This must be unprecedented in US history. His streak was broken last year during the pandemic as he apparently did not contest a 5000m race. Ben True is listed at 6’0 and 164 lbs. Whatever he does in the marathon he has really had a solid running career.
This headline is incorrect.
Ben True broke 13:13 8 years in a row.
He ran slower than that a bunch of times.
Jeff Albertson wrote:
This headline is incorrect.
Ben True broke 13:13 8 years in a row.
He ran slower than that a bunch of times.
You are incorrect. He broke 13:13 SEVEN years in a row, not 8. Any moron knows I was referring to his fastest effort of the year.
Jeff Albertson wrote:
This headline is incorrect.
Ben True broke 13:13 8 years in a row.
He ran slower than that a bunch of times.
Yeah, terrible and inaccurate thread title even by LRC standards (though it was seven years.
i got what OP meant but "at least" would be better wording than "no slower than"
For those who aren’t very bright, and that appears to be most of you, if I said I ran no slower than a 4 minute mile for 7 consecutive years, even you dimwits would not assume that my jogs were at sub 4 minute mile pace.
This is actually a really cool stat, thanks for bringing it up! I had no idea and I've followed running pretty consistently the last few years.
Regonald wrote:
For those who aren’t very bright, and that appears to be most of you, if I said I ran no slower than a 4 minute mile for 7 consecutive years, even you dimwits would not assume that my jogs were at sub 4 minute mile pace.
I would say that statement is as stupid and inaccurate as this thread title.
Regonald wrote:
This must be unprecedented in US history. His streak was broken last year during the pandemic as he apparently did not contest a 5000m race. Ben True is listed at 6’0 and 164 lbs. Whatever he does in the marathon he has really had a solid running career.
You are rude, silly and ignorant. You go mad at another poster because another poster pointed out your imprecise language. This is meaningless and it shows how awful U.S. is at 5000m. Let's compare your worthless stat to U.S' best event, 400m. 13:13 5000m is equal to about a 45.2 400m. No one cares if a U.S. 400m athlete races several sub-45.2 400m. Go away! A worthless stat.
dumb op wrote:
Regonald wrote:
For those who aren’t very bright, and that appears to be most of you, if I said I ran no slower than a 4 minute mile for 7 consecutive years, even you dimwits would not assume that my jogs were at sub 4 minute mile pace.
I would say that statement is as stupid and inaccurate as this thread title.
You have demonstrated that you aren’t very bright. Intelligent people rarely take every statement to be literal when the context would be a dead giveaway of the intended meaning. However you and your ilk suffer from a paucity of skills requisite for obvious interpretation.
GO AWAY ...!!! wrote:
Regonald wrote:
This must be unprecedented in US history. His streak was broken last year during the pandemic as he apparently did not contest a 5000m race. Ben True is listed at 6’0 and 164 lbs. Whatever he does in the marathon he has really had a solid running career.
You are rude, silly and ignorant. You go mad at another poster because another poster pointed out your imprecise language. This is meaningless and it shows how awful U.S. is at 5000m. Let's compare your worthless stat to U.S' best event, 400m. 13:13 5000m is equal to about a 45.2 400m. No one cares if a U.S. 400m athlete races several sub-45.2 400m. Go away! A worthless stat.
The stat is incredibly meaningful. I am not mad at stupid posters. Why would I be mad? Stupidity is ubiquitous.
Regonald wrote:
dumb op wrote:
I would say that statement is as stupid and inaccurate as this thread title.
You have demonstrated that you aren’t very bright. Intelligent people rarely take every statement to be literal when the context would be a dead giveaway of the intended meaning. However you and your ilk suffer from a paucity of skills requisite for obvious interpretation.
I know what you were trying to say. It’s not that complicated. That doesn’t make your incorrect statement any less idiotic.
I do not find the grammar remotely unclear.
dumb op wrote:
Regonald wrote:
You have demonstrated that you aren’t very bright. Intelligent people rarely take every statement to be literal when the context would be a dead giveaway of the intended meaning. However you and your ilk suffer from a paucity of skills requisite for obvious interpretation.
I know what you were trying to say. It’s not that complicated. That doesn’t make your incorrect statement any less idiotic.
Dude it is a title for a thread on a message board with limited space. It is not one’s magnum opus.
calculass wrote:
I do not find the grammar remotely unclear.
This is because you are intelligent.
A reminder just how bad-ass True was/is!
How many years did Kipchoge put up sub 13 min 5000s?
Galen Rupp and Bob Kennedy both ran under 13:12 SIX years consecutively so they might be the closest US runners to True’s SEVEN years.
Regonald wrote:
Galen Rupp and Bob Kennedy both ran under 13:12 SIX years consecutively so they might be the closest US runners to True’s SEVEN years.
Rupp ran 13:09 or faster in all those six years. How many years in a row did True run under 13:09?
And 5000m is Rupp's secondary event. 13:12 is about the same level as 27:38 in 10000, according to the WA scoring table. Rupp ran faster than 27:38 in TEN straight years, including seven years faster than 27:30.
Lagat also ran faster than 13:10 in six straight years (NINE in total). and that was his secondary event. In his primary event, he ran faster than 3:35 in FIFTEEN straight years.
Nobody is asserting that Rupp and Lagat were not better runners than True. The point is that True has done something they did not do. The truth is that True was very close to Galen at 5000m. There is not much separation there.