You might be waiting longer. But 45.4 - whatever. That isn't world class over the distance. It's also why Rudisha, who ran that time, didn't compete - "double" - over the 400. It's probably equivalent to Brazier running 3:35 for the 1500. Or Courtney, Kerr and Crothers running 46 in old shoes on dirt with no bicarb or anything else.
None of the former greats you mention ran those listed times at 16. You conveniently leave that out. 🥱
I'm using them to show that 46 isn't fast now for a top 800 runner - regardless of age. In modern shoes and on modern tracks (and with modern training) those runners would easily be sub-46 if not close to 45.
I also compare him to Wilson to show that improvements can be incremental with prodigies after they break through. Wilson has only gained a tenth of a second since was 16. Lutkenhaus will be fortunate to run sub-46.
Armstrong argues so hard because he actually believes thst saying something has an impact on the outcome. Recall how hard he argues that Valby would never win an NCAA championship let alone qualify for a global team. He did the same thing with Wiley. When Cooper exceeds his expectations, he will accuse him of doping.
Why don't you say what you think Lutkenhaus will do rather than trying to speak for me - and getting it wrong? I can express my views without your "help".
I'm using them to show that 46 isn't fast now for a top 800 runner - regardless of age.
It’s been shown your take on this demonstrably false. Your old farts could barely translate their 400 speed over two laps. Now most 800 runners can easily break 3:40 for 1500 and aren’t as strong sprinters. Cooper is one of the fastest guys out there from a 400m speed perspective in this era.
None of the former greats you mention ran those listed times at 16. You conveniently leave that out. 🥱
I'm using them to show that 46 isn't fast now for a top 800 runner - regardless of age. In modern shoes and on modern tracks (and with modern training) those runners would easily be sub-46 if not close to 45.
I also compare him to Wilson to show that improvements can be incremental with prodigies after they break through. Wilson has only gained a tenth of a second since was 16. Lutkenhaus will be fortunate to run sub-46.
For years you have been whining that there's no such thing as modern training and that modern shoes don't give any advantage. Now that you want to belittle Cooper's achievements, suddenly you talk about how modern shoes and training make a difference. Like many have said, you are dishonest and move goal posts constantly.
Your argument is reducible ultimately to Lutkenhaus's age. None of his performances over the 400 or 1500 are superior to 800 runners in the distant past who ran without all the modern aids that he has.
He may get better - that isn't being disputed - but it likely won't be anything as exponential as what is argued here. As Wilson shows, the gains for prodigies can be small. So far we see no indication that Lutkenhaus has world class 400 speed (or 1500 endurance). It doesn't seem to be enough to you that he excels over his specialist distance.
Yet you still base Lutkenhaus’s potential on what adult athletes did 60 to 70 years ago. So far, he is unlike any 800m athlete who came before him in terms of demonstrated talent and performance. This is what bothers you. You ignore facts you don’t like. That says a lot about you. You are alone because of this. That’s why you spend hours a day trying to needle people on a discussion board.
Sure, you’ll bring up Jim Ryun, the former King of Middle Distance prodigies. Ryun was not capable at 17 of winning a world indoor title had a world indoor meet existed.
You will bring up Snell, who needed a full year of high mileage (80 mpw and up) to barely break 1:55 at 19. You’ll bring up Courtney and Kerr who spent a lot of time as sprinters, and you post their times from their early to mid 20s while ignoring the fact that Cooper was not focused on being a sprinter and from the start wanted to emulate an older sibling. You ignore that Cooper hasn’t run a 200m race in over two years, stuttering and stammering about his 200m interval at the end of a workout and how it’s only worth 22 high. That run is impressive because it was at the end of a workout. Which you ignore.
And you further obfuscate by saying all people do is use Cooper’s age to argue. You don’t think his youth is rather significant? Unusual? You’ll bring up Amos, a proven drug cheat (likely a career long drug cheat, but that’s another thread).
You argue merely to argue because uou are a shut-in seeking attention. You hate Cooper because he’s an American.
You don't understand what I have said. I am not saying what he is capable of based on what 800 runners ran 60-70 years ago; I am referring to their times to show that 46 isn't particularly fast for a top 800 runner today. Give those runners what athletes are able to use today and they would have been 44-45 runners. And on another point, Courtney and Kerr weren't sprinters; they were 800 runners who happened to be fast.
The rest of your post doesn't say anything meaningful. None of it indicates Lutkenhaus could be successful over 400.
I look forward to a few repeated efforts. But is that what Ingebrigtsen and Hocker required for the 5k? They just seemed to get out and run them.
Name a sprinter who just jumps out there and runs their best after not having raced a particular event for a year or two. Very different from middle and long distance events. Apples and oranges. You know this. You are disgustingly disingenuous, and that’s a great clue as to your actual background and innate malevolence towards all.
Lutkenhaus isnt a sprinter. That's why he doesn't train like a sprinter. He is being compared with other md athletes. He isn't especially fast for an 800 runner, as quite a few over the years have been 21-flat runners over 200. He will never be that.
But that doesn't matter if he has superior strength endurance, like Snell did. But he won't be a world class 400 runner. He isn't fast enough for that event. But neither were Rudisha and Kipketer - so I wouldn't get too worried about that if I were you.
This post was edited 12 minutes after it was posted.
46.3 doesn't make him a "decent prospect" over the 400. Wilson ran 44.2 at that age. That's a decent prospect. Lutkenhaus isn't going to improve 2 seconds over the distance.
🤡
I guess unless you break 46s as a 16-year-old you might as well abandon all hopes of ever being a top sprinter.
No, but Lutkenhaus should - because he isn't a sprinter and never will be. The 400 is a sprint. He is also a mature talent - as prodigies are. That limits his scope for improvement.
I'm using them to show that 46 isn't fast now for a top 800 runner - regardless of age.
It’s been shown your take on this demonstrably false. Your old farts could barely translate their 400 speed over two laps. Now most 800 runners can easily break 3:40 for 1500 and aren’t as strong sprinters. Cooper is one of the fastest guys out there from a 400m speed perspective in this era.
You don't realize it but you're helping my argument. Runners who were nowhere near his level over the 800 were faster than him over the 400 (by quite a margin if you take modern shoes and tracks etc into account). That shows he isn't particularly fast for a top 800 runner and simply isn't in the ball park for the 400 today. The latter event is a true sprint. He isn't a sprinter. If he is to double you will have to make a case for the 1500.
Bingo. And even as we might all agree that the kid is very physically mature for his age, that does not mean he’s at his peak physical maturity. That is still 2-3 years off. To presume he won’t be faster at 19-20 over 200/400 than at age 15-16 is just myopic thinking.
This thread asked what his potential is, not what do a couple of stale and incomplete data points say about his current ability… CL has 21-flatish and 45, maybe 44.9, potential. Now, whether he ever takes his shot is another matter. And I don’t think he really cares about the 200 or he would’ve run one even last year.
The 200 is run in training (as we've just seen on other threads). It doesn't require entry into an actual race.
The issue isn't whether he might improve his prs over these distances but whether he might become world class, which is what "doubling" would mean in his case.
Hocker doubles over the 1500 and the 5k - as does Jakob. That's what the term means.
Back to this again.
No one should listen to you because it's clear you 1) never did sprint training, 2) never were elite,3) never coached an elite and hell, probably 4) never knew an elite or saw them train in real life.
21.8 solo, in lane 1, at end of workout is an indicator of a much faster 200m fresh.
You are arguing with people much more knowledgeable than yourself.
Let's settle this: Give us/me one reference point that you have first hand where you can compare Cooper's workout to a lived experience? If you can't, it's almost certain you speaking from a point of ignorance.
I'm using them to show that 46 isn't fast now for a top 800 runner - regardless of age. In modern shoes and on modern tracks (and with modern training) those runners would easily be sub-46 if not close to 45.
I also compare him to Wilson to show that improvements can be incremental with prodigies after they break through. Wilson has only gained a tenth of a second since was 16. Lutkenhaus will be fortunate to run sub-46.
For years you have been whining that there's no such thing as modern training and that modern shoes don't give any advantage. Now that you want to belittle Cooper's achievements, suddenly you talk about how modern shoes and training make a difference. Like many have said, you are dishonest and move goal posts constantly.
I'm using the argument the likes of you use here, which is that modern shoes, tracks and training make a considerable difference. Are you denying that now? Lutkenhaus has no technological or training advantages over runners in the '50s and '60s?
The 200 is run in training (as we've just seen on other threads). It doesn't require entry into an actual race.
The issue isn't whether he might improve his prs over these distances but whether he might become world class, which is what "doubling" would mean in his case.
Hocker doubles over the 1500 and the 5k - as does Jakob. That's what the term means.
Back to this again.
No one should listen to you because it's clear you 1) never did sprint training, 2) never were elite,3) never coached an elite and hell, probably 4) never knew an elite or saw them train in real life.
21.8 solo, in lane 1, at end of workout is an indicator of a much faster 200m fresh.
You are arguing with people much more knowledgeable than yourself.
Let's settle this: Give us/me one reference point that you have first hand where you can compare Cooper's workout to a lived experience? If you can't, it's almost certain you speaking from a point of ignorance.
I can respond to that by saying you can't offer an example of your having "lived experience" comparable to Lutkenhaus because you have never been a prodigy who has won a world indoor title. So your question is without relevance.
I have said Lutkenhaus will be faster than 22.6 (that is his 21.8 conversion) but it won't be a lot faster. He was sprinting not jogging. He has yet to go under 22.1. If he runs 21.8 he will be doing well.
He is being compared with other md/800 runners and what they can run over 200. Some of them could run 21-flat or even faster - Juantorena ran 20.7. They weren't - aren't - sprinters - so, like him, they don't train like sprinters. But they all did sprint training - as he does.
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
For years you have been whining that there's no such thing as modern training and that modern shoes don't give any advantage. Now that you want to belittle Cooper's achievements, suddenly you talk about how modern shoes and training make a difference. Like many have said, you are dishonest and move goal posts constantly.
I'm using the argument the likes of you use here, which is that modern shoes, tracks and training make a considerable difference. Are you denying that now? Lutkenhaus has no technological or training advantages over runners in the '50s and '60s?
Good that you realised how stupid you argumented in this issue so far and that you changed your view.
Bingo. And even as we might all agree that the kid is very physically mature for his age, that does not mean he’s at his peak physical maturity. That is still 2-3 years off. To presume he won’t be faster at 19-20 over 200/400 than at age 15-16 is just myopic thinking.
This thread asked what his potential is, not what do a couple of stale and incomplete data points say about his current ability… CL has 21-flatish and 45, maybe 44.9, potential. Now, whether he ever takes his shot is another matter. And I don’t think he really cares about the 200 or he would’ve run one even last year.
The 200 is run in training (as we've just seen on other threads). It doesn't require entry into an actual race.
The issue isn't whether he might improve his prs over these distances but whether he might become world class, which is what "doubling" would mean in his case.
Hocker doubles over the 1500 and the 5k - as does Jakob. That's what the term means.
Incorrect. If you go back to the thread title and the original post, the question never was can CL become world class in the 400 and become a 400/800 specialist but, rather, what is his true potential given that his coach has gone on the record w multiple sources saying he’s in 44-high shape? The coach would know.
But you want to use stale, limited, and myopic data points to mansplain to everyone that CL isn’t capable of what his coach says he is. You act like his 15-year old PR truly constrains him and that flying 200 at the end of a workout was an “all out” sprint on fresh legs. Me thinks his coach knows that you can basically double his converted FAT 200 time from that effort and extrapolate it to 400 because it was so damn easy. Which means CL is certainly at least a full second faster over 400 than his one and only effort, doubling back, from last year.
Not sure what’s bothering you… I don’t know if it’s that the best Kiwi athletes train with American coaches or that CL was better at age 16 than any Kiwi ever in history or that Nick Willis’ own estimation that the super shoes are worth 1.5 sec over 1200, which, when combined with bicarb, explains all the wicked fast performances of the decade so far, or that Geordie Beamish can’t break 49 when fresh. If it didn’t bother you so much, you would stop posting and responding to every single post. But it does bother you. You prove it every day.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Armstrong argues so hard because he actually believes thst saying something has an impact on the outcome. Recall how hard he argues that Valby would never win an NCAA championship let alone qualify for a global team. He did the same thing with Wiley. When Cooper exceeds his expectations, he will accuse him of doping.
Why don't you say what you think Lutkenhaus will do rather than trying to speak for me - and getting it wrong? I can express my views without your "help".
The “poor me” deflection. This fraud is purely clickbait/rage-bait.
I'm using the argument the likes of you use here, which is that modern shoes, tracks and training make a considerable difference. Are you denying that now? Lutkenhaus has no technological or training advantages over runners in the '50s and '60s?
Good that you realised how stupid you argumented in this issue so far and that you changed your view.
Now just 100 other issues are left.
I haven't changed my view; I've incorporated yours to show that you have to conclude 46 sec runners in the distant past like Courtney, Kerr etc would be a lot faster today. That means they are considerably faster than Lutkenhaus over the shorter distance.
The 200 is run in training (as we've just seen on other threads). It doesn't require entry into an actual race.
The issue isn't whether he might improve his prs over these distances but whether he might become world class, which is what "doubling" would mean in his case.
Hocker doubles over the 1500 and the 5k - as does Jakob. That's what the term means.
Incorrect. If you go back to the thread title and the original post, the question never was can CL become world class in the 400 and become a 400/800 specialist but, rather, what is his true potential given that his coach has gone on the record w multiple sources saying he’s in 44-high shape? The coach would know.
But you want to use stale, limited, and myopic data points to mansplain to everyone that CL isn’t capable of what his coach says he is. You act like his 15-year old PR truly constrains him and that flying 200 at the end of a workout was an “all out” sprint on fresh legs. Me thinks his coach knows that you can basically double his converted FAT 200 time from that effort and extrapolate it to 400 because it was so damn easy. Which means CL is certainly at least a full second faster over 400 than his one and only effort, doubling back, from last year.
Not sure what’s bothering you… I don’t know if it’s that the best Kiwi athletes train with American coaches or that CL was better at age 16 than any Kiwi ever in history or that Nick Willis’ own estimation that the super shoes are worth 1.5 sec over 1200, which, when combined with bicarb, explains all the wicked fast performances of the decade so far, or that Geordie Beamish can’t break 49 when fresh. If it didn’t bother you so much, you would stop posting and responding to every single post. But it does bother you. You prove it every day.
It bothers me no more than it bothers you and others here, who respond to my posts. The only thing offered here that suggests Lutkenhaus can run a lot faster over the 400 is the prediction of his coach. It is a mere prediction with no times given to back it up. There is a very big difference between his current best of 46.3 and 44.8. I'm sure Wilson would like to make a 1.5 sec improvement on his pr of 44.1. Fat chance.
If the thread isn't about Lutkenhaus being competitive at other distances, such as the 400 or the 1500, it means nothing. It isn't about whether he might improve on his existing prs. Anyone could do that.
You also cannot double a 200 time to estimate a 400 time. 22.6 doesn't suggest 44.8 for one lap. It more likely equates to 48x for the 400. Nor does an "easy" 22.6 suggest 21-flat or better, which is what 44.8 would at least require. An "easy" 22.6 sprint might be only a few tenths faster at full effort. You haven't observed much sprinting.
Why don't you say what you think Lutkenhaus will do rather than trying to speak for me - and getting it wrong? I can express my views without your "help".
The “poor me” deflection. This fraud is purely clickbait/rage-bait.
The deflection is your focus on me and not the subject of the thread. You have nothing to offer about what Lutkenhaus might be capable of.
