Genzebe Dibaba just ran 3:54.11 for 1500 in Spain!

Jeff Wigand wrote:

I don't think you've ever watched Komen's 3000m world record. He had one of the all-time great pacemaking jobs ever. John Kosgei led him until 2000m (or 2/3rds of the race) in 4:53, making him one of the fastest men ever at 2000m.

get out of here with your facts! everyone must be a doper

Jeff Wigand wrote:

straight dope wrote:

That performance reminded me of Komen's 7:20 3000. Both are out of this world and both ran 50% of the race alone with no pacers and looked fantastic and fresh all the way to the line.

I appreciate both performances and found them incredible to watch... but seriously... this is doping at its finest.

I don't think you've ever watched Komen's 3000m world record. He had one of the all-time great pacemaking jobs ever. John Kosgei led him until 2000m (or 2/3rds of the race) in 4:53, making him one of the fastest men ever at 2000m.

And how again do these two races not look similar? Pacers take them out at a blistering pace which hasn't been seen in years (China... seriously... ) or never been attempted. Then the pacers are dropped with a significant portion of the race still to come. Both racers accelerate through the end and finish with an unreal time all having the strength to smile, stand, and breath normally immediately after finishing.

Are you really that naive to think that because he had Kosgei pace him through 2000m, that prevented him from blowing up in the last thousand? I'll put my money on the EPO preventing a blow up.

straight dope wrote:

And how again do these two races not look similar?

Is this a joke? He literally just explained how these two races don't look similar. You even quoted his explanation. Do you not know how to read?

You wrote:

Do you see what's wrong with what you wrote, given that it's mathematically and objectively incorrect? 2000m is not half of 3000m.

Komen had two pacemakers: Kisang and Kosgei. Kisang led them through 1200m in 2:54 and Kosgei led Komen through 2000m in 4:53. For yesterday's race to have been identical to Komen's 3000m WR, there would have needed to have been a first pacemaker to take Genzebe and the the 2nd pacemaker through 600m and then the second pacemaker would have needed to have held on until 1000m. Instead, she had a single rabbit that pulled off at 700m.

Do you see how wrong you were to write, and I quote:

Let me get this straight. You think both records are clean because they had great pacers?

straight dope wrote:

Let me get this straight. You think both records are clean because they had great pacers?

Show me one part of my post on this subject where I commented on drugs.

My point was that you completely misdescribed the pacemaking Komen had during his 7:20.67 3000m world record. You said he was on his own for half the race, but in reality he had two pacemakers, the second one of which held on for 2/3rds of the race.

Jeff Wigand wrote:

straight dope wrote:

Let me get this straight. You think both records are clean because they had great pacers?

Show me one part of my post on this subject where I commented on drugs.

My point was that you completely misdescribed the pacemaking Komen had during his 7:20.67 3000m world record. You said he was on his own for half the race, but in reality he had two pacemakers, the second one of which held on for 2/3rds of the race.

Is that what you really cared about the whole time? You wanted to ensure the pacemaking was accurately described for the readers? You didn't care at all about the conclusion over the possibility of these being drug enhanced performances?

You remind me of a six year old who always has to be right.

Adult: "Look at those beautiful green trees."

Kid: "Noooo. Those are beautiful green trees with brown bark."

And the 100, 200, 400, hurdles, shot put, long jump, etc. lol

alanson wrote:

Also true for 800, 5000, 10000

Dibs on Gold wrote:

Whoever wins the 1500 in Beijing will have a hollow victory if Dibaba is not in the race.

Did you never read what I wrote? Or did you get caught up in the excitement of this that you thought you read things that weren't there? Other posters pointed out the same to you. You said one thing about how Komen's race, I pointed out how your description was wrong, you came back talking about drugs, as if that was the point I had questioned.

Ask Kennedy what he thinks of Komen. He trained with him.

So why did you say that Komen ran half the race solo?

When was the last time she had out of competition testing for PEDs?

So Dibaba, who avoids out of season / spot tests most of the year is suddenly a great guns 1500 runner? Yep, she's clean. Not.

PC is killing the sport. lol

Sedgewick Harderwicker wrote:

So Dibaba, who avoids out of season / spot tests most of the year is suddenly a great guns 1500 runner? Yep, she's clean. Not.

PC is killing the sport. lol

Where are you getting your information from? According to the IAAF, she was subject to as many out of competition tests as any other athlete. She's listed as 4+ out of competition tests in 2013, the most recent year for which statistics are available.

rojo wrote:

haha what wrote:

So an American high school girl can run 4:03 and be clean but an african professional runs 3:54 and she is doping?

3:54 doesn't shock me. My buddies and I have always said, "Ever 14:15 guy in the world can run 4:10 for the mile. Why don't the very top women run faster?"

An agent told me once eh thinks it's because the Ethiopians have little no mid-d history. The coaches laregly over do the speed and burn them out was his theory.

On JK's conversion chart, a 14:19 is equal to a 4:08 mile which would be a sub-3:50 1500.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1739614

Because the top women have a higher level of fitness relative to their basic speed than the sub elite 14:15 guys.

Plus, those 14:15 guys have a ton of people to run with in a mile race that is won in 4:10. Women who can run that fast are on their own, and because they need to make money by winning, it doesn't make sense to be going for a PR every time out.

JK's converstion chart is not accurate for someone with an exceptionally well developed aerobic capacity.

ventolin^3 wrote:

GoldenMiles wrote:God bless you, Vent. "Chumpess" is a great word. I might have to steal that one. Reminds me of "chumpette" from Futurama

lioness or lionette

i don't think so...

I like "lionette," but unfortunately lioness is probably the politically correct term, haha.

equality for all wrote:

The Donger wrote:

Crazy that an adult female that is a professional runner can run as fast a teenage boys.

Even more crazy is that some adult who cannot run faster than teenage boys (didn't some 14 yo run 3-49 this year?) is paid a huge amount of prize and appearance money to be a professional runner!!

I can't tell if you guys are being serious or not, but if so, you have got to be kidding me. Do you really not understand that it's more impressive for a woman to run 3:54 than for a man to run 3:54? Like...that is just so obvious.

And if you can't appreciate great female runners, then that is your loss. Dibaba, Simpson, Ajee Wilson, Molly Huddle, Ayana, and of course Mesert Defar/Tirunesh Dibaba are all a ton of fun to watch. Frankly, it was a lot more fun watching Dibaba's 1,500 race in Barcelona than most recent men's races, since they so rarely go for fast times anymore. It's amazing to see a woman win by 18 seconds and run a time no one has run in almost two decades.

What's wrong with some of the people on here?!

Plus she seems to run with joy. Even in that horribly paced 5k she looked like she was having fun.

do i smell it , could be , dont know

yes i think so . grade A doper .

not even a doubt.

obvious like many others

where that speed is coming from

IGF-1 lr3 .

like many a male 800m runner

,same training group think

as for her endurance same old story.

straight dope wrote:

You remind me of a six year old who always has to be right.

Adult: "Look at those beautiful green trees."

Kid: "Noooo. Those are beautiful green trees with brown bark."

Really? Here's how it looks to the rest of us:

You: "Look at those beautiful green trees."

That other guy: "Huh? One of those is a green tree, the other is a brown shrub."

You: "Trees, shrubs, green, brown, what's the diff? And why are you taking me so literally? You've missed all the important stuff I said."

The reason that other guy was focusing on the details -- the unimportant stuff -- is because you told us they mattered. And then when it turned out you had the details wrong in ways that made your analogy silly, you started walking it back.If those details didn't matter, then why did you tell us to pay attention to them in the first place?

Shameless, actually, even by the standards of this board.

Nothing wrong people trying their best in any sport but the way prize and appearance money are distributed in T and F is wrong. If you argue that certain categories of humans have more diffculty to run as fast as others then why not have competition categories for people who weigh over 200lbs (or any arbitrary weight division), or people who are less than 5ft tall? It would be even more impressive to see these people run somewhat fast as they will be overcoming more disadvantages and therefore they should be worthy of prize and appearance money.

Should people who perform worse in their jobs be systematically paid more than people who are performing better just because of their sex? Performance in running is very easy to objectively measure btw - you just need a stopwatch.