Alan Webb Has NO CHANCE At Sub 13:30 On Saturday

I know that Ventolin sometimes gets trashed a lot on these boards, but I really have a lot of respect for him for making predictions based off of tangible data and facts rather than simply pulling out arbitrary numbers like our good friend Mr. Clavin over here.

idiot

did you even see the oxy-1500 ???

did you see andrews position in last 200 relative to rupp ???

even without the andrews factor, he ran an evened-out 3'34.2

this was almost certainly during a training bloc without any resting/tapering/peaking & almost certainly off no speed work

moron

what part of

"ran that 5k whilst almost certainly in heavy training with no attempt made at peaking/speedwork" your peabrain not comprehend ???

idiot

i quoted the observation that he likely ran his 1500/5k pbs whilst likely in training & therefore woud expect to be much quicker when he sharpens up with the speedwork + some rest beforehand

the dumbest statement that has ever been posted on these boards

Jurgis Rudkus wrote:

I know that Ventolin sometimes gets trashed a lot on these boards, but I really have a lot of respect for him for making predictions based off of tangible data and facts rather than simply pulling out arbitrary numbers like our good friend Mr. Clavin over here.

You're really not very bright, are you? Ventolin has "tangible data" that he uses to then make stuff up out of thin air. Ventolin is the one who uses "arbitrary numbers" and somehow believes that pacing is NEVER good and conditions are NEVER good enough so he concocts excuses as to why runners NEVER run as fast as his fantasy calculator decrees. It is a joke and he even knows it. Also, he can NEVER be proven wrong because when runners A and B fail to run as fast as his calculator decrees, then he states something about how the pacing was not perfect, and the runner wasn't rested, and a whole host of b.s. that the gullible swallow hook, line and stinker. And yes, I meant stinker.

Clifford A Clavin wrote:

You're really not very bright, are you? Ventolin has "tangible data" that he uses to then make stuff up out of thin air. Ventolin is the one who uses "arbitrary numbers" and somehow believes that pacing is NEVER good and conditions are NEVER good enough so he concocts excuses as to why runners NEVER run as fast as his fantasy calculator decrees. It is a joke and he even knows it. Also, he can NEVER be proven wrong because when runners A and B fail to run as fast as his calculator decrees, then he states something about how the pacing was not perfect, and the runner wasn't rested, and a whole host of b.s. that the gullible swallow hook, line and stinker. And yes, I meant stinker.

You're the one who said Rupp can't kick with the big boys, and then referred to a race in which he outkicked Kenenisa Bekele. Ventolin's calculator might have a margin of error, but your stupidity is unbounded.

Moron, Rupp did not outkick Kenenisa Bekele. My, you're truly stupid. Watch the race before you incriminate yourself in the moron department. Rupp was dusted on the last lap by Farah, and Bekele was already trailing so he was not outkicked by Rupp.

idiot

it predicted 3'34 for rupp when you posted drivel about 3'37

no

i've no grumble with pacing/wind for 12'37/26'17/7'20

calculator only makes these a sec or so faster, which is fine

idiot

when examing rupp's 12'58, it was obvious beforehand when there were wind readings as severe a -2.6 that this was going to cost a handful of secs thru buffeting wind

then factor in unambitious pace target of 7'45, for 12'55 & that immediately put a cap on final time - rupp is not going to run 5'00 off 7'45

12'58 was a very good return in this context & likely he's not got his speed factor yet

how can your peabrain not comprehend this ???

Ventolin, of course Rupp is not going to run a 5:00 2000 after a 7:45 3000. Rupp's ceiling is 12:55, so the fastest he'd be able to run after a 7:45 is a 5:10. Slightly negative splits are not the catastrophe you make them out to be. The pacing was OK at Pre, and more importantly, Galen simply had to follow in a time trial. That is where he is at his best.

idiot

what part of "wind cost them a handful of secs" you don't comprehend ???

that already gets his 12'58 well below 12'55, your nonsense limit

then get into your numbskull the concept of

faster sustained pace

komen ran 7'20 because he got fast sustained pacing of 2'27/4'53

he woud have been lucky to run 7'23 if the pace had been 2'29/4'58

rupp is inferior version of komen in that he follows fast sustained pace very well - same like komen - little kick presently on last lap but can grind a race superbly

he was damn unlucky the brussels 10k was "only" 13'25 target for 26'50 which he easily followed & pre with only 7'45 & buffeting winds

in that 10k he wouda had little trouble following a faster sustained pace of 13'20 for a final time much nearer 26'40 & in pre, providing 0 wind, wouda had little trouble following 7'42 for ~ 12'50

get these concepts into your brain

Moron, when Rupp wins one of these races like Pre or Brussels, your argument could hold some water, but since he couldn't even go with the winners, it sounds a bit desperate of you to ramble on about how much faster he could have run. The conditions in Eugene were very good, and I am tired of hearing b.s. to the contrary.

complete utter moron

just because he didn't win the races doesn't mean we don't/can't analyse his races

get it into your numbskull :

he put 26'48 on the board

he's damn well entitled to plenty of analysis with that ability

& he lost those races to kennster & mo - 2 best runners of recent years

& conditions in eugene re: wind were shit

moron : reese the lj champ had a -2.6 wind for her best jump

get it into your numbskull :

if you have 2+ wind on one stretch helping you & 2+ on another hindering you, & pushing/pulling on bends you are going to lose a lot of time

idiot

do you not understand even basic physics & the concept of

efficiency ???

ventolin^3 wrote:this raises interesting possibility

rupp ran 3'34.75

( worth 3'34.2 at even pace & he didn't get a full sprint in the stretch as andrews planted himself in front of rupp, leaving rupp no where to go until last few meters when andrews tired

i think he was in high-3'33 shape in a perfect race with no impediments )

it's almost certain rupp was in heavy training block at the time ( oxy 1500 is not a meet you attempt to peak for when you are rupp's calibre )

that woud indicate that he was in this shape off virtually 100% endurance work

the intriguing possibilty is that when he now sharpens up with some speed work he may be 1 - 2s faster come trials/london

rupp may have 3'32 speed ( maybe even 3'31 ) by the time he peaks this year

this is speed which woud make him as competitive as anyone in a slow 5 or 10k

for serious posters here, i'll post what i think is possible if rupp does get his speed to 3'32 or even 3'31 with sharpening & likely assumption he's down to 26'35 this year ( i have no doubt he couda gone close to 26'40 in brussels with quicker pace from rabbit - 13'20 instead of 13'25, so going to 26'35 in a "perfect" race is not a stretch )

51.8 / 1'48.8 ->

3'32.84

4'49.19

7'25.18

12'45.93

26'36.85

51.3 / 1'48.0 ->

3'31.68

4'47.85

7'23.61

12'44.23

26'35.96

the take home message is that salazar seems to have a superb ability to gauge his athletes

he mentioned that 12'45 was rupp's ultimate target

looking at above, i don't think he'll need to wait 2 or 3y to achieve this

if he sharpens up his 1500 speed as expected & gets right race, 12'45 is something he can shoot for this year, maybe after london if he has an energy left

Ventolin, stop acting like a sh*tbag whenever someone disagrees with you.

eh ?

i don't have any disagreement with anyone if they talk sense

salazar has come out with ultimate potential for rupp of 12'45 & ?26'30

many posters here laughed at him & derided him & i coud have so easily joined the bandwagon

however, further thought/analysis indicated these times are within realms of realistic possibility & i have no disagreement with that

talk sense & i'm the last one to deride anyone

No, the take home message is that you have a superb ability to pile on erroneous inference upon erroneous inference with flawed premises as a foundation. You're now telling us that Galen has the ability to be the fastest man who has ever run 5000m who is not Bekele, Geb, or Komen. This is prefontposterous, and yes, I've just coined a word which should be used when one makes an outrageous assertion in relation to running. Galen has NO CHANCE of ever running faster than 12:55, and here you're now saying 12:45 is a possibility. Your numbers don't add up. One of your "lines of fit" has Galen running 7:23, which is what the great ElG ran. Please stop, I'll admit your line about Salazar having a superb ability to gauge his athletes did leave me laughing. His view of Galen through rose colored glasses just happens to coincide with your fantasy of Galen as spun through your calculator. Keep the laughs coming. You do need to recognize that my capacity to recognize athlete's ceilings is uncanny, and it is not something you possess.

no

idiot

the statements made are all sound

yes

& idiot, those predictions are 6s+ slower than those trio, which is a huge gap

no one is claiming he's at the level of these titans, but guys after them are no big deal

moron

it's because you have a numbskull & can't apply logic

utter drivel you imbecile

yes

if he sharpens upto 3'31 speed - a possibility

moron

hicham ran 1 3k in his prime & that was shitty pace with a suicidal 2'26/2'27 middle k

he wouda gone 7'20/7'21 that day with sensible pacing

did you even see the race ???

clearly you are imbecile then if you laugh

after mo went 26'46, he said

"rupp's right there"

he was 100% correct you moron

moron

he was 100% correct re: rupp's 10k

the calculator happens to agree

you complete, utter, f*cking moron

OK, well, we'll just agree to disagree on Rupp, but the intelligent are cognizant who is correct.

This thread is about Alan Webb.

Alan is running tomorrow and let's hope he can run to the best of his ability. Although Alan has NO CHANCE at running under 13:30 tomorrow, let's hope he comes close and then maybe he can have some confidence heading into the Trials.

No longer on start list.

Ahmed is just rabbitting for Wisconsin teammates at Trials A-standard - not Olympic A-standard

??

this still has him as 'declared' and going for the olympic A:

http://www.runnerspace.com/eprofile.php?event_id=147&title_id=357&do=title&pg=1&folder_id=953&page_id=2388

Seeing all of you guys so bent out of shape, Clavin is by far my favorite poster on this board. He plays you guys like a fiddle and it is hilarious. I can't believe you guys get so offended by his opinion.

I love this board.