Jingy doesn't even save characters over Jakob lmaoooo there's literally no point in ever using it
Jingy shortens "Jakob Ingebrigtsen" and thus makes identifying the athlete more efficient. It's ambiguous to just use the word "Jakob" it could apply to a ton of other athletes: - Jakob Kiplimo (World XC champ) - Jakob Wightman (World 1500m champ) - Jakob Heyward - Jakob Krop - Jakob Rayner
You suspect he has added something to his program. How astute!
Yes, he added 1 year of training and one year of maturation, which from 15 to 16 years of age can produce massive changes in a boy's body.
But you don't care. You just want to accuse the boy of doping.
Those "massive changes" that you refer to do not turn a 16 year old into a 20 or 25 year old. He is a junior athlete - and will be for several more years - and yet is running at the level of former greats in the sport and on less training. He is already far better than Coe, Ovett and Cram were at the same age. So what does he have that those prodigies didn't?
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Over the next 3 years he improved by 46 seconds to 3:54 for 1500 as a 14-year-old.
Over the next 2 years he’s improved by roughly 15 or so seconds.
That looks to me like a pretty steady progression from a very high pre-pubescent baseline explainable by going through puberty in combination with 5+ years of serious quality training from that very high baseline.
At the very least, a one minute progression in 1500/mile time between age 11 and age 16 is not in anyway notable. Most kids progress far more than that. But most kids are nowhere close to his baseline at 11.
If you’re going to accuse a kid of doping at least tell us at what point in that 5 years he likely started, what the most likely doping agents used would be, and how that—and only that—can explain the results.
The usual suspects are here once again to derail another interesting thread with doping talk. They need to be banned or given their own thread to yell into the abyss. Ridiculous how often threads go off the rails with the same characters every time
Three years of serious consistent training with older faster training partners had him at the 1500 equivalent of a 4:12 mile as a 14-year-old.
And, by the way, 4:12 actually DOES happen to be the world age group record for 14 (though Myers did not seem to have raced a full mile that year, only an equivalent 3:54 for 1500).
From there he has dropped about 15-18 seconds over the next two years, most likely the period during which he had most of his gains from puberty and also increased his training substantially.
Unless you honestly believe that the parents or coaches of a middle schooler from Australia were engaged in doping him up DURING HIS FIRST YEAR AS A TEENAGER, risking his health and potentially his eligibility to compete if caught, then we arrive at the conclusion that he was as fast as any 14-year-old miler in recorded history.
From there, we have a 15-18 second improvement between what is his freshman and junior years of high school (and remember that his birthday is in June, making him closer to the grade below rather than the grade above). That is considerably less improvement than one sees from many committed HS runners during that same period, but is consistent with already being so good at the start and at the point where gains are more marginal.
You can throw out all the names of fast runners from history you want. The facts still are they either:
(1) were NOT as fast as him at age 11,
(2) were NOT training seriously and consistently under good coaching for a 6+ year period from ages 10 to 16,
(3) were NOT blessed to have older national-caliber training partners to run all their workouts with and generally look to as their role models and standard bearers for what is possible,
or
(4) were NOT able to stay healthy for long stretches of time.
Again, my suspicion is that if Snell, Coe, Ovett, Cram, and all the others HAD been as fast at age 11 and had trained seriously and consistently from that point in a good system for them that they probably COULD HAVE run something similar at age 16 (especially with access to modern shoes, tracks, strength training, physios, etc.).
But they—and almost everyone else in the world—did not have all four of those facts above working in their favor. So, their actual first 3:55 mile came a bit later in age (but more quickly once they started training seriously).
Three years of serious consistent training with older faster training partners had him at the 1500 equivalent of a 4:12 mile as a 14-year-old.
And, by the way, 4:12 actually DOES happen to be the world age group record for 14 (though Myers did not seem to have raced a full mile that year, only an equivalent 3:54 for 1500).
From there he has dropped about 15-18 seconds over the next two years, most likely the period during which he had most of his gains from puberty and also increased his training substantially.
Unless you honestly believe that the parents or coaches of a middle schooler from Australia were engaged in doping him up DURING HIS FIRST YEAR AS A TEENAGER, risking his health and potentially his eligibility to compete if caught, then we arrive at the conclusion that he was as fast as any 14-year-old miler in recorded history.
From there, we have a 15-18 second improvement between what is his freshman and junior years of high school (and remember that his birthday is in June, making him closer to the grade below rather than the grade above). That is considerably less improvement than one sees from many committed HS runners during that same period, but is consistent with already being so good at the start and at the point where gains are more marginal.
You can throw out all the names of fast runners from history you want. The facts still are they either:
(1) were NOT as fast as him at age 11,
(2) were NOT training seriously and consistently under good coaching for a 6+ year period from ages 10 to 16,
(3) were NOT blessed to have older national-caliber training partners to run all their workouts with and generally look to as their role models and standard bearers for what is possible,
or
(4) were NOT able to stay healthy for long stretches of time.
Again, my suspicion is that if Snell, Coe, Ovett, Cram, and all the others HAD been as fast at age 11 and had trained seriously and consistently from that point in a good system for them that they probably COULD HAVE run something similar at age 16 (especially with access to modern shoes, tracks, strength training, physios, etc.).
But they—and almost everyone else in the world—did not have all four of those facts above working in their favor. So, their actual first 3:55 mile came a bit later in age (but more quickly once they started training seriously).
So he's way faster than the best in the sport were at the same age. I wonder when he's going to slow up or is he going to maintain that superiority and run 3.42? Of course he is. Everything is possible here. And clean of course.
Three years of serious consistent training with older faster training partners had him at the 1500 equivalent of a 4:12 mile as a 14-year-old.
And, by the way, 4:12 actually DOES happen to be the world age group record for 14 (though Myers did not seem to have raced a full mile that year, only an equivalent 3:54 for 1500).
From there he has dropped about 15-18 seconds over the next two years, most likely the period during which he had most of his gains from puberty and also increased his training substantially.
Unless you honestly believe that the parents or coaches of a middle schooler from Australia were engaged in doping him up DURING HIS FIRST YEAR AS A TEENAGER, risking his health and potentially his eligibility to compete if caught, then we arrive at the conclusion that he was as fast as any 14-year-old miler in recorded history.
From there, we have a 15-18 second improvement between what is his freshman and junior years of high school (and remember that his birthday is in June, making him closer to the grade below rather than the grade above). That is considerably less improvement than one sees from many committed HS runners during that same period, but is consistent with already being so good at the start and at the point where gains are more marginal.
You can throw out all the names of fast runners from history you want. The facts still are they either:
(1) were NOT as fast as him at age 11,
(2) were NOT training seriously and consistently under good coaching for a 6+ year period from ages 10 to 16,
(3) were NOT blessed to have older national-caliber training partners to run all their workouts with and generally look to as their role models and standard bearers for what is possible,
or
(4) were NOT able to stay healthy for long stretches of time.
Again, my suspicion is that if Snell, Coe, Ovett, Cram, and all the others HAD been as fast at age 11 and had trained seriously and consistently from that point in a good system for them that they probably COULD HAVE run something similar at age 16 (especially with access to modern shoes, tracks, strength training, physios, etc.).
But they—and almost everyone else in the world—did not have all four of those facts above working in their favor. So, their actual first 3:55 mile came a bit later in age (but more quickly once they started training seriously).
So he's way faster than the best in the sport were at the same age. I wonder when he's going to slow up or is he going to maintain that superiority and run 3.42? Of course he is. Everything is possible here. And clean of course.
Three years of serious consistent training with older faster training partners had him at the 1500 equivalent of a 4:12 mile as a 14-year-old.
And, by the way, 4:12 actually DOES happen to be the world age group record for 14 (though Myers did not seem to have raced a full mile that year, only an equivalent 3:54 for 1500).
From there he has dropped about 15-18 seconds over the next two years, most likely the period during which he had most of his gains from puberty and also increased his training substantially.
Unless you honestly believe that the parents or coaches of a middle schooler from Australia were engaged in doping him up DURING HIS FIRST YEAR AS A TEENAGER, risking his health and potentially his eligibility to compete if caught, then we arrive at the conclusion that he was as fast as any 14-year-old miler in recorded history.
From there, we have a 15-18 second improvement between what is his freshman and junior years of high school (and remember that his birthday is in June, making him closer to the grade below rather than the grade above). That is considerably less improvement than one sees from many committed HS runners during that same period, but is consistent with already being so good at the start and at the point where gains are more marginal.
You can throw out all the names of fast runners from history you want. The facts still are they either:
(1) were NOT as fast as him at age 11,
(2) were NOT training seriously and consistently under good coaching for a 6+ year period from ages 10 to 16,
(3) were NOT blessed to have older national-caliber training partners to run all their workouts with and generally look to as their role models and standard bearers for what is possible,
or
(4) were NOT able to stay healthy for long stretches of time.
Again, my suspicion is that if Snell, Coe, Ovett, Cram, and all the others HAD been as fast at age 11 and had trained seriously and consistently from that point in a good system for them that they probably COULD HAVE run something similar at age 16 (especially with access to modern shoes, tracks, strength training, physios, etc.).
But they—and almost everyone else in the world—did not have all four of those facts above working in their favor. So, their actual first 3:55 mile came a bit later in age (but more quickly once they started training seriously).
So he's way faster than the best in the sport were at the same age. I wonder when he's going to slow up or is he going to maintain that superiority and run 3.42? Of course he is. Everything is possible here. And clean of course.
He’s already slowing up in year-to-year progress—just as one would expect in nearing the top of the performance curve (law of diminishing returns and all…).
He improved by about 15-16 seconds per year between 11 & 14.
He’s only improved by 7-9 seconds per year between 14 & 16 despite likely getting most of his puberty gains and significantly increasing his training from what he did at 13 or 14.
His improvement from this point will likely be 7-9 seconds—at most—for the rest of his CAREER. It’s far better than even odds that he never runs under 3:48 than that he does.
It’s much easier to get to 98 to 99% of one’s potential than it is to eek out that final 1-2% without running into injury, bad luck, losing your confidence and mojo, mistiming your peaks, and all the normal types of training and life disruptions and setbacks.
Again, though, there’s really nothing exceptional about a one minute progression between 11 and 16 or a 15-18 second improvement between 14 and 16. The only thing exceptional in this case is that Myers was in the upper .1% of 11-year-olds and then was the world age group record equivalent at 14 so (combined with modern shoes, tracks, and all the rest) you get a world age group record as a result.
Global human population (billions) by year (with name of runner born that year):
1947 (Jim Ryun): ~2.5
1955 (Steve Ovett): 2.8
1960 (Steve Cram): 3.0
2006 (Cameron Myers): 6.6
The human population more than doubled since the births of Jim Ryun, Steve Ovett, and Steve Cram to the birth of Cameron Myers. Even with the same-shaped normal distribution curve, shouldn't we expect more than twice as many outliers, because there is a bigger population represented by the curve?
FFS Armstrong, can you please stop it with your ad nauseum accusations of doping without proof, the moment someone runs an exceptional time? How about you wait until a person shows up positive and/or wait to see where his career ends up. There is no depth of field that makes junior running records at the same level as seniors, so it is no surprise that records get broken...same on other end of scale at masters level.
I wish someone accused by you sues you for all you have to teach you a lesson and shut you up. The 'annomity' of LRC ain't going to save you.
Cheers...your fellow antipodean who has gotten sick of your trolling
