No. According to you, that day Bannister wasn't a 3:59 man. Jakob is not a 3:26 man.
"Keep coping" is funny coming from you.
No, that isn't according to me. That's according to how you argue. Usain Bolt is a 9.58 runner over 100m. So that means that to you he must be a 9sec man, since you think the time must always be rounded downwards.
Anything from 3:45.00 to 3:45.99 is a 3:45. You can say his time was closer to 3:46 than it was to 3:44, but not "closer to 3:45" because 3:45.94 IS 3:45.
If you start out in New South Wales and then you cross over the border into Queensland, you're not "closer to New South Wales than Queensland" after you've crossed that border. You're now in Queensland.
What rubbish. 3:45.94 is almost 3:46, not 3:45. You don't realize time is still moving when it passes the second and while it is moving Hocker barely breaks 3:46. But to you Rudisha must be a "1:40 man". That'll be news to him.
We, in athletics/T&F, refer to times in a certain way. You don't seem to be familiar with the language of the sport. I suggest you educate yourself.
No, that isn't according to me. That's according to how you argue. Usain Bolt is a 9.58 runner over 100m. So that means that to you he must be a 9sec man, since you think the time must always be rounded downwards.
You have trouble with numbers, we know that.
I know that you fit into the lowest standard deviation on the IQ Bell curve. So is Bolt a 9sec man, since you insist times/numbers have to be rounded downwards?
What rubbish. 3:45.94 is almost 3:46, not 3:45. You don't realize time is still moving when it passes the second and while it is moving Hocker barely breaks 3:46. But to you Rudisha must be a "1:40 man". That'll be news to him.
We, in athletics/T&F, refer to times in a certain way. You don't seem to be familiar with the language of the sport. I suggest you educate yourself.
What you say "we" do is irrelevant, since athletes are only credited with the time they ran. If someone runs 3:45.93 they will be faster than Hocker. Come to think of it, quite a few have.
Anything from 3:45.00 to 3:45.99 is a 3:45. You can say his time was closer to 3:46 than it was to 3:44, but not "closer to 3:45" because 3:45.94 IS 3:45.
If you start out in New South Wales and then you cross over the border into Queensland, you're not "closer to New South Wales than Queensland" after you've crossed that border. You're now in Queensland.
What rubbish. 3:45.94 is almost 3:46, not 3:45. You don't realize time is still moving when it passes the second and while it is moving Hocker barely breaks 3:46. But to you Rudisha must be a "1:40 man". That'll be news to him.
Wow, really plumbing new depths of profound reckons.
Anything from 3:45.00 to 3:45.99 is a 3:45. You can say his time was closer to 3:46 than it was to 3:44, but not "closer to 3:45" because 3:45.94 IS 3:45.
If you start out in New South Wales and then you cross over the border into Queensland, you're not "closer to New South Wales than Queensland" after you've crossed that border. You're now in Queensland.
What rubbish. 3:45.94 is almost 3:46, not 3:45. You don't realize time is still moving when it passes the second and while it is moving Hocker barely breaks 3:46. But to you Rudisha must be a "1:40 man". That'll be news to him.
Yes, Dumb, we are currently closer to 2025 then to 2026.
And we are closer to the 20th century then to the 21st century.
What rubbish. 3:45.94 is almost 3:46, not 3:45. You don't realize time is still moving when it passes the second and while it is moving Hocker barely breaks 3:46. But to you Rudisha must be a "1:40 man". That'll be news to him.
Wow, really plumbing new depths of profound reckons.
If Hocker is a "3:45" man then Rudisha is a "1:40" man. Or are you going to back off from that idiocy?
What rubbish. 3:45.94 is almost 3:46, not 3:45. You don't realize time is still moving when it passes the second and while it is moving Hocker barely breaks 3:46. But to you Rudisha must be a "1:40 man". That'll be news to him.
Yes, Dumb, we are currently closer to 2025 then to 2026.
And we are closer to the 20th century then to the 21st century.
Good to have checkers like you!
A simple question. Is Hocker closer to 3:46 or 3:45?
If we follow your reasoning, anyone who runs under 27 minutes for the 10k is a "26 minutes man". Or do your arbitrary calculations only apply when you're talking about seconds? (And not even fractions of seconds?)
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Anything from 3:45.00 to 3:45.99 is a 3:45. You can say his time was closer to 3:46 than it was to 3:44, but not "closer to 3:45" because 3:45.94 IS 3:45.
If you start out in New South Wales and then you cross over the border into Queensland, you're not "closer to New South Wales than Queensland" after you've crossed that border. You're now in Queensland.
What rubbish. 3:45.94 is almost 3:46, not 3:45. You don't realize time is still moving when it passes the second and while it is moving Hocker barely breaks 3:46. But to you Rudisha must be a "1:40 man". That'll be news to him.
3:45.xx is 3:45. If the time starts with 3:45, it's 3:45.
Rudisha said, "When I saw 1:40-something on the clock, it was a little bit of a surprise.”
Arop and his coach have an initiative they call Project 99, which is to be first to run under 1:40.
After you've crossed over the border into Queensland, are you "closer to New South Wales than Queensland" or are you in Queensland?
December (also July, August...) 2025 is closer to 2026 for you then to 2025.
It's hurting to see your dumbness.
haha
By Armstronglivs "logic", New Year's Day should not be a holiday because it's not really the new year. It's closer to the old year.
When Latin American girls turn 15, Armstronglivs would say they shouldn't have a quinceañera birthday celebration because they're closer to 14 than 15.
3:48 indoors for the win is totally different than a high schooler behind pulled to a fast time. Is Cole Hocker 3.5 seconds faster than Sam indoors and what about this 2026 season❓
Ruthe's indoor time is likely worth 3:46 outdoors. So how much faster than that is Hocker?
PRs Dont matter when it comes to Cole Hocker. He isnt a time trial guy (although he has had some very real success doing it). He has the ability to just follow anyone and out kick them at the end. I think Hocker is a terrible tactician. He was DQ'd at the last olympics for pinning himself to the rail and running someone out of his way. His Gold medal in the 1500 was only possible because Ingebritsen moved out to lane 2 to try and block Kerr and gave Cole the inside lane and a free run to the gold. He's questionable at best when it comes to track positioning, but he's unbeatable if he's close with 200m to go.
I saw someone argue once that a guy who had run 3:59.99 wasn’t a sub 4 guy because you have to round it up.
Reading all the messages from Livstrong, I imagine he’s neurodivergent and cannot help himself from getting into these arguments that only make sense to him.