I'm not guessing. He hasn't improved his sprint times since last year - the only proof of that would have been times that show that. There are none. He has improved his 800 time since which I said - but you didn't understand - would have required improved endurance but not necessarily speed. I am not saying he can't be faster but it isn't a necessary condition of a faster 800 that he must have improved his sprint speed.
But for all of you who insist he must be faster and will run faster sprint times you have nothing to go on. His prs remain the same. If he is faster we are yet to see it.
He hasn’t improved his sprint times since last year, because he hasn’t run raced sprints since last year. Your surmising your conclusion from such a weak absence of evidence argument is mysteriously and uncharacteristically illogical of you. Say a person is born in France and learns French and then moves to America at ten years old and learns English, and doesn’t speak French again because he has no need to. Do you conclude from that the person is incapable of improving his French simply because he isn’t currently speaking it? You seem to have an extreme predilection for empiricism, while at the same time neglecting choices, opportunities, and improvement that isn’t immediately verifiable by your own unrealistically strict standards of evidence.
If he hasn't raced sprint times how do you know he is faster?
This post was edited 9 minutes after it was posted.
He hasn’t improved his sprint times since last year, because he hasn’t run raced sprints since last year. Your surmising your conclusion from such a weak absence of evidence argument is mysteriously and uncharacteristically illogical of you. Say a person is born in France and learns French and then moves to America at ten years old and learns English, and doesn’t speak French again because he has no need to. Do you conclude from that the person is incapable of improving his French simply because he isn’t currently speaking it? You seem to have an extreme predilection for empiricism, while at the same time neglecting choices, opportunities, and improvement that isn’t immediately verifiable by your own unrealistically strict standards of evidence.
Your language analogy is nonsense. The point you can't refute is that it can't be claimed he is faster over the sprint distances until he shows it with actual times.
You are also incorrect to say he hadn't run any sprints since last year as this discussion originated with a 21.8 flying 200 (22.6 from blocks) in training. He may be faster in an actual race - he's run 22.1 - but there's nothing to suggest he could be a whole second faster, which is what a sub-45 over the 400 would require. I don't care if he runs sub-46. Merely improving his pr isn't the issue. It's how much faster he may get. I would say, not a lot. There's nothing yet to say I'm wrong.
You do realize the flying 21.8 was at the end of a workout right? Have you not watched the video? It’s his last rep of a workout before world indoors. And at this point, just what are you arguing? That he can’t run any faster than he has? You keep arguing in a circle and contradicting yourself.
You remind me of Ben Shapiro. You probably are Ben, sitting there at your laptop talking as you type with that cringe, squeaky, rapid voice and that stupid scowl on your face. You sit there and say to yourself, “Oh as long as I talk and type fast, people will think I’m smart. I’ll find every hole in every argument and every logical fallacy, and I’ll talk so fast and so elaborately that everyone will be confused. Muwahahahah!”
I see Army has been busy having the mods go after people who point out inpleasant facts.
Truth still stands. Cooper hasn’t run a 200m in over two years. He hasn’t raced a 400m in just over 11 months.
I don't have the mods do anything. The debate about his speed began with a recent 21.8 flying 200 in training. That is 22.6 from blocks. It doesn't provide an argument he has increased his speed.
I also pointed out that another teen prodigy, Quincy Wilson, has found it hard to reduce his prs. Only a tenth of a second in the 400 since he was 16. Improvements and especially big improvements aren't a given.
He hasn’t improved his sprint times since last year, because he hasn’t run raced sprints since last year. Your surmising your conclusion from such a weak absence of evidence argument is mysteriously and uncharacteristically illogical of you. Say a person is born in France and learns French and then moves to America at ten years old and learns English, and doesn’t speak French again because he has no need to. Do you conclude from that the person is incapable of improving his French simply because he isn’t currently speaking it? You seem to have an extreme predilection for empiricism, while at the same time neglecting choices, opportunities, and improvement that isn’t immediately verifiable by your own unrealistically strict standards of evidence.
If he hasn't race sprint times how do you know he is faster?
Why do you assume he isn’t? Because he’s American? Because as a 17 year old American he’s over two seconds faster than Peter Snell was at 800m? Faster than Coe at 400m? And Cooper ran that 400m after a brisk 1:47 800.
Your language analogy is nonsense. The point you can't refute is that it can't be claimed he is faster over the sprint distances until he shows it with actual times.
You are also incorrect to say he hadn't run any sprints since last year as this discussion originated with a 21.8 flying 200 (22.6 from blocks) in training. He may be faster in an actual race - he's run 22.1 - but there's nothing to suggest he could be a whole second faster, which is what a sub-45 over the 400 would require. I don't care if he runs sub-46. Merely improving his pr isn't the issue. It's how much faster he may get. I would say, not a lot. There's nothing yet to say I'm wrong.
You do realize the flying 21.8 was at the end of a workout right? Have you not watched the video? It’s his last rep of a workout before world indoors. And at this point, just what are you arguing? That he can’t run any faster than he has? You keep arguing in a circle and contradicting yourself.
You remind me of Ben Shapiro. You probably are Ben, sitting there at your laptop talking as you type with that cringe, squeaky, rapid voice and that stupid scowl on your face. You sit there and say to yourself, “Oh as long as I talk and type fast, people will think I’m smart. I’ll find every hole in every argument and every logical fallacy, and I’ll talk so fast and so elaborately that everyone will be confused. Muwahahahah!”
I'm not arguing he can't run any faster than he has. I am saying his 21.8 flying 200 isn't an argument he is now faster. Nothing so far shows that. So any claim he is significantly faster isn't based on anything except supposition.
But by all means make it personal. It shows you've run out of anything substantial.