They are, Dumb. By almost everybody in this forum (including yourself). Almost any athlete is doing it.
You have done it yourself many times in this forum.
You are by far the most dishonest person I have ever discoverd.
Dumb himself gives middle distance times almost always exact only to the full second.
Armstrong in 1 Ruthe thread:
"You're comparing an 18 year old who was 3 seconds slower than a 16 year old. So age makes no difference?"
"Not equalling. Ryun ran that at 17; Ruthe has run the equivalent of 3:31 (indoors) at a year younger. On far less training."
"Ruthe's "much more sensible training" is 40-60mpw. That is typical schoolboy training. But no other 16 year old schoolboys are running 3:48 on so little."
"He is 8 seconds faster than Jakob was at the same age. So how much faster will he be than 3:26x and 3:43x?"
In another
"So he has no advantage over them there. Yet they aren't running 2:17."
"He (Snell) ran 1:44 on grass in '62."
"Katir went from 3:36 to 3:28."
"I said in an earlier post that a clean athlete who can run 3:38 today could be running sub-3:30 if doped"
"He might have run faster with ideal training in late '64 but he was still breaking world records - as 2:16 was."
"Question: could he one day be 8 seconds faster than Ingebrigtsen's current best of 3:43x for the mile and 3:26x for the 1500?"
"4:07 at 16 is simply not in the same class as 3:38 for the 1500 at the same age"
I can easily find hundreds of more examples. He is nothing more then a dishonest psychopatic liar.
Jesus, to write all this about .94 of a second! Which you don't want to acknowledge is part of Hocker's time. The psychosis is all yours.
A running store I frequented in the early 2000s had a signed photo of Paul McMullen. Underneath his signature, he wrote “3:55 miler.” His PR was 3:55.84.
So he claimed to be .84 faster than he was. Figures. American.
And it was your best post in this thread - by far.
You even edited the post: T.
Army’s job is to derail threads, sow diacord, and spew hate against the US. Par for the course for his ilk. You can bet his crappy Brooklyn walk-up stinks to high heaven. He and his ilk are contrarian just to be contrarian, so Army can’t help it. Self-deceptive to the end, that’s him.
Sorry - several thousand miles from Brooklyn. Do you always respond in this fashion to those with different views from yourself?
An athlete who runs 3:45.94 is .94 away from being a "3:45" runner. That is misleading. Hocker is barely a sub 3:46 runner. Deal with it.
You have written countless times that Snell ran 1:44
Hocker is a 3:45 runner. Deal with it.
1:44.3 - so only 3 tenths off 1:44 not nearly a full second off, as Hocker is from 3:45. When the distinction matters, such as discussion about world records and prs the full time matters. If Snell had run 1:44.94 he would have been "sub 1:45". Like Hocker is "sub 3:46." But none of this nonsense that you hobby joggers are dying in a ditch over changes Hocker's actual time one iota. He remains substantially behind Ingebrigtsen's best and not within range of El G. Another American pretender.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
You have written countless times that Snell ran 1:44
Hocker is a 3:45 runner. Deal with it.
1:44.3 - so only 3 tenths off 1:44 not nearly a full second off, as Hocker is from 3:45. When the distinction matters, such as discussion about world records and prs the full time matters. If Snell had run 1:44.94 he would have been "sub 1:45". Like Hocker is "sub 3:46." But none of this nonsense that you hobby joggers are dying in a ditch over changes Hocker's actual time one iota. He remains substantially behind Ingebrigtsen's best and not within range of El G. Another American pretender.
1:44.3 - so only 3 tenths off 1:44 not nearly a full second off, as Hocker is from 3:45. When the distinction matters, such as discussion about world records and prs the full time matters. If Snell had run 1:44.94 he would have been "sub 1:45". Like Hocker is "sub 3:46." But none of this nonsense that you hobby joggers are dying in a ditch over changes Hocker's actual time one iota. He remains substantially behind Ingebrigtsen's best and not within range of El G. Another American pretender.
You have written countless times that Snell ran 1:44
Hocker is a 3:45 runner. Deal with it.
1:44.3 - so only 3 tenths off 1:44 not nearly a full second off, as Hocker is from 3:45. When the distinction matters, such as discussion about world records and prs the full time matters. If Snell had run 1:44.94 he would have been "sub 1:45". Like Hocker is "sub 3:46." But none of this nonsense that you hobby joggers are dying in a ditch over changes Hocker's actual time one iota. He remains substantially behind Ingebrigtsen's best and not within range of El G. Another American pretender.
1:44.3 is 1:44 for him.
Nuff said. All the nonsense he writes is not even his opinion. He just has to be contra.
3:48.88 makes Ruthe a 3:48 runner for him. So the change must be somewhere berween .88 and .94.
A running store I frequented in the early 2000s had a signed photo of Paul McMullen. Underneath his signature, he wrote “3:55 miler.” His PR was 3:55.84.
So he claimed to be .84 faster than he was. Figures. American.
Nick Willis, on his greatest achievement in athletics:
It is a toss-up between my silver medal at the Olympics and running 3:29 for the 1500m. The Olympics is all about showing off on the day and I happened to have one of the greatest races of my career on the day that counted in Beijing. There are two sides to running and the other is to see how you can go against yourself. In Monaco when I ran 3:29 – that is the closest I’ve ever got to reaching my body’s extreme limit.
Nick Willis set a New Zealand 1500m record of 3:29.91 in Monaco last July to become the fastest non-African in the world for the distance in 2014. The 2008 Olympic 1500m silver medallist speaks about the best things in his at...
1:44.3 - so only 3 tenths off 1:44 not nearly a full second off, as Hocker is from 3:45. When the distinction matters, such as discussion about world records and prs the full time matters. If Snell had run 1:44.94 he would have been "sub 1:45". Like Hocker is "sub 3:46." But none of this nonsense that you hobby joggers are dying in a ditch over changes Hocker's actual time one iota. He remains substantially behind Ingebrigtsen's best and not within range of El G. Another American pretender.
1:44.3 is 1:44 for him.
Nuff said. All the nonsense he writes is not even his opinion. He just has to be contra.
3:48.88 makes Ruthe a 3:48 runner for him. So the change must be somewhere berween .88 and .94.
Insane.
None of this nonsense that doesn't take account of a runner's actual time changes the time they ran. What a waste of time.
So he claimed to be .84 faster than he was. Figures. American.
Nick Willis, on his greatest achievement in athletics:
It is a toss-up between my silver medal at the Olympics and running 3:29 for the 1500m. The Olympics is all about showing off on the day and I happened to have one of the greatest races of my career on the day that counted in Beijing. There are two sides to running and the other is to see how you can go against yourself. In Monaco when I ran 3:29 – that is the closest I’ve ever got to reaching my body’s extreme limit.
He wouldn't claim that 3:29 was the actual time he ran. An approximation is only that. He knows that. An approximate time is the numerical equivalent of a nickname; we know who is being referred to but it isn't their actual name.
Nick Willis, on his greatest achievement in athletics:
It is a toss-up between my silver medal at the Olympics and running 3:29 for the 1500m. The Olympics is all about showing off on the day and I happened to have one of the greatest races of my career on the day that counted in Beijing. There are two sides to running and the other is to see how you can go against yourself. In Monaco when I ran 3:29 – that is the closest I’ve ever got to reaching my body’s extreme limit.
He wouldn't claim that 3:29 was the actual time he ran. An approximation is only that. He knows that. An approximate time is the numerical equivalent of a nickname; we know who is being referred to but it isn't their actual name.
I'd say it's more of a matter of precision. He clearly takes pride in having run 3:29.
