied only on the "concrete evidence" of a doping violation to perceive possible doping we would never see it because very few are caught (with the current exception of Kenya, which is busting athletes on a near daily basis).
No, she isn't poorly coached for not running more. But since Valby clearly isn't doing 125mpw you would conclude she, too, is poorly coached.
Without knowing more details, she actually could be doing an amount of aerobic training work that exceeds a 125mpw equivalent.
The Arc Trainer burns over 10 calories per minute, which works out to what is burned when running a little slower than 9min/mile, which is 6.7 miles/hr. So 15 hrs per week on the Arc Trainer would consume the same amount of calories as a 100mpw of easy running.
It isn't about burning calories but training muscle - and muscles that are used specifically for running. Nothing does that better than running - which is why training must include a lot of running.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.