Katelyn Tuohy running unattached for the first time?

Why? The incentive structure has changed entirely. Adidas will broadly want her to stay in college because winning NCAA titles left, right and centre and setting collegiate records will bring far more attention than being a mid-level pro. Even if she set the world record - that's still a better story and more publicity if she is in college than being out of it...

Projection from her current times would be more like 8:45. But I think the main difficulty might be a similar gap between a leading group going for ~8:30 and rest like last year with Keilati and Monson about 10 sec. ahead at the end. If there are more runners around 8:40 in the mix Tuohy has a better chance.

Henes has already run 8:41 I believe - probably can't try to stick with the leaders but she, and maybe Orton-Morgan/Wayment might be targetting 8:40 ish

You forgot what you learned freshman year? You obvioulsy aren't in a STEM field or you wouldn't be prepared for the next level class. And I hope that you don't plan to be a doctor if you forget what you learned. How do you know what Tuohy did 5 years ago if you frget everything?

You are correct. Tuohy is doing great against college runners but got absolutely embarassed at the USATF 5000. She would disappear as a pro.

Everyone loves Tuohy. But claiming that she is guaranteed to run 14:30 or even 15:00 is foolish because the majority of college runners do not earn a living as a professional. And saying that a business degree from NC State guarantees somebody a good job is just not true.

You would have said the same aboiut all those pros she was running against when they were here age. The logic is always very fuzzy.

I predicted most of them to be good because they were on steep improvement curves while Tuohy is not. Pretty simple to see. I predicted Cain to disappear though. I have stated this many times and will remain consistent in the future. When Tuohy tops out as a sub-elite, you will have an excuse and say that it was not predictable but it has been predicted here and now. Tuohy is just another data point for me while she is your focus which is why your views are biased.

Tuohy is already sub-elite. Before the superspikes her current 5000m mark would have been (in principle, I am not saying she would have been good enough at US trials) sufficient to qualify for Rio 2016 or London 2017.

Nothing fuzzy about recognizing that some runners make large improvements from age 16-20 while others flatten. Tuohy is in the latter category. Valby is in the former.

Yes she is sub-elite but has not topped out yet. I am more optimistic than you if you think she won't improve. I think she can get to 14:55-15:00 in her career which is still sub-elite these days.

I wonder if / how long Henes will try to stick with the lead pack.

Praught Lear, Jennings and Fulton are running too. Praught Lear ran 8:41 but that was back in 2018. She said in her post race interview at BU that she is targeting the world standard this season I believe.

Oh, the "improvement curve". Sure. How does that work again? So the runners in question all basically run slower times throughout college, typically stagnating for four years after an initial improvement, but then improve after turning pro. But they have the special late bloomer gene or something, right? :). We seen this same drivel for the last five years.

This should be simple enough to understand without. You don't need to get emotional regarding facts.

Schweizer 5000 meters

2010 19:42 XC Age 14

2011 19:07 XC

2012 18:42 XC Age 16

2013 17:51 XC

2014 17:18 XC

2015 16:32 Track Age 18/19

2016 15:58 Track Age 19/20

2017 15:39 Age 20 PR

2017 15:18 right after turning 21

Looks like 3 minute drop from age 16 - 20. what was Tuohy's drop from age 16-20? How about Monson or Coburn or Frerichs?

trotting out this old chestnut again. Just go away. No one cares. The 'she's not gonna improve' predictions are endless on this site. The NYT wrote about this back in 2018. Literally. Do. Not. Care.

Sooooo what? Maybe Tuohy was just more serious about her running in her teen years. That does not equate to she will not eventually be good enough to make US teams. Sit back and watch, we will al see.

Obviously a female cannot improve another 3 min if one runs 15:37 at barely 16.

I think most of these extrapolations are 20/20 in hindsight. It's very hard to tell anything early on, especially if one doesn't know the training details. (I was not following her closely, but to me e.g. Efraimson still looked fairly promising in 2017-18 despite stagnation.)

How many people would have (or did) predict in 2017 that Schweizer would run 14:40s 2019 and 14:20s in 2020?

Not many but we can all predict that the US female professional runners nearly all make large improvements ffrom age 16-20. On the flip side, nearly every elite American girl at age 16 who barely improved from age 16-20 ends up in a cubicle job.