It really come down to if Webb is in a funk. When he is on Webb will be in sub 3:33 condition, and when he is off he will lose to generic 3:38 runners. This currrent funk is now over a year long. The last time he was in this situation was at Michigan. He is easily the most erratic distance runner in US history.
Noddles wrote:
It really come down to if Webb is in a funk. When he is on Webb will be in sub 3:33 condition, and when he is off he will lose to generic 3:38 runners. This currrent funk is now over a year long. The last time he was in this situation was at Michigan. He is easily the most erratic distance runner in US history.
Yes. If he had toughed 2006 out, he probably could have put down a 3:52, 3:34, hell he was on pace in Pre, that year. Last year, I don't even know...
He just didn't have anything right. So far this year, haven't seen anything spectacular, but his times show at least similar fitness to 2005, early 2006 in the 15/mile.
He probably has a 3:50/3:32 in him this year, maybe. But thats just on his talent. Next year we can expect another blow up...then the 'comeback' to the 3:51/3:33 range, and another blow up in 2012, and then he retires in 2013.
Imagine what he could do if his on years, were his off years. At least 1 Olympic medal. Maybe 2. He'll be 30 in 2013, and he already looked old at 24. I don't see him getting much faster than 2007. He'll be lucky to be within a second of those times ever again, mark this post.
A "comeback" to 3:51? I don't think anything less than 3:48 should really be considered a comeback, unless that 3:51 wins a medal.
Other US runners may be more consistent from Webb, but they won't do anything spectacular. Runners like, Myers, Lukezic, and Lamong will go to Europe and post a 3:35 + 1500 just like Jennings and Stember did before them. When Webb is on he will be ranked in the IAAF top ten and run a solid 3:30+, and maybe a 3:50 mile or under. I suspect Webb is probably in 3:35 condition right now.
"A 3:30 guy will beat a 3:35 guy everytime."
-Steve Holman 1998