But from a performance point of view yeah you go on the person who is 4 years younger and who is showing better speed. Valby also has that injury history.
i don’t track either of their socials to guess who is going to give a bigger ROI.
I don't think women go on missions unless the Mormons are getting progressive
Buddy, women have been going on LDS missions since the 1800s
Hedengren is the easy choice since Valby has so many injury issues. Plus Hedengren is already as fast as Valby despite being 4 years younger.
Hedengren's coaches do need to be careful though. She has been racing constantly and has the US champs coming up. Also, tall runners tend to have injury issues. Hopefully they don't fry her.
Na Parker Valby is too injury-prone and the arc trainer eventually is going to run out of room for improvement. How do you get better at running? Run more. Very few, if any, long runs (16+ miles) and weekly mileage. She’s eventually going to max out, unless she stays healthy enough to run more, if she hasn’t already. Regardless, Jane by a landslide, especially on five years. Jane might be the greatest female runner this country has ever seen in five years time.
Na Parker Valby is too injury-prone and the arc trainer eventually is going to run out of room for improvement. How do you get better at running? Run more. Very few, if any, long runs (16+ miles) and weekly mileage. She’s eventually going to max out, unless she stays healthy enough to run more, if she hasn’t already. Regardless, Jane by a landslide, especially on five years. Jane might be the greatest female runner this country has ever seen in five years time.
How Valby has been training has resulted in her setting NCAA records and being possibly the greatest collegiate female distance runner of all-time. She doesn’t need to go on 16 mile runs to keep it going. There’s no such thing as an arc trainer ceiling.
I wouldn’t invest 5 million in either of them. Both a years away from their prime. Both have an injury history, as well. One is already an Olympian. Jane has been training like a pro for quite some time, so there may not be as much upside as some think. Only time will tell, and I won’t buy into the hype until I see sustained improvement over a number of years.
How does Hedengren training compare to how Rylee Blade trains? Blade probably can’t break 4:40 in the mile but was only 3.5 seconds behind Hedengren in the fast indoor 5000m they ran, which indicates Blade had similar fitness. Also, how does training like a pro differ from training like a collegian or a pro that is attending college.
Blade had the race of her life and ran like a 9:50 3200m. She didn’t do that this weekend. There fitness might have been similiar on that day but blade hasn’t shown progression since then.
now we can hand wave about progression and training and so on. Who knows where each are on their performance growth. We have had plenty of people stall. Plenty take 3-4 years to progress and so on. It is easy to say Jane should drop 5-10s in the mile and 30s in the 5k over the next 4 years and it doesn’t sound too crazy. But not many people take the jumps to be world class(call it like 3:57/14:30 these days)
Not trying to stir up any controversy, but if you had a 5 year, 5 million dollar contract who would you award it to? You cannot choose someone else and you have to pick one based on future potential from today's date.
Before anyone freaks out,
Parker has run:
3k- 8:34 (with about 9:15 for 3200)
5k-14:52
10k- 30:50
Jane has run:
Mile- 4:23 (worth about a 4:02 1500)
2 mile-9:17 (worth about an 8:36 3k)
5k-14:57
Personally I like Jane's speed, but Parker is the more proven runner against better competition. We haven't really seen what Jane would do at a US championship.
Just updating, Hedengren ran an 8:40 officially. Not too far off Valby now.