my friend thinks u. bolt could run a sub-4:30 mile

You're a retread, Douche. Pretty much everything you say is retreaded and useless.

You have nothing but hyperbole and invective.

Some of us have actual experience, and contribute to threads on a substantive basis. Show me where you have given anybody any specific help or details on anything...oh, that's right, you haven't.

And you still haven't identified WHICH thread, have you? No. Because you're full of cr@p.

The bottom line is that your identifiable contributions have been garbage, and that is what bothers me.

Nobody but Rupp, and maybe not even he, knows what his time is for a FAT 100 from the blocks. Unlike you, though, I don't minimize athletic achievements to make myself feel better by belittling others--to run 11.00 or below FAT from the blocks, you have to sprint, and that is an impressive time, whether you like it or not, and your serious distance guys cannot do it, just the same as natural talent and training must combine to enable a 4:30 mile--it is also impressive, and serious sprint guys cannot do it, including Bolt.

How do I know? Because I know. Everybody who does athletics knows one way or another. Like ukathleticscoach said, you haven't shown one serious distance guy record a sub-11.00 FAT 100 from the blocks, and Rupp is FAR from being the fastest serious distance guy over 100m. Similarly, you can't show me one serious sprinter who has posted a 4:30 mile.

Get a life, Douche. Here's a thought--why don't you try some running?

Sprintgeezer wrote:

How do I know? Because I know.

Well, can't argue with that can't of logic. but I guess that's the point to using circular reasoning, isn't it. I am very glad I bother you, because you are a fraud and I love pissing off frauds. I've mentioned the thread twice now, you just choose to ignore it. Just like you have turned saying Rupp couldn't break 13 into trying to find guys who have broken 11. Very rational argument.

Hey Douche, why don't YOU learn to quote correctly instead of criticizing others?

What I ACTUALLY have said in this thread has been:

"...Rupp would be really lucky to run 13 seconds for a block-start 100m..."

"...if Rupp were to start from blocks right now, he would be lucky to run 13-flat..."

"There is no chance that Rupp could run 11.5 from the blocks, even with LOTS of sprint training."

"Guys like Lagat and maybe Webb, at least they look sinewy, and seem to have some "pop". Guys like Rupp, OTOH, are just really thin windbags, which is why Rupp would probably do better than either of those guys in a marathon."

"And to not be able to make, or go with, a serious move tells me all I need to know about his ability in the first 30m of a 100m--totally useless."

Hey Douche, where in this thread did I say that "Rupp couldn't break 13"? Oh, that's right, I didn't.

You wouldn't recognize circular reasoning if it bit you in the a$$, and your taking incomplete quotes out of context doesn't prove anything.

The only thing I might take back is Rupp never being able to go 11.5 FAT from the blocks. Maybe.

And you still haven't specifically identified the thread. Post a link to it, Douche.

The only reason you pi$$ me off is that you have nothing to offer, and are just a useless troll.

Touche wrote:

You seem like a nice enough guy and sincere, but seriously, the point of quotation marks is to state EXACTLY what a person said. Don't put things in quotes that I didn't say. To the original point of the thread, I agree I doubt Bolt would run sub 4:30 especially since his coach boasts about him never jogging. It isn't that hard to get a 10.5 guy to run sub five though.

What you literally said was "Anyone who can't run under 11.5 should be banned from anything under 400 meters and that's in a podunk small school." and I think that's about as unrealistic as the people who think anyone who doesn't run a 4:30 mile just hasn't tried very hard.

I missed the close of the quote by one word because I'm lazy and the letsrun interface is bad.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

How do I know? Because I know.

That is a quote. It is also about the clearest example of circular reasoning anyone could ever hope to get.

You don't seem to understand if I don't use quotes (" ") that I can't misquoute you. You don't have a logical bone in your body, do you? I wish I had the capability to troll as well as letting your trolling backfire on you. Actually I don't, I have no reason to troll. But wow. You have lost it. This is awesome!

You used to piss me off because you are such an obvious fraud and most people on the board believe you are/were a decent sprinter. That's why I wanted to call you out. I'm glad I did.

asdfasf, totally fair. Don't get me wrong, I work with lots of kids who run 14 seconds and over and I'm happy to do it. I got caught up in the "elite" side of the discussion. I actually like working with 13-14 second 100 runners than 11.5-12.0 guys that won't run the 4 or 8. At least the slower runners aren't wasting their potential. If I had the choice though, I wouldn't let an 11.5-12.0 guy run less than a 4 any more then I think a basketball coach should let a guy under 6 foot play center.

It's not circular at all, Douche. If you would read the entirety of this thread, along with many other threads, you would realize that.

But instead of giving anything of substance, you simply extract brief out-of-context quotes where that lack of context suits your purpose.

I posted what I said, exactly. You post cr@p, and aren't even man enough to recognize where you are wrong, even when it is specifically pointed out to you.

You offer absolutely nothing worthwhile.

And you still haven't identified the thread.

You are 0-for-2.

You are no doubt that same dipsxht troll who just tried to get under people's skin. What a waste of time.

Touche wrote:

asdfasf, totally fair. Don't get me wrong, I work with lots of kids who run 14 seconds and over and I'm happy to do it. I got caught up in the "elite" side of the discussion. I actually like working with 13-14 second 100 runners than 11.5-12.0 guys that won't run the 4 or 8. At least the slower runners aren't wasting their potential. If I had the choice though, I wouldn't let an 11.5-12.0 guy run less than a 4 any more then I think a basketball coach should let a guy under 6 foot play center.

How do you expect any of them to become faster 100m sprinters if you don't train them for it? Even Usain Bolt was a 12 second guy at some point.

Bad analogy also.

You can get faster, you can't get taller.

Poor analogy wrote:

Touche wrote:

asdfasf, totally fair. Don't get me wrong, I work with lots of kids who run 14 seconds and over and I'm happy to do it. I got caught up in the "elite" side of the discussion. I actually like working with 13-14 second 100 runners than 11.5-12.0 guys that won't run the 4 or 8. At least the slower runners aren't wasting their potential. If I had the choice though, I wouldn't let an 11.5-12.0 guy run less than a 4 any more then I think a basketball coach should let a guy under 6 foot play center.

How do you expect any of them to become faster 100m sprinters if you don't train them for it? Even Usain Bolt was a 12 second guy at some point.

Bad analogy also.

You can get faster, you can't get taller.

I'm going to have to ask for a citation on that "even Usain Bolt was a 12 second guy at some point"

The first year Bolt ever ran track, he ran 21.73 in the 200m and 48.28 in the 400m. That was at the age of 14. Running either of those times off of 12 second 100 meter speed is impossible.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

You offer absolutely nothing worthwhile.

You are no doubt that same dipsxht troll who just tried to get under people's skin. What a waste of time.

Just for the record, no, I am not sprintgeezer. This does describe him perfectly though. I absolutely love that - I know because I know - is not considered circular reasoning to him. The clear mark of a losing argument is seething, uncontrolled, irrational anger.

All right "non sprint/never ran at a level higher than high school, maybe a geezer maybe not," here's a hint: You don't understand, any noise at all and you jump in in a sprint race! HA HA. As if a flinch so slight that it didn't trigger the blocks sensor would make a pro like Bolt jump. or how about, I have 180 degree vision in the blocks. What? I am paraphrasing because I am seriously not going back for the actual quotes but before that thread I thought you were just an idiot. That was when I learned you were a total poser. I hate posers. I didn't bother getting involved in that one but I couldn't resist this one. I'll taunt you some more, because like I said, I hate posers, and then I'll be out. Seriously, thanks for outing yourself better than I ever could though.

The "I know, because I know" quote was probably the dumbest thing i've read on this thread....and it's agitating because my parents would use that when i was little when they didn't know. Sprintgeezer you're a moron

Mr. Geezer here's a thread from a while ago about Rupp running 10.9 with a flying start and beat Mo Farah. I don't know what that means really, and I don't care, but you might.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4460299

The more you post, the more you reveal yourself as an idiot.

Still 0-for-2.

Douche, the more you post, the more you reveal yourself as an idiot.

Still 0-for-2.

I know because of everything I've posted. Here it is again for you, you idiot (because you're obviously a single poster)--no acceleration, no knee lift, wrong angles, insufficient musculature, insufficient neural ability to generate power, incorrect foot plant, horrible arm action, biochemically optimized for aerobic ability, no conditioning for anaerobic power output, all adding up to terrible top speed and terrible acceleration, all adding up to lucky to run a 13 from the blocks today, and very unlikely to approach anything like 11.5

You're still 0-for-2.

Post a link to the thread, Douche.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Douche, the more you post, the more you reveal yourself as an idiot.

Still 0-for-2.

Well, since you posted it twice you must be right. You must also be a marathoner who wanted some cred on letsrun so he made up a sprint personna so people would think he was something different. You read a few links on sprinting and thought you could make up the rest - like having 180 degree vision in the blocks (yep, that's focus) and reacting to the faintest sound like mongoose on crack. I'm sorry I had to expose you as a fraud but just like "Mr. Chest" it had to come to an end. You can keep posting all you want but your credibility is shot. Make up a new handle like vault geezer and talk about how you once vaulted 16 feet and then ran a sub five mile and therefore you know Rupp could never vault ten feet. I actually know nothing about the vault so that might be true but this handle is of sprintgeezer is obsolete friend.

Archimedes--

I highly recommend you read that thread in its entirety!

I don't know. I don't want to do it but if my coach decides I'm dominant and let's try something new, I'll definitely try to put my heart into it. I'm just going out there all the time to do my thing and show the world I'm probably the best. For me, it is just to go out there fast from the start. I think 4:30 is possible.

All I can say is: Yo, Jamaican sprinters, taking over the world.

More of the same tripe from Douche.

You're not even good at insults.

Keep digging, though.

And if you have anything less than 180 degree vision laterally, I suggest you get your eyes checked:

"The approximate field of view of a human eye is 95° out, 75° down, 60° in, 60° up." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_eye)

95 x 2 = 190 degrees

Nice of you to have brought up RT, where Rupp would also lose time. Thank-you.

You dipshxt. You loser. You Douche.