INGEBRIGTSEN GOING FOR 3 RECORDS NEXT YEAR

3 is big for him wrote:

justanothercuriousdude wrote:

I don’t think posters claiming Jakob’s chances of breaking one WR or more are about zero, are stupid. Not at all.

And I neither think there’s something wrong with the intelligence of people who go for a hundred per cent, or those who land somewhere in between.

And I don’t think you are unintelligent -I think there’s something else that is driving you…

It’s hard to estimate Jakob’s chances, simply because there are too many variables, and we aren’t well informed about all of them. And because we have very few other relevant athletes to compare with.

I think one could make a case for zero chances if one think one has enough relevant information to make a judgement, and this information suggests zero chances. So does it? -I don’t know; I think that depends on how people weight the pros and cons.

I also think one could make a case for the hundred per cent chance, if one weight the information in that direction.

Zero chance/100% chance -it is only one of these alternatives (if one has all the necessary information). But in lack of knowledge/facts one can of course speculate, and give a graded %. but that only says that you have that percentage of good information, and that you are guessing a chance based on how much you think you know or don’t know. But if you knew enough you would of course land on a 100% or a zero chances, depending on what your information is saying.

In my view there’s only one way of debating Jakob and WRs: We have to evaluate details -1. Will he be reasonable, and cut his Achilles exposing training. 2. If he does adjust his training in the way suggested above, will he still get good enough quality to break WRs? 3. Will he change his commitment to races (when, and how many) in a way that prevents injuries good enough? 4. Will he take less risks? 5. Will his body endure the training necessary for new WRs? 5. Does he have the talent, age, likelihood to relax properly, and avoid too damaging mental challenges? Do Athletes with recurring severe injuries normally (or at all) come back for multiple new WR? +++

-Armstronglivs has addressed some of these challenges, and concluded with zero chance. -If you disagree, you should argue which facts and details you view differently and why, instead of (so boringly and predictably) going after the man…

To say 100% and 0% both is utterly stupid (and for sure wrong). It's neither a given he will get any of those records nor is it impossible (he just turned 25, is the 4th fastest ever in the 1500m and 3rd fastest ever in the Mile and by some margin the fastest in history over 2000m, 3000m and 2 Miles as well as a 2 times world plus Olympic champion in the 5000m - and he didn't have both legs amputated because of his injuries.).

You have no clue about probabilities and sound more and more as stupid as your friend

justanothercuriousdude wrote:

3 is big for him wrote:

To say 100% and 0% both is utterly stupid (and for sure wrong). It's neither a given he will get any of those records nor is it impossible (he just turned 25, is the 4th fastest ever in the 1500m and 3rd fastest ever in the Mile and by some margin the fastest in history over 2000m, 3000m and 2 Miles as well as a 2 times world plus Olympic champion in the 5000m - and he didn't have both legs amputated because of his injuries.).

You have no clue about probabilities and sound more and more as stupid as your friend

One can come up with a graded %, just to be safe -if your estimate of what turns out to be the outcome was below 50% you can still underline that you didn’t rule out this outcome totally, and if the outcome went the other way (your way, that you f.x had a 60 or 70% estimate of), you can claim you were on to something…

But another way to do this is to be honest and to stand for what you believe in and really think after having studied a likely case scenario. This is what I think Armstronglivs has done -he has thought through every thing around Jakob’s situation that he thinks is relevant for his future fitness, and concluded: He has way too many things against him, no way he has a chance in hell…. That doesn’t mean that Arms is God and can’t be wrong -it only means that he thinks that the indications and evidence for his conclusion are so strong that there’s almost zero chances of a WR. So why shouldn’t he stand for it, and take it as a man if he turns out to be wrong..? Why is it so extremely important to you that everybody view this like you, and have the same definition of chance and “surely/sure”. Have you forgotten that it is sport we are debating, and not life and death!? And do you really think you can get others/opponents to see things through your lenses by trying to be a bully with the word “stupid” as your arsenal?

This isn’t a case of statistical probability. It’s too complex, and there are too few athletes for comparison. So we have to weight subjectively, and do our reasoning as good as possible. But of course the opinions will differ. That doesn’t mean people are stupid -if someone thinks Jakob, as good as he has been, as how young he is, and how un fatal an Achilles tendon is opposed to a rupture, and how talented he is, +++, certainly (e.g meaning almost a 100%) will come back on WR breaking level, I don’t think this is stupid. But maybe too optimistic not to give more attention to all that has and might go wrong…?

Again -why are you so focused on stupidity? Do you really think you can get rid of stupidity by gluing it to us who don’t think like you, in something after all so harmless as sport..?

justanothercuriousdude wrote:

3 is big for him wrote:

To say 100% and 0% both is utterly stupid (and for sure wrong). It's neither a given he will get any of those records nor is it impossible (he just turned 25, is the 4th fastest ever in the 1500m and 3rd fastest ever in the Mile and by some margin the fastest in history over 2000m, 3000m and 2 Miles as well as a 2 times world plus Olympic champion in the 5000m - and he didn't have both legs amputated because of his injuries.).

You have no clue about probabilities and sound more and more as stupid as your friend

One can come up with a graded %, just to be safe -if your estimate of what turns out to be the outcome was below 50% you can still underline that you didn’t rule out this outcome totally, and if the outcome went the other way (your way, that you f.x had a 60 or 70% estimate of), you can claim you were on to something…

But another way to do this is to be honest and to stand for what you believe in and really think after having studied a likely case scenario. This is what I think Armstronglivs has done -he has thought through every thing around Jakob’s situation that he thinks is relevant for his future fitness, and concluded: He has way too many things against him, no way he has a chance in hell…. That doesn’t mean that Arms is God and can’t be wrong -it only means that he thinks that the indications and evidence for his conclusion are so strong that there’s almost zero chances of a WR. So why shouldn’t he stand for it, and take it as a man if he turns out to be wrong..? Why is it so extremely important to you that everybody view this like you, and have the same definition of chance and “surely/sure”. Have you forgotten that it is sport we are debating, and not life and death!? And do you really think you can get others/opponents to see things through your lenses by trying to be a bully with the word “stupid” as your arsenal?

This isn’t a case of statistical probability. It’s too complex, and there are too few athletes for comparison. So we have to weight subjectively, and do our reasoning as good as possible. But of course the opinions will differ. That doesn’t mean people are stupid -if someone thinks Jakob, as good as he has been, as how young he is, and how un fatal an Achilles tendon is opposed to a rupture, and how talented he is, +++, certainly (e.g meaning almost a 100%) will come back on WR breaking level, I don’t think this is stupid. But maybe too optimistic not to give more attention to all that has and might go wrong…?

Again -why are you so focused on stupidity? Do you really think you can get rid of stupidity by gluing it to us who don’t think like you, in something after all so harmless as sport..?

Armstronglivs wrote:

justanothercuriousdude wrote:

One can come up with a graded %, just to be safe -if your estimate of what turns out to be the outcome was below 50% you can still underline that you didn’t rule out this outcome totally, and if the outcome went the other way (your way, that you f.x had a 60 or 70% estimate of), you can claim you were on to something…

But another way to do this is to be honest and to stand for what you believe in and really think after having studied a likely case scenario. This is what I think Armstronglivs has done -he has thought through every thing around Jakob’s situation that he thinks is relevant for his future fitness, and concluded: He has way too many things against him, no way he has a chance in hell…. That doesn’t mean that Arms is God and can’t be wrong -it only means that he thinks that the indications and evidence for his conclusion are so strong that there’s almost zero chances of a WR. So why shouldn’t he stand for it, and take it as a man if he turns out to be wrong..? Why is it so extremely important to you that everybody view this like you, and have the same definition of chance and “surely/sure”. Have you forgotten that it is sport we are debating, and not life and death!? And do you really think you can get others/opponents to see things through your lenses by trying to be a bully with the word “stupid” as your arsenal?

This isn’t a case of statistical probability. It’s too complex, and there are too few athletes for comparison. So we have to weight subjectively, and do our reasoning as good as possible. But of course the opinions will differ. That doesn’t mean people are stupid -if someone thinks Jakob, as good as he has been, as how young he is, and how un fatal an Achilles tendon is opposed to a rupture, and how talented he is, +++, certainly (e.g meaning almost a 100%) will come back on WR breaking level, I don’t think this is stupid. But maybe too optimistic not to give more attention to all that has and might go wrong…?

Again -why are you so focused on stupidity? Do you really think you can get rid of stupidity by gluing it to us who don’t think like you, in something after all so harmless as sport..?

You're trying to talk like a grown-up to someone who isn't.

3 is big for him wrote:

You think your friend "has thought through every thing around Jakob’s situation that he thinks is relevant for his future fitness" - hard to believe.

You can start writing a book about it, it will not change the pure fact: his chances are not 0% and they are not 100% (and, no, there are no arguments for those numbers).

Both is impossible. For sure any numbers which someone gives (like me) are just some attempt of expressing the own valuing of the known facts. There isn't a true percentage which can explain his chances - and something like this can't be proved after the event has happened (which I think you nonsensically believe).

When someone - against all odds - wins in the lottery, I'm pretty sure you will argue that the chances were not that small like anybody has said...

Jakob's achievements as a runner so far clearly tell us his chances are not 0% - for sure. Also his injuries can't bring them down to 0%. 0% is pure dumbness. Same for 100% - pure dumbness. That you try to argue for those numbers as possibilities tells us a lot.

3 is big for him wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The probabilities are zero because after successive Achilles injuries - which will only recur if he continues to train and compete at his maximum - he will never regain his previous peak, which is what he would have to do to take the records.

To tell his chances are zero is exactly as stupid as to say he will get the records without any doubt (100%).

A runner who so far is 0.73 and 0.60 seconds away from the 1500m and the Mile WRs and just turned 25 has not a 0% chance for breaking those records. His injuries - for sure - reduces his chances. But - for sure - not down to 0%. That's impossible (or has he had both of his legs amputated?).

So, how do you seriously rank his chances for the three events? For full career and for next season? For none of the six values, 0 is an option.

Armstronglivs wrote:

3 is big for him wrote:

To tell his chances are zero is exactly as stupid as to say he will get the records without any doubt (100%).

A runner who so far is 0.73 and 0.60 seconds away from the 1500m and the Mile WRs and just turned 25 has not a 0% chance for breaking those records. His injuries - for sure - reduces his chances. But - for sure - not down to 0%. That's impossible (or has he had both of his legs amputated?).

So, how do you seriously rank his chances for the three events? For full career and for next season? For none of the six values, 0 is an option.

To take the records and all 3 in a year he would have to be better than he has ever been. He now has recurring Achilles injuries and so will have to reduce his training and competing. The injuries may also keep coming back. So he has zero chance of taking the records next year, which is what he claims he will do.