Okay, and your husband cheated others out of a spot in the OT due to his connections within Nike. Where were the crocodile tears then? Do you really wonder why there's so little sympathy for someone who exists in an ivory tower?
Deer Gouchers: go away, get a life.
sesamoiditis wrote:
“Also in Osaka, just before the 10,000m, Kara Goucher was given a pair of new spikes to try. This spike, called the Nike Zoom Matumbo, was created for distance events and features the same Flywire technology as the Nike Zoom Victory.No one expected her to wear it in the race. But she did that and ran pretty remarkable results. The 10,000m is typically a race against distraction. In the twenty five laps around the track, athletes often find themselves focusing on the smallest thing that’s bothering them. But for once, Kara found she wasn’t distracted by her footwear. It was only at the end that she realized she hadn’t thought once about them and she took bronze.”
http://speedendurance.com/2008/09/24/nike-zoom-victory-track-and-field-spikes/
I just want to bump this post that shows that Kara was perfectly willing to wear prototype shoes with new technology at the World Championships. In fact, they were behind her most notable result.
Billary wrote:
Okay, and your husband cheated others out of a spot in the OT due to his connections within Nike. Where were the crocodile tears then? Do you really wonder why there's so little sympathy for someone who exists in an ivory tower?
Deer Gouchers: go away, get a life.
Still missing the point. The claim that it was unfair to have Nike shoes with secret technology at the Trials is either valid or it isn't, but that doesn't depend on who is presenting the argument. Whether the point is made by Mother Theresa, Adolf Hitler, or Lonewolf McQuade is immaterial.
We get it: some people don't like the Gouchers personally. Maybe you are the ones who should go away and get a life.
waaaaaaaaah wrote:
Could she be any more of a sore loser?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2020/01/21/on-par-with-doping-the-first-person-to-miss-the-olympics-for-wearing-the-wrong-shoes/#2c5eab064a08
How much time did you save writing VF instead of Vapor Fly?
Sesamoiditis wrote:
sesamoiditis wrote:
“Also in Osaka, just before the 10,000m, Kara Goucher was given a pair of new spikes to try. This spike, called the Nike Zoom Matumbo, was created for distance events and features the same Flywire technology as the Nike Zoom Victory.No one expected her to wear it in the race. But she did that and ran pretty remarkable results.
I just want to bump this post that shows that Kara was perfectly willing to wear prototype shoes with new technology at the World Championships. In fact, they were behind her most notable result.
Wow. +++++++++
This is what makes LetsRun great. We can leverage all our knowledge to call out the absurd statements pros make that contradicts past behavior.
Their testimony is tainted, even if correct their clear bias means they aren't credible.
Billary wrote:
Their testimony is tainted, even if correct their clear bias means they aren't credible.
Just like if someone assaults you then your testimony is tainted because you are clearly biased towards them.
It means they'll twist their perspective to best fit the current situation that benefits themselves above anything else. They did while with Nike and they're doing that post-Nike.
Saying that someone is biased against a former employer that they feel wronged them is hilariously idiotic.
Cool. It's even more idiotic to ever find integrity in any of the Gouchers' espoused views. Because even broken clocks are right twice daily.
https://giphy.com/gifs/obama-barack-obama-president-l4q8cJzGdR9J8w3hSrojo wrote:
Speaking of invalidation, I've had to ban a poster or two on this thread. I don't understand the vitriol for Goucher. But if you want to criticize her, that's fine. But bringing up something not related to the topic at hand - like her looks - isn't allowed on this thread or any thread.
some basic facts wrote:
Any prototype shoe that is not available to the public is illegal. That is a fact. It doesn’t matter whether it works or makes a difference in results it is still illegal.
Therefore Shalane and Amy used an illegal product in the 2016 Trials.
That is a fact.
Just like every time I've exceeded the speed limit while driving I've done something illegal. And yet I've gotten away with it because authority was unable or unwilling to catch me at it. Does it really surprise anyone that Nike athletes get away with favorable rulings or omission on the part of USATF authority? They paid well for that advantage for years to come. That's no secret in the sport and there's zero signs that will ever change.
To Kara's statements, if she had made the case that she could have placed better herself with the shoes or relative to the field if the shoes were excluded from competitors, that would seem fairest and acceptable (minus the obvious anti-Kara crowd). But instead she singled out a couple of peers, one of whom is nearly universally respected and beloved in the sport and who has enough class to have never publicly commented on Kara's confessed involvement with microdosing. That's the mistake that gives it the tint of sour grapes for many impartial observers who might otherwise agree with her position.
Billary wrote:
It's even more idiotic to ever find integrity in any of the Gouchers' espoused views.
Well you certainly don't have any biases!
I'm simply aware of public record. Maybe you aren't.
Claiming that they've never had any integrity in any stance they've ever had on anything isn't being "aware of public record". It just shows you hate them.
So you aren't, as expected.
I don't know Kara Goucher and she is obviously a great runner. In other sports, high profile athletes generally stay off the internet and if they do engage, it is usually just light stuff. It doesn't work out for pro athletes if you have strong opinions. I am sure agents tell their athletes to tread lightly and let their performance do the talking.
Is there something different about running where the stars are encouraged to be so engaged when it comes to social media? There seems to be many internet stars in running, some of who show up here all the time.
It's not worth the ridicule.
She should swipe a pair, show up in Atlanta, and qualify for Tokyo
BOHICA wrote:
some basic facts wrote:
Any prototype shoe that is not available to the public is illegal. That is a fact. It doesn’t matter whether it works or makes a difference in results it is still illegal.
Therefore Shalane and Amy used an illegal product in the 2016 Trials.
That is a fact.
Just like every time I've exceeded the speed limit while driving I've done something illegal. And yet I've gotten away with it because authority was unable or unwilling to catch me at it. Does it really surprise anyone that Nike athletes get away with favorable rulings or omission on the part of USATF authority? They paid well for that advantage for years to come. That's no secret in the sport and there's zero signs that will ever change.
To Kara's statements, if she had made the case that she could have placed better herself with the shoes or relative to the field if the shoes were excluded from competitors, that would seem fairest and acceptable (minus the obvious anti-Kara crowd). But instead she singled out a couple of peers, one of whom is nearly universally respected and beloved in the sport and who has enough class to have never publicly commented on Kara's confessed involvement with microdosing. That's the mistake that gives it the tint of sour grapes for many impartial observers who might otherwise agree with her position.
Agree with the above . The new BTC coach doesn't deserve to be part of Kara's $hit show .
Same with Amy , she is all class , and humble .
Here again is a true factual claim, that the shoes made enough difference to change a similar effort of 2:30 to 2:28 (Skechers to Vf) or 2:28 to 2:30 (Vf to Skechers). What is not known is whether the other runners could still have run a lot faster. In cool conditions, Cragg and Flanagan could've run a lot faster, but Flanagan was having a tough day and Cragg stayed back with her a long time to help her, so that Cragg would likely have won anyway, because she had much more in the tank--and did validate this with a later medal at World's and a 2:21, while Flanagan might well have been passed by Goucher with vf's on this particular day but not, say, at the Olympics or later. Cragg ran 2:21:42 at Tokyo in 2018, while she ran 2:27 bronze at London World's in 2017. She ran 2:28:25 in Rio in 2016.