Letesenbet Gidey runs 44:20 15k, SMASHES WR. Equivalent to a 13:42 5000!

Bartholomew Maxwell and this other moron

Prothrombin here. Either true naive imbeciles or directly profiting from doping. You people are ridiculous. This is absolutely not a real performance and it is equal to a woman running 2:11:XX. It is not possible without illegal aid. Period.

It will take 5+ years and you'll both be gone/using different handles but they'll be outed and whatever they're on will be well known. Utter horseshit.

fake news,

none of the following are real words,

not even close, except for giddy.

check your scrabble dictionary.

Letesenbet

Gidey

Zevenheuvelenloop

must be a cnn thing.

zzzz wrote:

I watched the last minute, and she is getting a sensational bounce from those shoes. It's known that people are getting differential benefits from the Vaporfly Next%s, so it's possible she is one of the ones getting largest benefits from the shoe.

Here's a bit more on the variable benefit that runners are getting from Vaporflies. I looked for a summary of the initial CU Boulder tests that gave the Vaporfly 4% its name. They tested 18 runners with sub-31 minute 10K PRs, so all of these runners were fast already. No BS about faster runners not gaining as much please!

All of them were faster/more efficient with the Vaporflies, but the benefit for the individual runners ranged from 1.59% to 6.26% better than the Streak 6 (with similar range better than the Adios Boost). The average was 4%, so that's how they came up with the 4% in the name. The Next% is said to test substantially better, but not quite to where they could name it 5%. Adding a bit to 4%'s spread of efficiency gains, it's likely that that 6.26% gain in the Vaporfly 4% corresponds to 7% gain in the Next%.

I'd like to coin the phrase "high Vaporfly responder", akin to a high responder to PEDs. Some runners are getting 7% efficiency gains, maybe even more, since that 6.26% for the 4% was based on only 18 runners. Look at 100 runners and you're likely to find a few already fast runners that are exceptionally high Vaporfly responders getting 7% gains in the 4% shoe, and 8% gains in the Next% shoe.

Like I said, Gidey has a sensation bounce with those shoes. When someone has time, compare visually her bounce with those shoes vs. her running on the track in spikes and see how much different it is. I haven't done it yet.

ShilohDoesntCare wrote:

Bartholomew Maxwell and this other moron

Prothrombin here. Either true naive imbeciles or directly profiting from doping. You people are ridiculous. This is absolutely not a real performance and it is equal to a woman running 2:11:XX. It is not possible without illegal aid. Period.

I have a sneaking suspicion that reading comprehension is not your forte.

Prothrombin wrote:

ShilohDoesntCare wrote:

Bartholomew Maxwell and this other moron

Prothrombin here. Either true naive imbeciles or directly profiting from doping. You people are ridiculous. This is absolutely not a real performance and it is equal to a woman running 2:11:XX. It is not possible without illegal aid. Period.

I have a sneaking suspicion that reading comprehension is not your forte.

Absolutely my bad and I apologize.

Also that was a sweet burn I held back a laugh.

***Yawn****.....At the end of the day millions of people know who Gidey is and I can count on both hands the number of people in this world who know who you are. She has already beat you at life and human glory. And she is etched in the history books forever.

ShilohDoesntCare wrote:

It will take 5+ years and you'll both be gone/using different handles but they'll be outed and whatever they're on will be well known. Utter horseshit.

ShilohDoesntCare wrote:

Bartholomew Maxwell and this other moron

Prothrombin here. Either true naive imbeciles or directly profiting from doping. You people are ridiculous. This is absolutely not a real performance and it is equal to a woman running 2:11:XX. It is not possible without illegal aid. Period.

Just ignore this Maxwell troll, obviously trolling or just oblivious to how micro dosing works. Since athletes, regardless of where they live, now can pass doping tests easily while being on the juice shows that negative tests mean nothing. This time is a result of boundary-breaking doping and nikes spring shoes. Both should be abolished from the sport

Just a few remarks: the 7H course is super fast for those who know how to handle the light downhills. The 15k best time (AKA record) for men was set there last year by Joshua Cheptegei. 41. 05 in windy weather. This year the conditions were absolutely perfect, Cheptegei would have gone sub 41 for sure. Both Cheptegei and Gidey have a running style suited to this race: long stride, powerfull. Probably also suited to their shoes of choice. But Gidey showed her huge potential before, like in the Doha worlds, where she lost the 10K to Sifan Hassan on top speed only. That was a slow race with a fast finish, while this 7H was about breaking the WR (and winning 50K for that). Contrary to some other top runners, Gidey is not super skinny and has a perfect running style. What is not to like about her?

JohnnyS wrote:

Since athletes, regardless of where they live, now can pass doping tests easily while being on the juice shows that negative tests mean nothing.

So why isn't every athlete making broundgreaing improvements if doping is so easy? You all make no sense. Try to at least be consistent in your logic. Assuming everyone else is on the juice, and Gidey is on the juice, then she is STILL the fastest.

Again, if she ran a minute or two slower, this thread would be about how attractive she is and not how fast she ran but when a beautiful woman can literally lap you in a 10K , suddenly she's a doper.

Another bunch of loser saddos on LR papping on negatively about a female running performance, imagine my surprise. Shout out to the minority of secure, normal people who were successful and popular at school offering some balance here.

zizwami wrote:

Just a few remarks: the 7H course is super fast for those who know how to handle the light downhills. The 15k best time (AKA record) for men was set there last year by Joshua Cheptegei. 41. 05 in windy weather. This year the conditions were absolutely perfect, Cheptegei would have gone sub 41 for sure. Both Cheptegei and Gidey have a running style suited to this race: long stride, powerfull. Probably also suited to their shoes of choice. But Gidey showed her huge potential before, like in the Doha worlds, where she lost the 10K to Sifan Hassan on top speed only. That was a slow race with a fast finish, while this 7H was about breaking the WR (and winning 50K for that). Contrary to some other top runners, Gidey is not super skinny and has a perfect running style. What is not to like about her?

Be gone with this calm sense of rationale and logic please, your type aren't welcome here!

bartholomew_maxwell wrote:

JohnnyS wrote:

Since athletes, regardless of where they live, now can pass doping tests easily while being on the juice shows that negative tests mean nothing.

So why isn't every athlete making broundgreaing improvements if doping is so easy? You all make no sense. Try to at least be consistent in your logic. Assuming everyone else is on the juice, and Gidey is on the juice, then she is STILL the fastest.

Again, if she ran a minute or two slower, this thread would be about how attractive she is and not how fast she ran but when a beautiful woman can literally lap you in a 10K , suddenly she's a doper.

You aren’t even trying to make sense. Everyone isn’t on the juice, but many athletes are. Of course Gidey is super talented, who has said anything else? Or is it not possible to both be talented AND doped?

And stop with your super wierd rant about her looks, you are giving your bait away.

LDoc wrote:

Juicy fruit? wrote:

I don't say it's impossible for a woman to run 44:20 at 15 k road, but I say It's impossible to do that extreme improvement from a 30:21 10000m PB in just two months! I suspect she ran the WC and then went back home to Ethiopia and did what caused this result. There is no other explanation for this that makes sense.

Did you even watch the 10km final at worlds? It wasn't a time trial, and her final mile was astounding. This board is full of idiots.

Yeh the reference to the WC are killing me, it's painful reading this nonsense. Like WC finals are run exclusively as a TT lmfao. Well said.

zizwami wrote:

Just a few remarks: the 7H course is super fast for those who know how to handle the light downhills. The 15k best time (AKA record) for men was set there last year by Joshua Cheptegei. 41. 05 in windy weather. This year the conditions were absolutely perfect, Cheptegei would have gone sub 41 for sure. Both Cheptegei and Gidey have a running style suited to this race: long stride, powerfull. Probably also suited to their shoes of choice. But Gidey showed her huge potential before, like in the Doha worlds, where she lost the 10K to Sifan Hassan on top speed only. That was a slow race with a fast finish, while this 7H was about breaking the WR (and winning 50K for that). Contrary to some other top runners, Gidey is not super skinny and has a perfect running style. What is not to like about her?

Surely a road race with hills can’t be faster than the track, no matter the type of runner? I’ve never said anything about Gidey as a character, I’ve only spoke against the blatant doping.

JohnnyS wrote:

Surely a road race with hills can’t be faster than the track, no matter the type of runner? I’ve never said anything about Gidey as a character, I’ve only spoke against the blatant doping.

If these athletes cared enough about this board, can you imagine how easy it would be for them to bring a defamation lawsuit against the likes of you and others?

JohnnyS wrote:

Surely a road race with hills can’t be faster than the track, no matter the type of runner? .

Wrong....You have to take into account the incline and decline length of the hills as well as the number of straightaways. A road race with hills can be faster than a track if hypothetical 1 mile road race was straight with no turns as opposed to turning on the track. The 5th avenue mile for example is one such type of course with a straight shot to the end.

Ask any sprinter how much faster they could run 200 meters if they didn't have to turn.

bartholomew_maxwell wrote:

JohnnyS wrote:

Surely a road race with hills can’t be faster than the track, no matter the type of runner? .

Wrong....You have to take into account the incline and decline length of the hills as well as the number of straightaways. A road race with hills can be faster than a track if hypothetical 1 mile road race was straight with no turns as opposed to turning on the track. The 5th avenue mile for example is one such type of course with a straight shot to the end.

Ask any sprinter how much faster they could run 200 meters if they didn't have to turn.

I can accept that the turns take some speed away, but surely not enough to compensate for the slower surface and hills.