Her 15:15.92 is 1.081855 times the world record of 14:06.62.
If we multiply the men's world record of 12:35.36, we get 13:37.19. 24 college guys ran faster than that at BU.
If we assume the men's world record is soft (Bekele ran 12:37 before super shoes, and Cheptegei's 12:35 was run in somewhat less than ideal conditions) and use 12:29 instead of 12:35.36, you get 13:30.31 if you multiply by that amount. 12 college guys ran faster than that at BU.
Facts and data get Tuohy fans very upset. They will be here soon talking about feelings rather than facts. Your facts are correct. Tuohy is far away from being elite while the men are on the cusp already.
The unfortunate truth is that women's running is just not that deep, especially at the college level.
Collegiate men are just relatively better, on average, than their female counterparts.
It was also not close to Tuohy's best race. She intimated she had been feeling sick coming in and didn't have the best race. No offense to Annie Rodenfels, but at both of their best you're expecting Tuohy to win comfortably.
The truth is a time like 13:11 can make a world final. 15:08 is not good enough to make a world final. Emily Infield had to run 15:00 to make the world final as a small q.
The unfortunate truth is that women's running is just not that deep, especially at the college level.
Collegiate men are just relatively better, on average, than their female counterparts.
Women in general have a longer tail to the bell curve. There are just more factors that lead to being an outlier as a woman. There is nothing “unfortunate” about it. It is just the way it is.
Yes. You are making the point. Tuohy is further away from being elite than a bunch of college guys are. Saying it over and over and in slightly different ways just reinforces it.
Well then maybe you know that men and women are biologically different with different testosterone levels which affects the comparative impact of peds which is why we do not talk about the East German mens swim team, etc. That is why this argument is so laughable.
Her 15:15.92 is 1.081855 times the world record of 14:06.62.
If we multiply the men's world record of 12:35.36, we get 13:37.19. 24 college guys ran faster than that at BU.
If we assume the men's world record is soft (Bekele ran 12:37 before super shoes, and Cheptegei's 12:35 was run in somewhat less than ideal conditions) and use 12:29 instead of 12:35.36, you get 13:30.31 if you multiply by that amount. 12 college guys ran faster than that at BU.
Now do the rest of the women in the NCAA, and the US women pros. Waiting.
Typical for clueless men on letsrun to start yet another stupid thread putting down a promising young female runner.
I'm a Tuohy fan. I think she will break 15:00 this year, or do something that shows she clearly has that fitness, like maybe popping a 15:10 in a tactical or hot weather race. And if she hits mid or high 14:50s that is probably the equivalent of a 13:15ish men's time, which would show she is running as comparatively well as any guy in the NCAA.
But the numbers are what they are when it comes to NCAA men's depth vs. women's. Its worth thinking about why that is. I certainly don't know for sure what causes that. It could be one or more of the following:
1. A gap in the developmental opportunities for pre-collegiate women, in the U.S. and/or abroad.
2. The men's 5000 meter world record could be soft.
3. The women's 5000 meter world record could be doped.
4. There could be hormonal and/or other biological differences between college age men and women that mean women's development curves are different.
5. NCAA women's performances could improve if there were changes in the volume and intensity of their training.
6. Any host of other reasons I can't think of as an active but not professional observer of the sport.
But the numbers are what they are when it comes to NCAA men's depth vs. women's. Its worth thinking about why that is. I certainly don't
What numbers? In this thread, you only looked at one NCAA female. Why go through the process of trying to explain ‘the numbers’, when you didn’t present them? Look how many collegiate women went under the course record at Natty’s; which simply makes the case collegiate women are getting faster, and the fast women are increasing in depth.
Astro is correct - anyone faster than Tuohy is doping as is anyone who beats her. That is just a fact. He said it and he is never wrong. In fact he is the only one who understands anything on this board, such is his wisdom. He is mentoring semihaze to follow in his footsteps. Touhy owes her career to them, she would not be the greatest of all time without them. Look for her to be the first under 3.50 and 14minutes (when she gets better coaching and other things)- of course then the quandary will be how she runs faster than all the dopers, but Astro will have the answer to that - he always does.
But the numbers are what they are when it comes to NCAA men's depth vs. women's. Its worth thinking about why that is. I certainly don't
What numbers? In this thread, you only looked at one NCAA female. Why go through the process of trying to explain ‘the numbers’, when you didn’t present them? Look how many collegiate women went under the course record at Natty’s; which simply makes the case collegiate women are getting faster, and the fast women are increasing in depth.
It's not even debatable that men's NCAA running is deeper than the women's. Women's running may be increasing in depth, but so is men's running.