negative split, due primarily to a 30 sec or so last 200.
negative split, due primarily to a 30 sec or so last 200.
I could see Mu getting down to 4:04 1500m at some point, if she spent a little more time with it.
NYDCRunner1 wrote:
The way you people rhapsodize distance running is weird.
Runners who can - sprint, those who can't move to distance running. Athing is a 400/800 runner and she has the Olympic medals to prove it.
She has what it takes and does not need to prove her self at a lazy man runs.
Not so. Many gravitate to distance running from the beginning.
I wanted to add something I haven't seen on the boards yet, since Athing is also the high school 500m record holder at around 1:09-1:10. Will Sumner ran a new boys national record for 500m of 1:01.25, almost a half second drop, and he has run 47.01/1:52. He is thin for the sprints and really heaped on the advantage after going out in 23, settling behind guys and being boxed to 49 and then hammered the last 100m in 12.2. He has also run 1:21 in the 600m and is going after a 600m time next week before turning back to the 800m. I predict a 600m of closer to 1:17, and sub-1:50 in the 800m indoors. And this kid looks like he has the build to run a fast mile. Athing has more of sprinters build but can run 4:20s with comp.
She wasn't built for endurance. With that said, if put under pressure to give maximum effort I bet she could run about 5 seconds faster. Part of the problem with 4/8 types running the mile is they don't have a lot of experience dealing with aerobic stress; they often mentally breakdown before they do physically.
I don't know if you all follow track, but the best 4x4 women's team in the world ran her as anchor in the Olympic final, which seems to suggest she's a 4/8 runner.
This reminds me of the letsrun posters who want Sydney to move up in distance.
I just don't understand why someone near the top of their field would move away from that.
wgfssr wrote:
bio Domer wrote:
Seems kind of slow for an Olympic champion in the 800
Let's see some other sub 50 gals race a mile...Could AF even finish a mile?
I can't find it, but I swear I watched Allyson Felix time trial an early season mile in 4:57.
Del Preston wrote:
wgfssr wrote:
Let's see some other sub 50 gals race a mile...Could AF even finish a mile?
I can't find it, but I swear I watched Allyson Felix time trial an early season mile in 4:57.
coach js could have her down to 66 minutes for 21 km.
El Keniano wrote:
I hope she's not another Nijel Amos or Mohammed Aman, known for peaking in their teens.
Terrible post.
Amos ran 1:41 at 18, 1:41 *seven years later* at 25, 1:42 at 27.
How is that peaking in the teens??
yr post is clueless wrote:
El Keniano wrote:
I hope she's not another Nijel Amos or Mohammed Aman, known for peaking in their teens.
Terrible post.
Amos ran 1:41 at 18, 1:41 *seven years later* at 25, 1:42 at 27.
How is that peaking in the teens??
Well it is peaking in his teens. However he has occasionally revisited that peak and ostensibly never surpassed it. IF Athing Mu runs 1:55xx for the next decade but never runs faster than 1:55.04 someone could still say she peaked in her teens. However there are much better examples such as Mary Cain and Zola Budd.
That is not what the term means. It stems from climbing up and down mountain by inversely plotting your times. Hitting your peak in your teens would mean that your times in your twenties would resemble those if time before your peak. Cain is an example but Amos is not. Mu would not be either if she runs 1:55 ten years from now.
just the ticket wrote:
That is not what the term means. It stems from climbing up and down mountain by inversely plotting your times. Hitting your peak in your teens would mean that your times in your twenties would resemble those if time before your peak. Cain is an example but Amos is not. Mu would not be either if she runs 1:55 ten years from now.
You are incorrect.
So anything short of running 1:39 or 1:40 makes him a disappointment to you. Got it.
For 99.9% of professional runners, however, it would be a dream come true to peak in their teens, by that definition, and then to remain one of the best in the world for over ten years.
The Dirty Duck wrote:
So anything short of running 1:39 or 1:40 makes him a disappointment to you. Got it.
For 99.9% of professional runners, however, it would be a dream come true to peak in their teens, by that definition, and then to remain one of the best in the world for over ten years.
How are you people so stupid? Why can you not learn to read? Please explain why you would assume disappointment on my part. Show me where I wrote anything like that.
just the ticket wrote:
That is not what the term means. It stems from climbing up and down mountain by inversely plotting your times. Hitting your peak in your teens would mean that your times in your twenties would resemble those if time before your peak. Cain is an example but Amos is not. Mu would not be either if she runs 1:55 ten years from now.
Over-complicated. If you never run faster than in your teens then you peaked in your teens. That's Amos.
Armstronglivs is back. I knew the lure of an Athing Mu thread would be too much for him. Oh well, relapses only make you stronger.
The Dirty Duck wrote:
So anything short of running 1:39 or 1:40 makes him a disappointment to you. Got it.
For 99.9% of professional runners, however, it would be a dream come true to peak in their teens, by that definition, and then to remain one of the best in the world for over ten years.
It is not just about the PB. Globally Nijel Amos has only an Olympic Silver medal won in his teens. If Mu never medals again like Amos so far and also doesn't go faster than she does as a teenager, saying she peaked in her teens would be accurate.
Rob Rippa wrote:
Armstronglivs is back. I knew the lure of an Athing Mu thread would be too much for him. Oh well, relapses only make you stronger.
Obviously you prefer to read opinions that match your own, like many here.
michimanx wrote:
I could see Mu getting down to 4:04 1500m at some point, if she spent a little more time with it.
There is no way a 1.55/4.18 runner gets down to 4.04. She isn't an endurance runner. I think she is near her peak already as an athlete. I don't see her improving by nearly a 100m over the longer distance.
yr post is clueless wrote:
El Keniano wrote:
I hope she's not another Nijel Amos or Mohammed Aman, known for peaking in their teens.
Terrible post.
Amos ran 1:41 at 18, 1:41 *seven years later* at 25, 1:42 at 27.
How is that peaking in the teens??
He has never run faster than in 2012. So his fastest isn't his "peak"?
TrackCoach wrote:
She wasn't built for endurance. With that said, if put under pressure to give maximum effort I bet she could run about 5 seconds faster. Part of the problem with 4/8 types running the mile is they don't have a lot of experience dealing with aerobic stress; they often mentally breakdown before they do physically.
+1