blackbeltmarathoner wrote:
he broke 4 for the mile speed is not an issue
That indicates endurance, not speed.
blackbeltmarathoner wrote:
he broke 4 for the mile speed is not an issue
That indicates endurance, not speed.
someone had to do it wrote:
That indicates endurance, not speed.
Hey Ventolin.
o ok so it doesnt require any kind of above average speed to have sub 4 abilities ? makes sense
I LURV COLLEGE - are you accusing Levins of drug use?
blackbeltmarathoner wrote:
o ok so it doesnt require any kind of above average speed to have sub 4 abilities ? makes sense
Chris Derrick has run 3:41 for 1500m - sub 4 mile equivalent.
You think that indicates he has good speed?
learn something
Define speed.
I've seen Derrick run 52 for a 400.
Whether that counts as speed or not depends on who you're talking too.
Ok, well he also has a 1:49.9 800, which is also an indication that he has good speed. Why are you trying to invent arguments rather than just accepting that Levins has good speed?
doesnt exactly indicate bad speed, what WOULD be good speed then? 3:28 for a 10k runner? id like to see that
someone had to do it wrote:
Chris Derrick has run 3:41 for 1500m - sub 4 mile equivalent.
You think that indicates he has good speed?
learn something
Ventolin, you suck just as much as usual when you post under this name.
Ho Hum wrote:
Ok, well he also has a 1:49.9 800, which is also an indication that he has good speed. Why are you trying to invent arguments rather than just accepting that Levins has good speed?
No
I'm pointing out that one cannot infer that an athlete has good speed because they ran a sub 4 minute mile. If you need 160+ mile weeks to run a sub 4 minute mile, you certainly cannot conclude that that athlete has good speed based only on a sub 4 minute mile (which was what the poster i originally responded to said)
x time for y distance takes some combination of speed and endurance.
If you're running over 150 miles per week, you're not running sub 4 off of speed.
understand?
good
He's running 150 mpw because he's a 10k runner.
Who's to say that he couldn't run sub 4 on 30 mpw. We will never know if he could or not because that's not the training he does.
You guys are confusing each other because you're assuming that you both mean the same thing by speed and endurance, and you're assuming that those words even have exact definitions.
llama wrote:
He's running 150 mpw because he's a 10k runner.
Who's to say that he couldn't run sub 4 on 30 mpw. We will never know if he could or not because that's not the training he does.
He has run a 3:57 mile while running over 150 miles per week.
In what universe does he break 4 running 120 miles per week less?
Levins just tweeted that he's "definitely not" experimenting with any mileage over 190.
Woxl wrote:
I hope the guy implodes. He didn't learn squat when everyone ran away from him in the 10,000m Final.
This is a guy that worships his training log and not his results.
Who the F cares? Great he wins an award for the highest mileage. How about doing something productive with your life. God this guy is pathetic. yeah, I can beat a bunch of canadians. levins will never win an olympic or world medal. He is too concerned with being the highest mileage runner. This guy sounds like Dean K in the making.[quote]
I'm not sure who the bigger idiot is. If either of these two morons are serious then there is no hope. And what are the chances that they even know Cam. I will have to vote for the moron who compares Levins to Karnazes as the BIGGEST idiot. Anyone who compares those 2 in a similar light is a complete ignoramus.
Anyway, did occur to any of you numsculls that the 250 refers to kilometers! He is Canadian, so it makes perfect sense to refer to kilometers depending who he is talking to.