1337hax0r wrote:
very obese
Obese? You idiot.
Women are supposed to be round, soft, and supple - like her - and not muscular and hard. She's not even chubby. Plump maybe, but not chubby. I think she very attractive.
That idiot runner #17574 should have turned around and run backwards, I know I would. Why don't streakers like her run in my marathons?
It is all relative you closeminded individual. I would not want her.
E=mc2 wrote:
It is all relative you closeminded individual. I would not want her.
or put another way, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder." not that anyone here is accusing her of "beauty." she is not obese. she is a little "plump," but not obese. i for one like curves on women, so many of the "hotness" threads have women who have the chests of little boys. not good at all. but as they say, "beauty is in the eye..."
put in her bib number....17854
I saw a chance to score but it was not meant to be, she lives in Italy. I would have stalked her to at least Montana but I draw the line at Italy.
define stalking wrote:
http://www.ingnycmarathon.org/results/results.htmlput in her bib number....17854
I saw a chance to score but it was not meant to be, she lives in Italy. I would have stalked her to at least Montana but I draw the line at Italy.
that can not be her number, that bib belongs to a 38 yo MALE.
JUST REMEMBER THE CAMERA ADDS ABOUT 10 POUNDS OR IS IT 20?????
ok, good point but check this out....
http://www.brightroom.com/view_user_photo.asp?EVENTID=4044&PWD=&ID=11361863&FROM=photos&BIB=17854
that dude is no where to be found but if you put in that number there are more photos of her than him. I think its a conspiracy but if you think about it she doesn't even have a number so the photographer obviously wanted to sell some booby pictures.
I didn't think she looked italian (her pits are shaved)...."so you're saying theres a chance"
6packjack wrote:
of all the photos posted, i would take the fat chick. a little curve is nice. if a gal is too thin to menstrate she is too thin to do it with. use that as your rule of thumb.
Yea, but how the hell would you know?
Just check teh finishers at that time and it should be easy to figure out. These are the only women who finished between 4:31:05 and 4:31:08:
15823 F 3589 299 Nancy Hodges (48) VA 4:31:06 4:27:31 1:03:33 2:08:33 3:19:25 10:12 4:03:42 56.9 %
15825 F 3590 1003 Devon Noonan (24) VA 4:31:06 4:16:39 1:12:24 2:18:45 3:28:18 9:47 4:16:39 54.1 %
15828 F 3591 1499 Cathleen Balseiro (36) NY 4:31:07 4:26:41 1:04:58 2:12:48 3:26:19 10:10 4:26:41 52.0 %
15829 F 3592 1004 Jill Ann Coccaro (24) NJ 4:31:07 4:26:31 1:09:17 2:19:24 3:29:57 10:10 4:26:31 52.0 %
15831 F 3593 611 Teresa Koczorowski (44) MA 4:31:07 4:29:59 54:25 2:00:13 3:17:52 10:18 4:14:35 54.5 %
She's probably one of the 24 year olds.
i think she is a BANDIT.
hser wrote:
6packjack wrote:of all the photos posted, i would take the fat chick. a little curve is nice. if a gal is too thin to menstrate she is too thin to do it with. use that as your rule of thumb.
Yea, but how the hell would you know?
------
sometimes you need to check their medicine cabinet to see if they have any tampax.
Doug_theRunner wrote:
Why don't streakers like her run in my marathons?
are you running december marathons in blue states?
Not only did that "chick" remove her top while crossing the finish line but "she" was also wearing a mask.....as was the guy who finished right before her. Check it out:
http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=5719864&uid=2841619
NYer wrote:
Just check teh finishers at that time and it should be easy to figure out. These are the only women who finished between 4:31:05 and 4:31:08:
15823 F 3589 299 Nancy Hodges (48) VA 4:31:06 4:27:31 1:03:33 2:08:33 3:19:25 10:12 4:03:42 56.9 %
15825 F 3590 1003 Devon Noonan (24) VA 4:31:06 4:16:39 1:12:24 2:18:45 3:28:18 9:47 4:16:39 54.1 %
15828 F 3591 1499 Cathleen Balseiro (36) NY 4:31:07 4:26:41 1:04:58 2:12:48 3:26:19 10:10 4:26:41 52.0 %
15829 F 3592 1004 Jill Ann Coccaro (24) NJ 4:31:07 4:26:31 1:09:17 2:19:24 3:29:57 10:10 4:26:31 52.0 %
15831 F 3593 611 Teresa Koczorowski (44) MA 4:31:07 4:29:59 54:25 2:00:13 3:17:52 10:18 4:14:35 54.5 %
She's probably one of the 24 year olds.
Good grief you people are stupid. That chunky lass most certainly did NOT run the entire marathon, nor did she have a number on the top she pulled off at the finish. Repeat, she was NOT a registered runner. Do you really think someone her size could run a 4.5 hour marathon in those pants on a warm day? If so, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
To the idiot earlier who thought she was from Italy, "Rocco" isn't a woman's name in the old country. The person with that number is the guy right behind our topless beauty in the finish chute. You know, the one with the Italy jersey with the #17854 pinned to it. I thought it would be fun to give captions to the picture since, unlike other people in those pictures, he appears to be aware there's a topless lady directly in front of him.
Doug_theRunner wrote:
Women are supposed to be round, soft, and supple
If that makes you happier about having a fat wife, then you keep telling yourself that. Women are supposed to be... Oh wait they can be anything they want.
I was wondering when someone was going to get around to noticing the obvious, which is that the woman in the photo clearly did not run the entire 26.2 miles. The pants she's wearing ought to be enough of a clue to that.
That being said, you'd have a lot more fun with her than with Tara Reid, unless you were a addleminded cokehead, or Milena, unless you were on a hunger strike.
go to page two of the women's photos from NYC marathon on the fast women running site. Check out the CURRENT photo of glusac from the race. Major body difference. Skeletal in the photo you provided. More running normal in the marathon.
To those who think she's fat:
GO FUCK A MUMMY!
sorry. page three of the photos.