Galen Rupp's 10000m Is Not Superior To Chris Solinsky's

Here's how stupid these morons are. They all think that Galen Rupp is not capable of running faster than 13:06, because has not done it. That's how stupid these people are, and I am no longer going to lower myself and my palpable brilliance by interacting with them.

Your weak but predictable premise could only work if Rupp and Solinsky ran equal times. Then maybe you could convincingly argue that Solinsky with a later date, sharper fitness, faster track, etc. has the superior mark. If you have some secret conversion table that adjusts a 26:59 to sub-26:50 then share it.

jesse was a friend wrote:

Here's how stupid these morons are. They all think that Galen Rupp is not capable of running faster than 13:06, because has not done it. That's how stupid these people are, and I am no longer going to lower myself and my palpable brilliance by interacting with them.

No, I believe that Rupp is capable of running 12:50. This PROVES that Rupp is better at the 10K than Solinsky.

Everyone is laughing at your arrogance and stubborn inability to admit any fault. Know this. Grow up.

And I doubt that Jesse was ever your friend.

American distance running sure has come a long way. Back in 2003 Meb had the best American 5,000m of the year and didn't break 13:20. Rupp ran very close to that pace for 10,000m. Alan Culpepper, who was one of the best runners in the US for years and a two-time Olympian, barely ran Solinsky's 10,000m pace for 5,000m at his best.

And here we are in 2011 and you fools find yourselves able to say that 26:48 isn't that good. Yes, American distance running has come a long way.

It's reasonable to say that Sol could have run this time last year, given his performances, but not to say that this 10 is not superior to solinsky's actual performance. Rupp cannot close races like Solinsky, but Sol has not done this.

jesse was a friend wrote:

Galen Rupp's 10000m Is Not Superior To Chris Solinsky's

Seriously, people? Already three pages of replies? It would be very difficult to find a post that is MORE worthy of the phrase "Please don't feed the troll!"

2/10, simply because enough people were foolish enough to take the bait.

The odd thing about the OP's post is he doesn't make the one valid argument that Solinsky has in his favor. Namely closing in 1:56. Otherwise he is kind of right that it was no breakthrough performance. Rupp had already shown he could do this in other races this year. And in any case Salazar strives for Rupp to only have smaller incremental improvement each year to reduce the risk of injury. That was truly a great performance Solinksy had at Payton Jordan. But his injury this year was the flip side of the coin that comes with his amazing performance at Payton Jordan. To train to do that he was taking a bigger risk of injury and it caught up to him. Rupp now enters the off season healthy with more major championship experience ready to build off this season to achieve even greater strength, endurance and speed. In contrast Solinsky is trying to heal and train hard just to get back to where he was in 2010.

jesse was a friend wrote:

IF you consider that Galen Rupp never led a step of the race and that the race was in Brussels, where 18 of the fastest 29 10000m performances have been achieved, and that the race was on September 16th instead of May 1st, it is clear that Solinsky's race was as good. However, kudos to Galen Rupp, as I knew he'd likely break 27 one day, but still don't think he has proven he can match Solinsky's 5000 pb. This is NOT a big breakthrough effort. Solinsky could have run this fast last year. Having said that, way to go Galen Rupp. You will never run faster than today, but so what? You made the fanboys happy...

CJ does exist wrote:

26:48 > 26:59...nuff said

Yep, that's how it works in track & field. A faster time is superior to a slower time. It's a matter of objective math, not an opinion.

The thing about track is that times DO NOT LIE. If someone has a better time, they are better in that individual event. There is absolutely no other way to measure it. I think anyone who reads this thread will get dumber because of you.

Lets just look at a factual comparison of Rupp VS Solinsky

I would say the two best gauges to determine how successful/great a runner is are his or her best times and their performance in world/Olympic Championships

First Times

Chris Solinsky Galen Rupp

5000 12:55 1228 13:06 1188

10000 26:59 1227 26:48 1246

2455 2434

So Solinsky has a slight advantage in PRS.

Now world/Olympic Performances

Chris Solinsky Galen Rupp

Never competed 10000, 11th 07, 13th 08, 8th 09, 7th 11

in a world final 5000, 9th 11

Based on these two factors i would say Rupp is a better distance runner. This is not about who looks nicer or who uses what technology its about times and performances they have actually run. Speculation into what someone could have or can is really meaningless when compared to what another person has actually run.

jesse was a friend wrote:

Heard through the grapevine wrote:

26:48 is not a big breakthrough effort? Great observation. Also, nice job halfheartedly covering all the remarks you've made about Rupp in the past. Truly a top-notch post and a worth contribution to this forum.

26:48 is NOT a big breakthrough. Do you not understand that Solinsky could have run that fast last year? IF you don't, you must not be very bright. Galen could have run under 27 by late summer last year. This is a nice step in the right direction.

Oh gee, you have once again insulted another poster's intelligence. Totally unexpected.

Scratch that, 26:48 > 26:59.

I believe that these forums should be taken off the internet! These forums are breeding grounds for haters!

chat rooms = cyber bullying city

Mario Lopezz wrote:

I believe that these forums should be taken off the internet! These forums are breeding grounds for haters!

dontfeedthetrolls.jpg

scoreboard!!!!!!

you're an idiot. i could explain why, but you don't merit the keystrokes.