Missy Franklin Wins Olympic Gold 13 Minutes After Her Previous Race - Could This Ever Happen In Running?

Qualify last in a semifinal and then come back 13 minutes later and run a fast final? Sure. I don't see it as that crazy. I think many of us have had track meets where we run/win 2 events within that time period. Certainly this is a different level but she didn't do amazingly well in the semifinal 8th overall. And then didn't set a WR or something in winning the final 13 minutes later.

Seems entirely doable for a runner.

misewell b wrote:And then didn't set a WR or something in winning the final 13 minutes later

a wr was not quite expected even if rested

the wr was 58.12 ( fast suit ) & her pb coming here was "only" 58.85

to go 58.33 & win was perhaps more than expected as the ozzie gal with 58.23 prelim/58.39 semi was expected to win & break wr

missy proved she is a racer

she can get wr next year in a meet where she only aims at the 100 back

the 100 free is today & i think a silver in low-53 is best she can do

unfortunately, the dutch gal looks a big favorite & may go mid/high-52

but here's hoping...

That is because Missy is God's Chosen Olympian. Swimmers are superior over runners. Swimming is the one true sport of God herself while Running is below swimming. Missy is going to be our greatest Olympian ever and nobody can touch her, including the vaunted Phelps and Spitz. Not even Usain Bolt can reach the greatness of Missy the Missile.

Here's a question (may be a dumb one but maybe nobody knows the answer yet):

Is there any possibility that a runner could put in a massive swimming-like base of 4-5 hours a day by running on an Alter-G to reduce the pounding on the bones, or perhaps in some pool-running type contraption where you could practice the motion of running without the pounding effect?

How about this crazy idea: Nighttime: sleeping in an altitude tent. Daytime: Training on an Alter-G for hours, with a mask providing oxygen enriched air (simulating negative altitude).

Can there possibly be a scientific training innovation allowing a crazy breakthrough in the marathon, 10k, etc by allowing the athlete to work on technique (running economy) like this for hours? Seems worth investigating...

Aufman wrote:Swimmers are superior over runners.

Only partially true. Runners for the most part are runners because they lack the skill or ability to compete in sports that require talent. They are the rejects of the sporting world. This is lead to an inbred insecurity evidenced by all the whining about other sports that have athletes that train harder and have vastly superior talent.

Running is a pussified sport. It's full of gaunt little pissants that think racing is jogging along at high school pace for 90% of the "race" is real competition. Runners whine about "oohhhh, I'm so wimpy I can't do a final Friday if I run hard Tuesday, boo hoo hoo, it's not FAIR!".

Swimmers on the other hand hit it from the gun even in the distance events, no gutless "tactical" racing there. People in the prelims were ahead of world record pace at the halfway point. Real racing, over and over, multiple times per day.

Swimmers start younger, train harder, and have to have technical skill instead of brainless foot in front of the other. If runners started at 8 or 9 and trained winter and summer seasons they would approach the talent of the swimmers, of course then they'd be Kenyans.