Shelby MF Houlihan responds to the LRC trolls -- definitely is not doping + great podcast listen

Not drinking kool-aid wrote:

It does not make someone a troll because they question the validity of her performance.

No, but between 89 and 93 percent of the regular posters on this board qualify as trolls, along with 82 to 87 percent of occasional visitors (Smithers, 2017). As a result, even when a poster raises a legitimate issue, a strong chance exists that this person is generally a troll.

If you went to a gathering of Jehovah's Witnesses and some of them were discussing the progression of the world record in the mile in a knowledgeable way, you might accurately observe "Look at those nut jobs talk about running" without calling the validity of the running chatter in question (Burns, Simpson et al., 2009).

The Scot wrote:

If Houlihan is complaing just say 'Asbel Kiprop' and see what she says. Cos after Asbel we can question ANYONE. Even if they look like they're running on pure natural talent.

... and what if they are running on pure hate?

Drugged up wannabe.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

She had had plenty of opportunity to go sub 2. It's a red flag. Nothing more but sub 4 is harder than sub 2. It's not evidence obviously just worrying. I mean look at that 1500m in London OG. Half busted for doping . Take those out and you see how hard it is to go sub 4 clean.. if she was from another country you'd be more suspicious. Same as me with Muir it's just bias

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/united-states/shelby-houlihan-249056

Your last comment is right on. You aren't suspicious of Muir but are suspicious of Shelby Houlihan. I'm suspicious of both, though I have no evidence that either has doped. Muir ran 3:55 before even breaking 2, while Houlihan ran 3:57 before breaking 2. I cited the former as evidence she was doping. In truth, she hadn't taken a shot at it--the suspicion was warranted because of the improvement, not the lack of breaking 2. Muir has run well under 2 and so will Houlihan, probably this year.

The latter can probably run 1:57 or better with her speed and 1500/5000 ability, just as Decker ran 3:57/1:56 high (!).

To listen to Houlihan is certainly to think she's clean but time will tell. In the meantime, she should run a hard 800 and a hard 5000m before the end of the season.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

UK Coach Who?? wrote:

Do you know how many times Shelby has run the 800 in the last few years? Are you kidding/a troll/or just helping out the site to get hits?

Who at least I use a consistent username unlike your dad attempt at a pun.

She had had plenty of opportunity to go sub 2. It's a red flag. Nothing more but sub 4 is harder than sub 2. It's not evidence obviously just worrying. I mean look at that 1500m in London OG. Half busted for doping . Take those out and you see how hard it is to go sub 4 clean.. if she was from another country you'd be more suspicious. Same as me with Muir it's just bias

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/united-states/shelby-houlihan-249056

The original post was about her running a 55.xx in the 400m and if she's this fast, why can't she break 2? Did you know Jenny Simpson AND Shannon Rowbury haven't broke 2 yet? Jenny is a 4x global medalist and Rowbury is the AR holder. I guarantee you they can both run about a 55 for 400m.

The fact that Shelby is a strength based 1500m and can run 8:36 and 15:00 for 3k and 5k further proves the point that her 55 400 likely matches up with her 2:01 PR. Most 800m runners sub 2 are running around 53 in the open.

And she has NOT had plenty of opportunities to run sub 2, not since joining Jerry's group of which she's been a part of the last 3 years. She's actually only ran the 800 4 times under Jerry and that was all in the 2016 season. These were early season 800's. 2:03/2:04 (day apart) and 2:01/2:02 (5 days apart). At this point, she's probably still adjusting to the training and I assure you, she did not taper for any of these 800's.

Thanks for injecting some facts into this discussion. As you say, Shelby has not taken shots at the 800 very often since joining Jerry’s group.

Having a high school PR of 55.XX doesn’t magically make sub-2 happen. Houlihan would have to want to enter a fast 800m race, and there’s just not much reason to do so unless her coach sees value in it. Seeing as how she is already crushing the 1500m with a devastating kick, I can’t think of a reason to have her enter a fast 800m during the peak of her season.

I think that speculation following a breakthrough season is completely healthy for the sport. However, the idea that Houlihan running 55.XX and not breaking 2 is proof of doping, seems completely asinine to me. Also, I’ll be sure to keep in mind that the 800m is the “least dopable” event on the track. I guess that means that all of those clean USSR times on this list, are primed to be broken any day now:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/800_metres_world_record_progression

RRRR wrote:

Seeing as how she is already crushing the 1500m with a devastating kick, I can’t think of a reason to have her enter a fast 800m during the peak of her season.

Here's what she told Spikes about her plans for the rest of the season:

1) July 21, 5000m at the "Night of Athletics," in Heusden, Belgium,

2) August 18, 1500m at the Birmingham Diamond League,

3) August 10, 1500m at the Zurich Diamond League

4) September 8, ???? at the IAAF Continental Cup in Ostrava.

Drugged to the gills

Moo Goo wrote:

She is not doping. She was already built like that in college. Also, she is way too early in her career to be doping. I am glad finally we have a runner who can destroy the Africans who may actually be doping.

Let's see, Paula was 20 years old and Bolt 16 when he started to get the help of the Healing Hans. Why wait until you are old to dope??

Does anyone think it's reasonable her 400 time is still 55.xx like it was in high school? I find it hard to believe she wouldn't be at slightly faster now.

what are the odds? wrote:

Does anyone think it's reasonable her 400 time is still 55.xx like it was in high school? I find it hard to believe she wouldn't be at slightly faster now.

Since Houlihan trains for a shoe company I am sure she goes on plenty of 20km to 30km training runs. Long training runs do not make one a faster sprinter. I am sure as a 1500m/5000m athlete, S. Houlihan does plenty of 400m to 1200m repeats. How does running 400m repeats @ 62 or 63 seconds make Houlihan a faster sprinter? How does Houlihan doing 1200m repeats @ 3:45 or 3:50 make her a faster 400m sprinter? This monster kick impressing many posters on letsrun is simply Houlihan having more left the final 300m than her competitors. Most posters on letsrun cannot run a 46 300m. Many posters on letsrun are extremely impressed that Houlihan runs her final 300m in 46 seconds.

No true female sprinter in the history of ever has run 15:00 for 5000. She seemed like a sprinter in high school because she ran a 55.xx, but the fastest female sprinters in high school are 3-4 seconds faster. She's always been a distance runner at heart or rather DNA. Increased aerobic capacity helps buffer lactate and Houlihan's aerobic capacity has absolutely increased. She may not be training specifically for the 400, but odds are if she raced it 3-5 times this season she'd beat her high school PR without a doubt.

Wow cool I'm sure nobody has ever lied about doping so definitely believe her.

Was she 15 or 18 and was it 55.1 or 55.8? This ominous HS 400m performance seems like a red herring. It does not mean very much. German Corinna Harrer who retired this year at 27 after chains of injuries ran 55.18 at 17 /18 because she began as a sprinter before she turned 1500m runner. She made the semifinals at the 2012 Olympics but never bettered her best performances at 21 (2:00,3 and 4:04.3) , partly because of injuries. Maybe I am wrong but I doubt that without injuries and a better coach she would have run 3:57, maybe 4:00-01. There is a considerable gap between 4:00 and 3:57 and far fewer women achieve the latter.

So, to put it briefly, Houlihan's development has been amazing (or suspicious, according to taste) regardless of that ominous 55.xx as a teenager. Because there are probably plenty of middle distance runners with such 400m times at 17/18 who never get close to 4:00, far less 3:57.

55 seconds is like 49 (or even 50). Steve Ovett was running 48s at 16 and 47 at 17. I know a female Olympic finalist who ran 54s in high school.

To summarize what you stated: 1) Houlihan is not a sprinter; 2) Houlihan does not train like a sprinter; 3) In conclusion, Houlihan is now a faster sprinter due to her increased aerobic capacity.

All nonsense!

Shelby reminds me a lot of Anna Willard and her 2009 season. Started in a longer event, built strength, moved down to short events and ran 1:58/3:59. She was even competitive in some Diamond League (Golden League back then?) 800s.

BTC trains very hard. In the podcasts I’ve heard with Shelby she frequently mentioned how exhausted she was that first year as a pro. The workouts would leave her flat out in the track and in bed the rest of the day. Now she has adapted, but that doesn’t mean she’s showing-up fresh to every race. This likely explains some of her performances the last few years and the big jump this year.

What is this? wrote:

To summarize what you stated: 1) Houlihan is not a sprinter; 2) Houlihan does not train like a sprinter; 3) In conclusion, Houlihan is now a faster sprinter due to her increased aerobic capacity.

All nonsense!

How is it nonsense? Because you don’t understand how lactate buffering changes with increased aerobic capacity? And why are people saying she trained like a sprinter in HS? As a high school senior she ran the following according to athletic.net

400: 55.52

800: 2:07.69

1500: 4:26.39

So she’s gotten significantly faster over 800 and 1500 but slower over 400. Very highly doubt that. I also know of 0 sprinters that ran the 400-800-1500 instead of the 100-200-400. She’s not a sprinter and never has been.

Houlihan

Muir

Tanaka

Jóźwik

Lane

CLEAN legends of the sport - present, and future.

Haters can eat it.