Again, if you're so smart and it's that easy then go recruit and train women runners to go out and win races like that. You clearly believe that you have all the answers so you should be able to make a small fortune doing that.
Again, if you're so smart and it's that easy then go recruit and train women runners to go out and win races like that. You clearly believe that you have all the answers so you should be able to make a small fortune doing that.
MarathonMind wrote:
Actually it's all the uphills that prevent a world's best time.
It's more the placement of the uphills. You had ryan Hall coming through in 63.40 yet finishing in 2.09.40 losing three minutes, so it is natural to assume you lose time running uphill. But a few hills should mean that much time for a guy like Ryan is used to them. Have you ever come flying down those hills at VC park before the finish? Your legs feel like jello.
And yet so many top runners from the 80s ran their PRs at Boston and not NYC or Fukuoka or Houston or etc. Breathe-rite strips and Alter-G treadmills probably wouldn't have helped them any, though.
OK in the 1st degree wrote:
Mr. Creosote wrote:You're 1 for 3. Want to try again?
Really? When was the last time someone the stature of Samuelson, Radcliffe, or Ndereba ran Boston? The last time Ndereba ran it. In other words, not this year. Nor last year. Hello, McFly!
Ndereba would have run Boston this year but was told they were out of "room"--which I guess means money. Too bad she didn't. Always one of my favorite Boston champs. Might have ended up a little more agressive a race too, who knows.
Boston IS a PR course wrote:
And yet so many top runners from the 80s ran their PRs at Boston and not NYC or Fukuoka or Houston or etc. Breathe-rite strips and Alter-G treadmills probably wouldn't have helped them any, though.
Actually the 10+ year old world record was broken at Fukuoka in the early part of the 80's.
My only contention is that the downhill does not equal fast times in relation to flatter courses like Chicago or European courses.
RTI wrote:
Congrats on revealing yourself to be a twit, those weren't your points he was responding to unless you're posting under multiple names in this thread. Anyone with even half a brain would actually have to try to fail to understand that the concepts of shutout or perfect game are from a fan's perspective. Geb is an uncompetitive whore, since you couldn't parse that one out on your own.
Huh? No kidding those weren't my points he was responding to. Am I only allowed to respond to people that respond to me?? ( I don't have my LetsRun rule book in front of me, so fill me in. And no, I, unlike others, have only posted under one name on this thread. Come to think of it....Since I never responded to YOU, why are you responding to ME??? Feeling stupid right about now, or are you that other jackass that I was indeed responding to. Whoops!).
And "Geb is uncompetitive whore" huh? While I agree that lately he has focused a bit too much on records, making such a statement like that undermines any other statement you could make on running. To call the greatest (until Bekele) and most competitive runner of all time, a man who took on everyone and anyone at EVERY distance from 1500 to the marathon (never afraid to go out of his comfort zone), on every surface from indoor, outdoor, cross to roads, and beat nearly every comer an "uncompetitive whore" is beyond reason. Just because he wants to set a few more WR's before he retires is hardly a knock on him after EVERYthing he has done. If anyone gets a pass it is him. And, if the greatest ever cares about times, I think we all should.
Remember the 4:00 and 3:50 miles? Remember the 10 second 100m? The 7 foot and then 8 foot high jump? The 13:00 5k? Running and THE CLOCK are forever married, as they should be. Get used to it, it ain't changing.
OK in the 1st degree wrote:
Changing your name is not a valid response, "Mr. Creosote," it's a white flag.
I have not changed my name, thank you very much. No white flag here. You were wrong and I'm proud to be the one who first pointed it out. Too bad you're the only one who doesn't realize it.
You cannot renounce that which you've never possessed.
Your anal-retentive knuckle-dragging concept will never be adopted by top marathons. Get used to that, clown.
No surprise at all that you also lack a functional understanding of predator-prey relationships. Seems typical, in fact.
and thread deleted in 3..2..
They should get paid. The same amount as the men in Boston who were running in the 2-30s. Then you have true equality for the sexes.
Go Eff Yourself wrote:
Your anal-retentive knuckle-dragging concept will never be adopted by top marathons. Get used to that, clown.
Many top marathons and 1/2 marathons (I've already cited 2 on this thread with zero research effort) ARE ALREADY using times beyond CR or WR bonuses to reward runners, rather than just places. Looks like YOU are the one living in the past, and I am living in the present/future. But good try anyway.
MarathonMind, you are clearly uninformed.
2 = "many"? Oh okay, now I see what deluded perspective you have. I think I hear the nurse coming with your tranquilizers, kittycat.
Deek did set the record at Fukuoka but he ran faster downhill at Boston.
Moore OK Runner wrote:
With a time that is nearly 17 minutes off the world record, what justification is there for paying them? They didn't earn their money. Someone should have taken the race out to an honest pace.
Can you imagine if the winning men ran 2:20-2:21 today? There would be 80 threads on the subject. That would be an equal disgrace and they wouldn't deserve paychecks either.
Any big level marathon should have a "minimum required winning time" to ensure that it's really a race and not a jogging exhibition. It doesn't have to be near the world record, but it should be fast enough. Maybe 2:10 for the men and 2:21 for the women.
Can you imagine showing up to a professional football game and the players on both teams agreed that they would only play at 90% effort?
Slow winning times are killing the sport. Go ahead and flame away, but it's the 100% truth.
http://www.gifflix.com/files/7868c9eaa99d.gifSir Lance-alot wrote:
And one woman at least seems to agree with the OP somewhat:
"As De Reuck said in the post-race press conference (her comments are to the right and also in this Boston Globe article), "I was a little bit embarrassed. You come to a marathon -- and a big marathon like this -- you get paid a lot of money to come and run and I think you should race."
Sure looked like a race to me. In fact, it was SUCH a race, that they went really slow at first, saving it for a big surge at the end.
That's racing! Dumbass!!!
(If it ain't about race with you, it's about racing.)
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....http://www.gifflix.com/files/7868c9eaa99d.gifWomen want this, Blacks do that......THIRD IS THIRD!!!
Sir Lance-alot wrote:
Franque Soda wrote:By who's standards?
Well, I am taking a middle approach. There is no reason to not pay them anything, that is absurd. Just don't pay them as much as the men when they don't run as fast relative to the best women's times.
By ]whose standards you ask?? Well, every major race gives bonuses for breaking wr's and cr's, right? Do they make the women break THE wr and THE cr (ie, the men's best times) ? No, of course not, they compare them to the WOMEN's best times ever and on that course. So in every major race in america, the race directors are already applying the concept of giving out extra $ for men and women running fast times relative to what their gender has done in the past. And now many other major races are taking that a step further, and giving more $ to the men when the top 10 run faster RELATIVE to what their gender has done before. Apply this to yesterday's race, the men would have received more than the women, and would have deserved it.
What on earth is wrong with looking at and rewarding quality that way??
(women seem to not only want equal pay for unequal performances in an absolute sense, but equal pay for unequal performances in a relative sense also. For the love of...... )
could we please let this thread die?
the entire premise is completely idiotic
