JK- what’s the most rational explanation for how Sara Hall runs significantly faster at age 37

As some other posters mentioned previously, drugs and/or the shoes are the most likely explanations. To suggest that she and her coach figured out a better way to train after two decades of running is laughable.

I'm not saying she doped, but to some of her staunch defenders, ask yourself if a random Kenyan who was B level throughout their 20's rose to the level that Sara is at in their upper 30's, would you not have some suspicions?

Armstronglivs wrote:

Yo Sara ian wrote:

Us? There's just you.

Wrong. When it comes to talking of legal action there's just you. So when was the last time anyone got sued on a message board for discussing doping?

Outright accusation differs from discussion.

She may simply be training with more intent / focus / whatever.

She’s 37 not 50. Yeah, she would have had a higher level of potential at 30, but there are plenty of explanations beyond ‘she took PEDs’.

Bingo! Here is the main reason! Magness is just crap!Magness and his weapon bearer Jonathan Marcus . What a disaster!lol

The only they can do is to fabricate a lot of meaningless quote junk at Twitter, lol

Sounds like a plan Stan wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Wrong. When it comes to talking of legal action there's just you. So when was the last time anyone got sued on a message board for discussing doping?

Laugh all you want, but one day you will certainly be sued for your comments on this site. It's only a matter of time.

Not in your lifetime or mine. There have been twenty years of threads alleging doping but I'm still waiting to see a lawsuit.

Yo Sara ian wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Wrong. When it comes to talking of legal action there's just you. So when was the last time anyone got sued on a message board for discussing doping?

Outright accusation differs from discussion.

You seem to be new here.

newredsun wrote:

newredsun wrote:

The days of legislative hearings I watched from PA, WI and GA scared me to death but obviously had no effect on others whom I'm sure watched to gather an informed opinion about the election.

If there had been a media monopoly in 1941, 40% of the citizens would not have known about Pearl Harbor.

I went back and read the rest of the thread and regret responding to Armstronglivs.

Disregard my post above. I do not wish for a 'dialogue' of the type above.

Whew! That's a relief.

What we need wrote:

As some other posters mentioned previously, drugs and/or the shoes are the most likely explanations. To suggest that she and her coach figured out a better way to train after two decades of running is laughable.

I'm not saying she doped, but to some of her staunch defenders, ask yourself if a random Kenyan who was B level throughout their 20's rose to the level that Sara is at in their upper 30's, would you not have some suspicions?

No, they don't. That goes with being a "staunch defender".

toozy wrote:

She may simply be training with more intent / focus / whatever.

She’s 37 not 50. Yeah, she would have had a higher level of potential at 30, but there are plenty of explanations beyond ‘she took PEDs’.

Yes, there are plenty of explanations - many of them about as credible as "voter fraud".

Sara’s run 15:20 5000. That’s 2:20:00 full Mary potential. Running 5:20 pace on a flat course, no pressure race, positive mental outlook, supportive family, magic shoes, 2:05 marathoner coach.

Armstronglivs wrote:

toozy wrote:

She may simply be training with more intent / focus / whatever.

She’s 37 not 50. Yeah, she would have had a higher level of potential at 30, but there are plenty of explanations beyond ‘she took PEDs’.

Yes, there are plenty of explanations - many of them about as credible as "voter fraud".

The voter fraud was real, apparently the videos are all lies. You are just a lame liberal who probably believed in the Russian hoax because it was aimed at Trump, not your girl Hillary. Yes, you'll see a lawsuit sooner than later.

Honestly, you're too easy and the funnies thing is, you actually believe what you post...now that is funny!

Sounds like a plan Stan wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Yes, there are plenty of explanations - many of them about as credible as "voter fraud".

The voter fraud was real, apparently the videos are all lies. You are just a lame liberal who probably believed in the Russian hoax because it was aimed at Trump, not your girl Hillary. Yes, you'll see a lawsuit sooner than later.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/073115/can-you-be-sued-negative-comments-online.asp

Honestly, you're too easy and the funnies thing is, you actually believe what you post...now that is funny!

Perhaps you could refer me to all those other libel suits on Letsrun that have occurred over the years?

The voter fraud was real, apparently the videos are all lies. You are just a lame liberal who probably believed in the Russian hoax because it was aimed at Trump, not your girl Hillary. Yes, you'll see a lawsuit sooner than later.[/quote]

Even Attorney General Barr doesn't agree with you about voter fraud. If that's what you believe I know I have nothing to fear.

Marython Christmas wrote:

Sara’s run 15:20 5000. That’s 2:20:00 full Mary potential. Running 5:20 pace on a flat course, no pressure race, positive mental outlook, supportive family, magic shoes, 2:05 marathoner coach.

15.20 for 5k suggests 2.20 marathon potential (for a woman)? What planet are you on?

What we need wrote:

As some other posters mentioned previously, drugs and/or the shoes are the most likely explanations. To suggest that she and her coach figured out a better way to train after two decades of running is laughable.

I'm not saying she doped, but to some of her staunch defenders, ask yourself if a random Kenyan who was B level throughout their 20's rose to the level that Sara is at in their upper 30's, would you not have some suspicions?

It is one thing to be suspicious. It is another thing to think it is the only explanation. Nobody thinks that she has some better way to train. People are saying she is in her best event and training properly for it. If she was dropping a 14:35 5k, you could add me to the what is up brigade. But we are talking about 2:25 for marathoner (i.e. what a 15:20 translates into for a person where the marathon is their event) in the old shoes. Go look at Kastor, Samuselon, Radcliffe and the rest do when the marathon is their best event. Shoes are 2-3 mins. So now we need to come up with 2-3 mins from better training (i.e. responding better to the 110mpw of being a marathoner than the 80mpw of a middle distance runner). Does that seem like a stretch?

We aren't talking about a Cathal Lombard level of improvement where you go from 30 mins to 27:30 in 2 years.

It fits if you look at 5k times of the top US marathoners.

Marython Christmas wrote:

Sara’s run 15:20 5000. That’s 2:20:00 full Mary potential. Running 5:20 pace on a flat course, no pressure race, positive mental outlook, supportive family, magic shoes, 2:05 marathoner coach.

So how fast could Houlihan run a marathon with her 14:23 PR!

2:15.

I wonder how many top runners plug away for twenty odd years before they discover their best distance in their mid-thirties?

I can imagine a male sub-14min 5k runner suddenly wakes up at 35 to realizing he's been wasting his time and should be running marathons - and so knocks out 2.05 in his late thirties. We are in the realm of believing anything now.