Could a fit Alan Webb break 3000M WR?

He is also known to make up "personalities" to "debate" with him. It's weird.

Ventolin^whocares, let's hear it: two times correctly predicting a SUBSEQUENT third using your little calculator. I'm waiting for all of the examples!

idiot

they are vertebrates with same physiological/biochemical processes

are are you so f***ing stoopid you believe horses don't use the krebs cycle ???

this is complete f***ing drivel

you don't have a clue about science

using 2 parameters is one of the foundations of science

get a science education idiot

you complete f***ing idiot

we are assuming they get to 3'30 & 12'45 in their best possible race at even pace off same training

can't your numbskull comprehend this ??

if they both do, there shoud be no significant difference in their 3k time

idiot

no differences between vertebrates in fluids

provide some hard refutation

moron

you have no clue about swimming

evans held the 400wr for 15+y off -ve splits

100m events have a dive which skews the eveness for 50m/100m, but it is no different to running for events over 400m

imbecile

you have no f***ing clue at all

evened out on flat tracks, there is no difference

look up what 1'33/1'59 implies for 1 1/2 miles

complete f***ing moron

it's off-season

we only have prior to work on

idiot

look up

1/18/2011 12:35PM

Bryn_R wrote:Ventolin - with all due respect you're an utter prick. Please get lost.

thank you

but with no respect

f*** off

the smartest letsrunner wrote:He is also known to make up "personalities" to "debate" with him. It's weird

no

moron

Ventolin^whocares, let's hear it: two times correctly predicting a SUBSEQUENT third using your little calculator. I'm waiting for all of the examples!

little pissant,

what exactly have you offered to this thread ?

let's see :

guy is a 5k runner & has 1'50/3'40 ability currently, he desperately wants to know what he coud do for 5k in his upcoming big circuit race

what are you going to tell him, moron ?

give him a number...

the smartest letsrunner wrote:

To say that a fit Webb could not break an AR is to say that a HYPOTHETICAL fit Webb could not break any of the EXISTING ARs.

Your early misinterpretation ('huh-huh-huh he DID break an AR before') was either deliberate or dumb, or maybe both.

I'm pretty confident both my french and english grammar is better than yours in any language.

What if I said:

"Pre couldn't break the 5k WR, but he did set the American Record." Does that sentence make sense? Of course it does, even though that doesn't have anything to do with the future, or current records.

Again, you're putting words in my mouth, and conveniently didn't address it when I pointed that (and your other factual errors) out in my previous post. I imagine you'll continue to ignore that. Good show.

You're like the little kid who can't stand to be told he's wrong and throws a tantrum. Rather amusing.

grammar are*

DocLove wrote:

[quote]I Am Fleetfoot wrote:

I watched Haile try at Boston Indoor Games in 2003 he failed - Webb aint doing it boys !'

No shit, Watson

Thank you Doctwatson !

Haha oh man this was entertaining. I love how Ventolin^3 responded in EXACTLY the way he was predicted to (a totaly tantrum), we should make a Letsrun tantrum calculator to predict who will flip out. We may even be able to use science to make it more accurate lol

Webb would need to lower his 1500/mile PR's by at least 3 seconds, being that he is more speed-oriented than Komen. And his 5k PR would need to be at least 20-25 seconds faster. Or he could just get as juiced as Komen was. No way that Komen was clean, especially if El G wasn't able to take down the 3k WR.

ventolin^3 wrote:

little pissant,

what exactly have you offered to this thread ?

let's see :

guy is a 5k runner & has 1'50/3'40 ability currently, he desperately wants to know what he coud do for 5k in his upcoming big circuit race

what are you going to tell him, moron ?

give him a number...

Now, now. There's no need to call names just because you're losing a fight.

There are a number of ways I would help assess your hypothetical runner's fitness. Most of them would be based on his workouts, previous races, period of the season, etc. Basically, I would do anything EXCEPT use your little calculator, which has been widely discredited.

iran2day wrote:

Haha oh man this was entertaining. I love how Ventolin^3 responded in EXACTLY the way he was predicted to (a totaly tantrum), we should make a Letsrun tantrum calculator to predict who will flip out. We may even be able to use science to make it more accurate lol

+1

Maybe he can apply his little calculator and actually predict something CORRECTLY for a change.

kartelite wrote:

I'm pretty confident both my french and english grammar is better than yours in any language.

HAHAHAHAHAHA: You're pretty confident that both your French and English grammar *IS* better than mine?

I know you tried to correct yourself later (but were still wrong), but when you can't even form a grammatically correct sentence in BRAGGING about your grammar (a sad activity in and of itself, even for you), you're really done.

ventolin^3 wrote:

they are vertebrates with same physiological/biochemical processes

are are you so f***ing stoopid you believe horses don't use the krebs cycle ???

It's easy to see why you have failed to understand your calculator's flaws or demonstrate its accuracy.

ventolin^3 wrote:

this is complete f***ing drivel

you don't have a clue about science

using 2 parameters is one of the foundations of science

get a science education idiot

I have one. I model things far more complicated than this every single day. Using two parameters isn't the problem. Obviously. Using a poor model to draw conclusions from them is.

ventolin^3 wrote:

moron

you have no clue about swimming

evans held the 400wr for 15+y off -ve splits

100m events have a dive which skews the eveness for 50m/100m, but it is no different to running for events over 400m

Wrong again. You must be old and out of it if that is the example you cherrypick. Look at the CURRENT WRs, not the one exception, which has been smashed anyway. Swimming splits look nothing like running splits (and I don't mean just the first lap).

No shock that you've failed, yet again:

Where x

the smartest letsrunner wrote:There are a number of ways I would help assess your hypothetical runner's fitness

moron

best way to assess a runner is thru the clockings they produce

Most of them would be based on his workouts, previous races, period of the season, etc

idiot

we are talking finished article ready to race

all the training has been done

Basically, I would do anything EXCEPT use your little calculator, which has been widely discredited.

moron

i want to know :

what are you going to tell this 1'50/3'40 guy he can run for 5k

put up or shut up

moron

are you saying horse's don't use glycolysis or the kreb's cycle ??

f***ing idiot

you clearly haven't a clue about anything scientific

moron

evan's 400wr was considered the greatest wr in history by many pundits

you clearly haven't a clue about swimming

ditance swimming records are fast initial/last 100m & even pace for remainder

ventolin^3 wrote:

moron

i want to know :

what are you going to tell this 1'50/3'40 guy he can run for 5k

put up or shut up

idiot

we are talking finished article ready to race

all the training has been done

Hahahahaha extrapolating a 1'50" 800 and a 3'40" to a 5000 time? I hope you have more than your little horse calculator to go on.

Yes, obviously the training has been done. I would like to know about it.

In case you missed what I said clearly before: "Basically, I would do anything EXCEPT use your little calculator, which has been widely discredited."

It's so cute that you keep calling me names. As many, many, many others have pointed out, the more desperate you become in your many losing arguments, the more vile the tantrum you throw.

Ventolin^3,

Shouldn't you be paying the Brojos for all the advertising you do for your calculator on here?

ventolin^3 wrote:

moron

are you saying horse's don't use glycolysis or the kreb's cycle ??

Yes, that's what I'm saying. Wrong.

Don't be obtuse. Of course they do. However, individuals vary within species and between activities in glycolysis, and certainly species differ.

ventolin^3 wrote:

f***ing idiot

you clearly haven't a clue about anything scientific

Well, it's how I make my living, and I happen to make a very, very good living, while you are trying to supplement yours by flogging a horse calculator online.

ventolin^3 wrote:

you clearly haven't a clue about swimming

Here's a clue: velocity falls off FAR faster in swimming than in running. Just off the top of my head...

Running:

800 1'41"

1600 3:25"

Swimming

200 1'42"

400 3'40"

But your horsie calculator doesn't capture this. And you blithely state that it's all the same.

You're too easy. I await your next name-calling tantrum, which I will easily refute.

Typo, obviously...

Here's a clue: velocity falls off FAR faster in running in running. Just off the top of my head, using events of very comparable durations. (You can exclude the sprints if you want - your calculator's weakness still holds.

Running:

400 43"

800 1'41"

1600 3:43"

Swimming

100 46"

200 1'42"

400 3'40"

But your horsie calculator doesn't capture this. And you blithely state that it's all the same.

For christ's sake, get it through your head. Comparing velocities between events, a runner with a roughly 1:2.2 ratio (as in the WRs) is clearly quite solid moving up between these distances, whereas a swimmer with the same ratio is comparatively weak. It is simply in defiance of reason to use the same formula in completely different sports to extrapolate from representative performances.

You're too easy. I await your next name-calling tantrum, which I will easily refute.