why did that london 1500 go out in 70?

Which is it wrote:

Everything that I have said is based on fact. I am not speculating or fantasizing.

However, your "facts" only exist in your reality. Just because Anna said in one interview last week that she did not enjoy a 1-mile tempo, does not mean that she has not put in the work. Just because she has more fun running faster repeats does not mean that she has not done long repeats. In all honestly, we know very little about Anna's training, and your assumptions about her base training are being created in your own head. Therefore, you are speculating and fantasizing. That is fact.

Which is it wrote:

Let's wait and see how they handle the rounds at worlds. Rowbury has more of a strength background and I think that will serve her very well in Berlin.

Which is it wrote:

Everything that I have said is based on fact. I am not speculating or fantasizing.

I believe what we have here is a person who has made an idiotic statement and instead of fessing up to it has decided to call people immature and dumb. Well nobody is buying it! You cannot be a 800 runner moving up to the 1500 and have more of a strength backround than a 1500/3000 SC runner. Running less races does not give you more of a strength backround than another runner. Running less rounds does not make you more prepared for a multi-round championship.

Which is it wrote:

Let's wait and see how they handle the rounds at worlds. Rowbury has more of a strength background and I think that will serve her very well in Berlin.

Which is it wrote:

Everything that I have said is based on fact. I am not speculating or fantasizing.

I believe what we have here is a person who has made an idiotic statement and instead of fessing up to it has decided to call people immature and dumb. Well nobody is buying it! You cannot be a 800 runner moving up to the 1500 and have more of a strength backround than a 1500/3000 SC runner. Running less races does not give you more of a strength backround than another runner. Running less rounds does not make you more prepared for a multi-round championship.

This season is not over.

Rowbury won the usatf nationals convincingly. Willard commented that the 1500 final was tough for her. By the way, she placed third in that race. These are all facts.

I don't fantasize. I am open minded and have stated numerous times that I am not convinced at this point that Willard will top Rowbury at Worlds. That is my speculation, I admit. However, your comments about who will come out on top are also based on speculation.

They are at different points in their racing season. Willard has been racing since indoors. Rowbury's racing began in earnest at Pre. Again, more facts.

There is nothing you can say that will change my opinion. Nobody owns anybody. It ain't over until the fat lady sings. If I'm forgetting any other metaphors, they also apply.

Let's just agree to disagree and call it a day. By the way, thanks for refraining from the swear words and insults! It is really a much more affective way of communicating

Nice. Your multiple personalities have been revealed a la the same post under two names Who are you anyway. " Johny quest" or "this one" or someone else posting under a different name?

1500xx wrote:

Poor Shannon- last year at this time she was being freed from the competition of the doped Ruskies,

This has got to be the most ridiculous comment I have ever seen. Being "freed" from competition against dopers? Are you seriously implying that Shannon, or any of the women who competed in her event in Beijing, were lucky because the dopers got caught and weren't able to cheat their way into a potential medal?

Wow, you are really messed up to make a statement like that against a great person who, by the way, ran very well in Beijing.

In the future, you may want to wait until the logic center of your brain engages before posting.

It keeps getting better wrote:

1500xx wrote:

Poor Shannon- last year at this time she was being freed from the competition of the doped Ruskies,

This has got to be the most ridiculous comment I have ever seen. Being "freed" from competition against dopers? Are you seriously implying that Shannon, or any of the women who competed in her event in Beijing, were lucky because the dopers got caught and weren't able to cheat their way into a potential medal?

Wow, you are really messed up to make a statement like that against a great person who, by the way, ran very well in Beijing.

Please help the logic center of my brain to understand exactly what you meant when you started your post about "poor Shannon" being freed from having to compete against doped up Russians.

Whatever your intentions, my logic tells me you are not being nice. Correct me, please, if I am wrong!

Hey, no one cares.

In fairness Rowbury ran a pretty stellar 5000m earlier this season. Willard has been throwing down monster 800s indicating she is sharper earlier in the season. From THIS years evidence Rowbury looks like she has been working more strength later on.

lkjhjhlkjhlkjhlkjh wrote:

In fairness Rowbury ran a pretty stellar 5000m earlier this season. Willard has been throwing down monster 800s indicating she is sharper earlier in the season. From THIS years evidence Rowbury looks like she has been working more strength later on.

A qualifying steeple/1500m double at the US Championships isn't indicative of strength?

The only women she lost two running four middle distance races in four days are all sub4.

Obviously Willard has plenty of strength. The 1:58 gives her the advantage over Rowbury for now in my eyes. If you know you can run against the best at 3000 (steeple or not) and you have that kind of speed, I'll take that over anyone's 5000 PR, unless they can make something happen during the race that takes the closing speed away.

All that said, there are still a few races before Berlin and a lot can happen. I don't think Rowbury is as race sharp as Willard right now. That will change in the next few weeks, I imagine.

My guess is the "strength" comment has to do with -

1) The fact that Willard is physically larger

2) Willard is faster over 800 meters

Willard's speed and body type point to her being more of a 800/1500 runner. Yes, I know she is a steepler, but the way she is running this year I wouldn't be shocked if she decides to give up the steeple at some point.

Then you have Rowbury - thin, light, not as fast over 800 meters. Decent 15:12 pr at 5k. She seems/looks more like a strength runner. I'm assuming that's where the comment is coming from.

Yeah, it's sort of hard to figure out why that guy was flipping out over the fairly innocuous statement that Willard (1:58/4:01) currently seems to have a more speed-oriented profile than Rowbury (2:01/4:00/15:12), who looks stronger at this point. It doesn't mean that Willard has no endurance, or that Rowbury has no speed -- just a pretty basic observation of their current performance profiles. Very hard to call who will come out on top in Berlin (though I did correctly pick Willard to win London in the IAAF Fantasy League!).

This debate is amusing, I think in trying to come to a happy place, we can all agree that these two women are both strength trained beasts, in an attractive way...

Willard is nothing short of amazing this year, especially given how heavy she looked in indoors. Although Rowburry beat her at Nationals fairly significantly, Willard did do the SC. I am amazed tht after Shannon has shown US women who were complacent running 4:05+ for the last few years, that they could be in the mix, how fast are women are now. That and Obama make me proud to be an American again.

They should both make the final, anyone's bet on who will run faster. I'm going with Robury, being a big fan of hers, but Willard is one wild hairdo from a big performance. (Blond or Brunette base, what color highlights?) We shall see...

BTW, the pacer was the worst ever, really blowed.

Willard: 5"4" and 120

Rowbury: 5"5" and 115

I guess by larger you mean denser?

As it currently stands...IMHO....A strictly kickers race would be won by Willard while a 4:00 or less race would be won by Rowbury. Unfortunately some of the times currently being run by the Russians and Africans will probably omit any USA women from medaling in Berlin.

Here is your Homework wrote:

Willard: 5"4" and 120

Rowbury: 5"5" and 115

I guess by larger you mean denser?

Sure, "denser" works. You know what I mean, you have eyes:

I fully agree.

Props to Willard for a great season so far.

Shannon seems to purposely be having a slower start this season so she can peak at world's, since she seemed to peak a little earlier last year.

We'll see how it plays out for both of them, but it's pretty exciting and not necessary to trash talk here.

There is the rest of the world, of course, and some of these times coming from the non-positive Russians at their trials is something to consider. And Jamal looks fast if not again suspicous. [oops I trashed talked...]