mr. randy wrote:
[quote]malmo wrote:
[quote]fresh cider wrote:
Obviously I think McDougal is a bigger talent than you do. .
No you don't. His 13:20 speaks volumes, but he doesn't have the championship-level kick yet. I'm a realist, you're not. Simple.
Now you're trying to have it both ways. Don't tell me you think Josh is a bigger talent than I do and then at the same time argue with me that he's not good enough to have won an NCAA championship already.
fresh cider wrote:
Now you're trying to have it both ways. Don't tell me you think Josh is a bigger talent than I do and then at the same time argue with me that he's not good enough to have won an NCAA championship already.
You don't process thoughts very well. There isn't having things "both ways." My statement is very consistent and very straightforward. 1) McDougal is a huge talent. 2) There hasn't been an NCAA event in which he has competed that he should have won. This is not a difficult concept to understand.
malmo wrote:
fresh cider wrote:Now you're trying to have it both ways. Don't tell me you think Josh is a bigger talent than I do and then at the same time argue with me that he's not good enough to have won an NCAA championship already.
You don't process thoughts very well. There isn't having things "both ways." My statement is very consistent and very straightforward. 1) McDougal is a huge talent. 2) There hasn't been an NCAA event in which he has competed that he should have won. This is not a difficult concept to understand.
If you can't see that you're trying to have it both ways, then I think it's you who don't process info. to well.
maker grow wrote:
If you can't see that you're trying to have it both ways, then I think it's you who don't process info. to well.
How old are you? There is nothing incongruent with my thoughts.
malmo wrote:
fresh cider wrote:Now you're trying to have it both ways. Don't tell me you think Josh is a bigger talent than I do and then at the same time argue with me that he's not good enough to have won an NCAA championship already.
You don't process thoughts very well. There isn't having things "both ways." My statement is very consistent and very straightforward. 1) McDougal is a huge talent. 2) There hasn't been an NCAA event in which he has competed that he should have won. This is not a difficult concept to understand.
Now you're saying I can't "process thoughts well." Nice, and I thought you had class.
Why do you try and belittle me by asking my age? Anyway, I'm old enough to realize you seem to have either forgotten or changed the arguement. You might try to read a post a little better before you respond to it.
bad data? wrote:
In which of those years was El G a junior?
Well??
1) McDougal is a huge talent.
2) There hasn't been an NCAA event in which he has competed that he should have won.
These are two independent statements that have no bearing on the other. There is no "change" in argument here.
Anyone have numbers on the top 5000/10000 single day doubles? (times/rest?) and also the best 1500/5000/10000 triples? Depending on how the 1500 goes tomorrow, McD should be well up on those lists. Anyway you cut it, great performance on Friday!
Dear lord, I've never seen old men act so pathetic. I think I'll consider perusing Dyestat's boards from now on.
My only question is as follows: would a top-class, global athlete do this to his body? Here, perhaps, is what separates us -nay, puts as behind- the rest of the world.
This is no competition, it's a slaughter. Think the German Army vs the French.
Following on your shitty analogy, didn't the German's commit themselves on too many fronts, resulting in what we would term in running circles as burnout?
asdasddddd wrote:
Anyone have numbers on the top 5000/10000 single day doubles? (times/rest?) and also the best 1500/5000/10000 triples? Depending on how the 1500 goes tomorrow, McD should be well up on those lists. Anyway you cut it, great performance on Friday!
Single day doubles. No rest.
1. 42:21 (14:05/28:16, no rest) (1) Ryan Hall (CA)
2. 42:22 (14:07/28:15, no rest) ( 1) Todd Williams (MI)
3. 42:40 (14:13/28:27, no rest) ( 2) Steven Spence (PA)
……
50. 43:33 (14:31/29:02, no rest) ( 4) Greg Meyer- (MI)
…….
1001. 44:23 (14:00/30:23, 23 minutes rest) (1) Josh McDougal (VA)
McDougal just ran his 13:20 - certainly this has no bearing on whether or not he should have won multiple titles in previous years.
He was one of the favorites in the past few cross country national races - but not winning wasn't an upset - he wasn't a huge favorite. Solinski not winning was much more of a surprise this year.
He wasn't beating Bairu in 2005, that's for sure. He definately wasn't the favorite that year.
Saying he was a huge talent but shouldn't necessarily have won multiple titles isn't a contradiction at all. There's lots of huge talents running these races. I believe malmo's two statement stand on their own.
van wrote:
My only question is as follows: would a top-class, global athlete do this to his body? Here, perhaps, is what separates us -nay, puts as behind- the rest of the world.
Yeah, and they probably do some variation of it in practice more often than McD. You're really suggesting a runner running 40 seconds off his best in a 5k and then coming back and running a 10k tempo is putting us behind the rest of the world. This message board is the only reason it was even discussed.
Classic letsrun overanalysis of irrelevant performances.
malmo wrote:
Obviously, neither Coach Kada nor El Guerrouj subscribes to the words attributed to them by Lear.
Hichan El Guerrouj race history
2004 11 races (1, 10) sick
2003 16 (3, 13)
2002 15 (0, 15)
2001 21 (5, 16)
2000 12 (0, 12)
1999 13 (0, 13)
1998 17 (2, 15)
1997 18 (3, 15)
1996 12 (1, 11)
1995 10 (0, 10)
In which of those years was El G a junior?
McD rarely runs near his potential in his biggest meets of the year. That's a problem, a coaching problem. I don't know if he'd have any titles if ran ran for a better school, but I know he'd have better finishes in bigger meets. His legs must have been dead in his 1500 today after yesterday's double, a 3:49 looks sluggish for him. I heard on Flocasts Josh mentioned he was tired at Stanford after running so much the week prior. You'd think they'd learn.
it's not hard to look it up, do the math and tell us:Hicham El Guerrouj (Arabic: åÔÇã ÇáßÑæÌ) (born September 14, 1974
For the 3rd time.............. wrote:
malmo wrote:Obviously, neither Coach Kada nor El Guerrouj subscribes to the words attributed to them by Lear.
Hichan El Guerrouj race history
2004 11 races (1, 10) sick
2003 16 (3, 13)
2002 15 (0, 15)
2001 21 (5, 16)
2000 12 (0, 12)
1999 13 (0, 13)
1998 17 (2, 15)
1997 18 (3, 15)
1996 12 (1, 11)
1995 10 (0, 10)
In which of those years was El G a junior?
drifterz wrote:
McD rarely runs near his potential in his biggest meets of the year. That's a problem, a coaching problem. I don't know if he'd have any titles if ran ran for a better school, but I know he'd have better finishes in bigger meets. His legs must have been dead in his 1500 today after yesterday's double, a 3:49 looks sluggish for him. I heard on Flocasts Josh mentioned he was tired at Stanford after running so much the week prior. You'd think they'd learn.
Along with what spiking it up so much has done to runners' achilles on occasions, I 100% agree that it isn't smart to triple (plus prelims). Plus, he's had a busy racing schedule in many racing distances, before this meet.
drifterz wrote: His legs must have been dead in his 1500 today after yesterday's double, a 3:49 looks sluggish for him.
Q-U-A-L-I-F-Y-I-N-G round.
Let's see if you can figure it out. He ran as slow as he could to win the 5,000. He ran as slow as he could to win the 10,000. He ran as slow as he could to qualify for the 1,500 final.
Compare what McDougal has done to what the Cornell dude did in the 1500, 3:42, a PR, winning by 4 seconds. Can you say "dummy?"