RE: Why does Sara Hall still compete?

Retire wrote:

zip it wrote:

Do you get paid to play basketball? She just won at Millrose. I remember last year she fought to the line in one of the big indoor races and was nipped for first as she dove face first into the boards. She is tough.

Well, I can't dispute the pay aspect of it. And if the competition is weak, she may as well collect a paycheck. So I stand corrected.

But I would hardly call anyone "tough" for running a 4:15 1500.

So, I guess by your logic, you should be able to break the world mile record right now because you're so tough, right? Just tough it out and anything is possible!

Fast times are not what determines a tough runner. Sara is probably much tougher than you'll ever be.

The Party's Crashing Us wrote:

The OP is a troll, you assholes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nope, the OP is not a troll. You just think I'm a troll because you don't agree with my opinion. As I mentioned previously, I've appreciated and learned from the perspective of others on this matter. As the thread went on, I could see that I was being a little too narrow.

If anyone is a troll, it's the likes of you. You hide behind your anonymity, call names and use vulgarities because you're not capable of contributing to a thoughtful discussion. As long as you're still in high school, you might want to consider taking an introductory debate or communication class.

someone else wrote: So, I guess by your logic, you should be able to break the world mile record right now because you're so tough, right?

Not necessarily. I just don't happen to think 4:15 is a very good time for a would-be national class runner in an open race. But it was certainly a poor choice of words to question her toughness; I agree to that.

As far as who's tougher between me and Sara Hall, you make a very childish comment. I've been retired from competition for 20 years, so I have no doubt she's tougher than I am right now. But 30 years ago? I imagine I had as much guts as any distance runner. Not the talent, as I've already noted, but definitely the guts.

I've stated this before on a similar thread and I'll state it again- last year's 3k at indoor nationals was the best track race I've ever seen- thanks to Metivier and Hall. I'm returning to indoor nationals again this year just to see Hall race, as I can't think of a runner who races with more guts time in and time out than Hall. Yeah, she may not have Rowbury's talent, but she puts it on the line every time she shows up.

Hopefully she doesn't hang 'em up anytime soon.

I have seen way too many thoughtful and considerate posts recently on Letsrun; People actually having a discussion and coming to reformed conclusions? I think the world may be coming to an end.

I think this type of fatalistic mentality kills the sport "Why train hard if you know you're not going to be the best runner at your distance?"

I don't see this nearly as much in other sports. I don't see basketball players quit after college because they know LeBron James is a better player, or LA Galaxy go under because there's a better team in the premier league.

Sarah Hall is an amazing athlete. Regardless of whether or not she will ever run the times that people like Jenny B will or have run, she is a competitor. Sara Hall is also pretty famous for getting a CLOSE 2nd behind premier US runners in MAJOR races. While this sicks for her, I think people don't realize what kind of runner she is.

I'm a good example of someone who trains really hard but I will probably never even be on the national scene. I have a 15:00 PR in the 5k, and may eventually get it down into the lower 14's, but I know where I will end up: far from the top. Why do I train? I train because I love the sport, I love being a part of it, and like many other people, I like to push my limits and see just how fast I can get. I enjoy competition, and I like the comraderie of being on a club team. I know I am doing my part to participate in and support the grown of the sport I love. How much more would I want to do this if I ran mile races against Leo Manzano and he outkicked me every time?

The person who said track is the only sport of "If you can't be the best in the world, give up" is right on the money.

Did the OP not go to the biggest indoor meet in the US?

I'd train for years to compete in front of 10,000 plus and win:

2011 Millrose Games

1, Sara Hall, United States, 4:15.35. 2, Carmen Douma-Hussar, Canada, 4:16.73. 3, Heidi Dahl, United States, 4:16.99. 4, Sara Vaughn, United States, 4:20.52. 5, Lesley Higgins, United States, 4:21.70. 6, Renee Tomlin, United States, 4:24.09. Karen Shinkins, Ireland, DNF.

But for the original poster, things like Millrose are a waste of time. Only the Olympics or time trials in Europe are significant.

If people want to know why track isn't as popular as it once was, this thread is a great example. The incessant chase for times and the focus and the lack of focus on individual races is a great start.

She's already had a good year in my mind as she won one of the two or three races where people actually care if you win.

Sorry to spoil your argument with facts, but that 1500 was certainly NOT a class field. In fact, it was the watered-down collection of remnants who were not invited for the women's mile. So she won the women's C (or D) middle distance race at that meet. Don't go trying to make it out to be anything more than that.

Sorry to Spoil YOUR argument, but there WAS no women's mile. The 1500 was the A race at that meet.

Jesus, you're right. In that case, if they could get just one marginal Olympian to race then Millrose truly does suck, Rojo.

rojo wrote: If people want to know why track isn't as popular as it once was, this thread is a great example. The incessant chase for times and the focus and the lack of focus on individual races is a great start.

Your point isn't wasted, but I'm not sure I agree. At least not completely.

Casual baseball fans like to see home runs, even though "small ball" displays so much more of the games aspects. Basketball fans like to see dunks, even though that particular shot requires less skill than any other. Fans like big plays.

So by comparison, don't you think fast times would draw more interest to the sport by virtue of attracting the casual fan? I mean, I've been involved with track as a both a competitor and fan for nearly four decades, but the one thing I still hate is a tactical (read: slow) championship race. Maybe this is why the infatuation with Pre continues for many.....True or not, the perception is that he went balls out for fast times in every race.

No, by comparison, casual track fans like to see good races. Fast times can be quite boring if it's just the person running by themself. If you have been involved with the sport for 4 decades, you are not a casual fan.

Your way is a dead end. As time goes on, world records become more and more rare. So are all the other races "boring" to you?

"So are all the other races "boring" to you?"

Well... to people like him they ARE a waste. He looks for things like "Rupp to go for 10,000 record", and if he doesn't make it (even if he wins with a PR), then "Rupp is a loser". Many of the most vocal on these boards (not necessarily the majority) have this view. Now some are just looking to stir up controversy and spark debate - but not all.

The fact that they spend so much time on a running message board tells me that they probably had SOME talent, but not "enough". Perhaps they were number 4 or 5 on their HS or college team. The sad part is that they probably worked hard and fought for every second, but they came to despise running rather than enjoy it. They stopped running altogether because they acknowledged that they would never "make it". When people like Joannie plan to run till the day they die - even though their times get slower and slower - these people just don't get it.

another great one wrote:Well... to people like him they ARE a waste. He looks for things like "Rupp to go for 10,000 record", and if he doesn't make it (even if he wins with a PR), then "Rupp is a loser".

With all due respect, please don't attempt to speak (or think) on my behalf. Perhaps I haven't done the best job of conveying my points, but your assessment of me (above) couldn't be further from the truth.

reviewer wrote: No, by comparison, casual track fans like to see good races. Fast times can be quite boring if it's just the person running by themself. If you have been involved with the sport for 4 decades, you are not a casual fan.....So are all the other races "boring" to you?

Just for the sake of clarification, I never suggested that I am a casual fan. And I guess I made the mistake of guessing what casual fans like, because you make good points.

I don't know that I find tactical races boring, per se, but I certainly don't enjoy seeing a bunch of 3:30 1500 runners putz around the track for 3 laps and then sprint to a 3:46 victory. I didn't mean to imply that I need to see a WR in every race but, generally, I like to see people run fast and/or close to their limits.

Retire wrote:

With all due respect, please don't attempt to speak (or think) on my behalf. . . your assessment of me (above) couldn't be further from the truth.

ditto

Have you ever heard her talk? There's not many career options for her outside of running...

That is the great thing about sports fans... it is never one size fits all. In baseball there are many fans that love to see a slugfest with both sides belting out HR after HR. Other fans see this as sloppy baseball and find a 1-0 game riveting. Both are fans and to each his own.

I understand that YOU prefer to "see people run fast and/or close to their limits" and that is great; however, I can't quite see how you don't understand why Sara would want to continue to race. Being able to run as a profession rather than work a full time job and find time to run on the side seems like a no-brainer.

WahhhlanWebb wrote:

Have you ever heard her talk? There's not many career options for her outside of running...

Are you kidding me? She's insanely smart. You're clearly an idiot or just trying to piss people off.