Webb 3:41.16 at Antwerp

Webb had enormous pressure at a very young age.He was never a head case. He was just young. He seems to have matured.Maybe the injury will be a good thing for his running career.

well could be wrote:

tim21bert wrote: Alan is an incredible talent, but his tragic shortcoming was the mental burden that came with his talent. Over-training, over-thinking, and over-reacting could have ended his career.

How do you know that it was a mental burden? seriously, why do so many people think that webb has head issues? could it not just have been unfortunate injuries like goucher and ritz?

I just watched his interview which shows clips of the 5k. What shoes did he run in? It look like he was wearing road flats

Has anyone talked with Eric yet? I'll make sure I get with him on FB.

Hooray! the boards will be shut down. What will all the losers do now?

Looked like the Streak XC 2 to me.

It's impossible because letsrun collectively said AWebb was washed up after that previous race in Britain...

Alan's form did look significantly better than it has in years past. I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of improvement he makes in that 800 coming up.

ROJO,

That's the kind of talk that perpetuates track's low status as a sport. Fans should be allowed to bash PROFESSIONAL runners for under-performing in the exact same way one would bash a pro quarterback for throwing a few interceptions.

Seriously, we just can't have real sports arguments about track because people get so butthurt every time their favorite runner is criticized. It is OBJECTIVELY ok to criticize a 3:46 miler that races a 1:52 800 losing, regardless of the circumstances. Everyone should realize that and therefore not overreact to negative comments.

Webb's recent performances may indicate a great deal to Salazar, but to us there is literally zero real information there. What does Alan Webb running a 3:59 mile mean, regardless of the type of training he's been doing? The 1:52 sucked because he should be able to pop 1:50 in his base phase no problem. His 3:41 means he's not completely out of shape/done, and that's all it means. Being way over-optimistic is just as bad as bashing.

You said something about shutting down the boards (which you definitely aren't going to do) because of the negative comments about Webb. You've got to be kidding. These guys are PROS. They are PATENTLY subject to scrutiny.

Chill,

Sorry to break it to you but you are just the type of idiot that Rojo is alluding too.

Glad you were able to further prove Rojo's point.

Cheers-

I can't get over how much smaller and smoother Webb is now. Getting him out of the weight room has certainly helped.

chillll wrote:

These guys are PROS. They are PATENTLY subject to scrutiny.

Yeah, what would the world be if douchebags couldn't pop off about athletes they've never met and know nothing about?

Webb looked very smooth and in control in that 1500. Good for Alan.

There could be 100 reasons why Webb's performances have been sporadically good and bad the past couple years. You've probably considered two or three of them.

I feel compelled to remind the quick-to-bash-Webb crowd that Alan Webb is the CURRENT US RECORD HOLDER IN THE MILE, breaking a 25 year-old record. What's on your running resume?

shut up bro, u just want attention and u sound like a little smartass!

a 3:58 mile after a 1:52 800 shows the 800 was indeed a rust buster. then running 14:15 for 1500m after also shows the base is there. he's doing the right thing and not at all making a big deal about it so just relax..

its ok to have an opinion but if its gunna be an irrational one that makes no sense but to do bash a guy then keep it to yourself. why critize america's most talented miler because he's on the comeback trail.. why arent u bashing nick willis for his 3:59 mile. and he ran 3:34/35 (?) in february where as webb hasnt raced in 14 months.. if he comes back with another 1:52 then by all means bash away

sorry, meant 14:15 5k 10 min after the 1500m

Webb ran a 1500...stop saying he ran a 3:58 mile. Everyone has to embelish the truth....lame ass liars.

Wallet Inspector wrote:

Webb ran a 1500...stop saying he ran a 3:58 mile. Everyone has to embelish the truth....lame ass liars.

Your a Liar. Have you ever run 13:30?!? Huh? Have you? I HAVE!! you have no write to talk. What is your IQ? Mine is 160. Therefore thou art stupider than me. So shut up! you have no write to post here. You don't even have a write to exist. Just STFU!!! Lame damned A-hole. That's write - YOU!!!

Ok. For one thing I am a really big Webb fan. I want him to succeed and I think he has the most potential (though perhaps now second to Wheating) of anyone in the US.

That has nothing to do with how lame it is that everyone gets so butthurt every single time a running performance is criticized. Especially when it really is a pretty bad race like Webb's 800. And Webb hasn't done anything since 2007 despite several attempts. It's not like he just had a bad race like Manzano, it was yet another not-fast race. It's just like in any other professional sport, bad performance is followed by perhaps not friendly, but objective criticism of a poor performance.

What's funny is that the whole reason it takes such a negative spin is because all the super-optimists hype it up so much. They cause a lot of the negative reactions and then defend their runners by nitpicking every detail of "how much faster he could have gone had he ____." I love some good speculation, but not when it's coming from obvious bias in defense of what seems to be just a bad run.

If you are arguing with your friend (a football fan), and you talk about his favorite wide-receiver's 3 drops from last game, do you ever hear him shout back: "yeah well how many touchdowns have you scored in the NFL?!" That's how we talk all the time (e.g. "what's on your running resume?"). The point is, they don't act like it's NOT OK for their favorite athletes or any athletes performances to be criticized. As runners, a lot of us really act like pussies about it.

That ^ is true.

[quote]chillll wrote:

Ok. For one thing I am a really big Webb fan. I want him to succeed and I think he has the most potential (though perhaps now second to Wheating) of anyone in the US.

That has nothing to do with how lame it is that everyone gets so butthurt every single time a running performance is criticized. Especially when it really is a pretty bad race like Webb's 800. And Webb hasn't done anything since 2007 despite several attempts. It's not like he just had a bad race like Manzano, it was yet another not-fast race. It's just like in any other professional sport, bad performance is followed by perhaps not friendly, but objective criticism of a poor performance.

What's funny is that the whole reason it takes such a negative spin is because all the super-optimists hype it up so much. They cause a lot of the negative reactions and then defend their runners by nitpicking every detail of "how much faster he could have gone had he ____." I love some good speculation, but not when it's coming from obvious bias in defense of what seems to be just a bad run.

If you are arguing with your friend (a football fan), and you talk about his favorite wide-receiver's 3 drops from last game, do you ever hear him shout back: "yeah well how many touchdowns have you scored in the NFL?!" That's how we talk all the time (e.g. "what's on your running resume?"). The point is, they don't act like it's NOT OK for their favorite athletes or any athletes performances to be criticized. As runners, a lot of us really act like pussies about it.[/quoten

no one is argueing the fact that the 800 was a shitty time.. but the fact that your bashing his FIRST race in 14 months is. no one hyped up his first race back saying it was gunna be fast. it was hyped up because it was his first race back in 14 months and he was back to racing, point blank. you're just trying to make up what u think everyone was thinking and how everyone feels about the bashing. his first race was a shitty time yes, very poor on all accounts. but since it was known ahead of time to just be a "rust buster" i for one looked over it and said well lets see what the next race will look like. and then what happens, 3:41/14:15, which arent great times but much better than a 1:52 thats for sure. relax no one is made about the actual "bashing" but in the context for which your making it based on a first time performance in 14 months. i dont think anyone should be bashed if in the same situation (manzano, wheating, lomong, lagat, willis). willis ran 3:59 his first race back, no one is bashing him which is good.

chillll wrote:

ROJO,

That's the kind of talk that perpetuates track's low status as a sport. Fans should be allowed to bash PROFESSIONAL runners for under-performing in the exact same way one would bash a pro quarterback for throwing a few interceptions.

Just a note (not saying whether I agree or disagree with you): you put forth a fallacious argument.

You are assuming your conclusion in your premise: you state that fans bashing quarterbacks is okay without giving any justification for it. I'll concede that fans do it in football. However, you go beyond that and say that it's okay and even imply that it's good for the sport. That is not a given. Someone could make a perfectly sound argument against that proposition (bashing could indeed be bad for football, unhelpful in ticket sales, team morale, success of a franchise, tv viewership. Or maybe it's fine, even helpful. You haven't made an argument either way, though).

You then go on to use that proposition to make your point that bashing (your word) professionals is also acceptable in track and field. Your conclusion rests on an unsupported premise. Also, no argument is given for your sport-to-sport jump.

You are also appealing to tradition (in a way): if it's okay in football (which could be debated), then it's okay in track and field. It's almost more of a non-sequitur.

My argument is that professional athletes are patently subject to scrutiny (baseball, basketball, football, etc). Track shouldn't be different. If you disagree with me, then what is a track discussion to you, just pages of over-optimistic speculation?

Webb gets paid to run 1:52, that's what a lot of people miss. It's just like a highly paid NFL receiver dropping passes. Wouldn't you agree that the burden of proof is on YOU to show me why bad performances should be regarded differently across different sports?

Also, all negative reactions to a race get grouped together. There's a difference between saying: "Wow bad race by Webb" and "Webb is done." I can maybe understand why the latter might make some people defensive, but seriously it's just normal sports speculation. And I could make a completely coherent argument for Webb being done. He hasn't done a thing for 3 full years and follows it up with a 1:52. Those facts WARRANT criticism; how can anyone say otherwise? But all the crazy Webb fans refuse to accept ANYTHING negative about it. Forgive me for pointing out obvious bias. It's ok for them to disagree, it's not ok for them to not understand the legitimacy of the point they disagree with.

Not to mention that hyper-sensitivity on these boards is exactly what keeps trolls going.

And yeah you're right, my argument is a bit tautological, but I think that's ok for this situation.