Could any of you win the Women's NCAA DI meet solo?

You skinny milers cant score in the shot put or the weight throw against these ladies. Go find a high school track and pick up a girls shot. Add close to a pound to it and throw it 55ft. You wont even break 40 with the high school girls.

The Weight Throw takes so much technique and coordination. Have you ever seen distance runners play basketball? You wont score in those events fellas.

Nowadays, I probably couldn't score in any event, except maybe the throws. I'm out of shape but I'm still fairly strong. Give a week or so to learn a little technique.

In my prime though, I was a sprinter/hurdler/jumper at a decent DI school. So in those days I'm sure I could have won the 60m, 60m hurdles (given some time to get used to the different heights), 200m, 400m, HJ, LJ, and TJ. I think I could have at least scored in the 800, Mile, and the throwing events (again, given a bit of time to learn technique first). Granted, having to go through rounds in some of the running events would be taxing, and scheduling might be a problem. But given that I at least had the potential to outright win no fewer than 11 women's events, I'm sure I could work out a 70 point meet somehow.

This is awesome. I've finally found where the man children hang out when they're not at a local road race elbowing any woman trying to pass them.

You are all fools. Also, since this probably applies to most, if not all, of you: no one wants to see you in 3-inch splits. BUY LONGER RUNNING SHORTS.

Off to look up high school boys' track meets to see if I could win one outright,

this girl.

Let us know if you find one.

P.Whelan wrote:

I'm laughing at all the people predicting 1-8 points in the sprints.

Almost the exact same thing in the 200m, 23.17 was the slowest qualifier, runner that again in the final gets you 6th, with 22.85 winning. 23.17 is not exactly a world away from 22.85. Looking at the results and saying "Yup, I could run faster than 23.03, but 23.00 is just too much to ask from me... I guess I'd score 4 points" is utterly ridiculous.

I have a pr of 22.32 in the 200m (I know because I dated/married a national caliber 100m/200m sprinter and I used to race her in college just for fun/bragging rights). I guessed 4 points because I'd be tired from all the other races. Had I only raced the 200m I would have blown the women away. I was trying to not be arrogant and stating I'd win it walking away after all the other races and thus figured I'd get a couple points (4) out of it.

Best bet would probably be a 400H/800 type. They could win or do well in, 60, 60H, 200, 400, 800, Mile, and 3k, as well as the jumps. You'd have to figure out with the schedule what events from there you choose, probably need 7.

Could we get a show of hands as to how many of the pansy-assed posters on this thread can pop a baby out of their vaginas?

This is easily the stupidest thread I've ever seen on Letsrun with the exception of the pooping in compression socks series.

Let's all hope Med School Runner sticks with lab work if he ever gets out of med school. He'll flame out miserably with real patients.

I don't understand why you're so mad. Nobody on here is saying "Oh, I'm SO much better than female athletes." This thread is more of a very difficult workout challenge that requires excellent range of endurance, speed, and technique.Also, unless you're an elite sponsored female athlete, you're not going to win any events at a high school boy's meet, little less win the meet outright.

this girl. wrote:

This is awesome. I've finally found where the man children hang out when they're not at a local road race elbowing any woman trying to pass them.

You are all fools. Also, since this probably applies to most, if not all, of you: no one wants to see you in 3-inch splits. BUY LONGER RUNNING SHORTS.

Off to look up high school boys' track meets to see if I could win one outright,

this girl.

You people crack me up. Anyone who thinks they can jump, throw, etc. and only have to do it once is a fool. While these women may not have the strength/power to jump as far as a male, they do practice these events every day. They MIGHT hit the jump on the first round if they're lucky. Same goes for the male field events. These guys practice every friggin day and still can't hit the boards or foul on their first few throws until they get their rhythm.

You fools think you're gods gift to athletics and assume you'd do it first try. RIGHT! Give me a break and pull your perfect head out of your perfect little 10 year old boy ass. How is it that you get to live in a perfect world and your competitors don't?

Christ you scrawny little distance runners will do anything to boost your confidence. How about you idiots go outside and smile at a girl. It will do wonders for your self-esteem.

I could do it if the rest werent an issue.

Pretty sure I could win the 60. Prob. top 10 in 200

and for sure win 400-3k. Top 5 in long jump

i agree with old coach man. lets be serious, a GOOD distance runner will win a few events, but won't win A SINGLE field event, or sprint/hurdle event. what will most likely happen is you will get a wedgie and a noogie by the top women thrower for wandering over to the pit. GOOD distance runners don't have the power to win those events. you will score in a handful of distance events, and that is it. congrats if that wins a meet.

Lets say your a 22.80/49.0/1:50/4:03/8:00/14:10 runner. It is pretty easy to figure out you are going to clean up in the 400-5000m. But how many points are you go to score in the 200? Seems a bit optimistic to think you are going to pretty much run a PR (for the win) but running a couple tenths off for 4-6 place seems more doable. Obviously not an exact science. I am also assuming your not going to false start in the 200/400. As far as how hard it would be to do those distance races, look at some of the conference meets outdoors where guys tripple. For example looks at AJ Acosta from last year1500m 3:46/3:413000st 8:525000m 13:46Do you really think 2 800m heats in about 2:00 flat would have been hard give you can run you miles races 30s slower, your steeple time is faster than the winning flat 3k time, and your 5k is 2 mins faster than what you need need? And before you say AJ Acosta is elite, look how much off his PRs he was and then figure out how slow you can be and still win the distance races easily. The only questions for a moderately talented guy (1:56/4:15/9:00) is can you run a couple 50s 400s and 22.8 200s and score in one of the field events to get the other 20 some odd points you need.

no, the real question is how many of them you could score on.

Well, in my case, I was actually a jumper at a DI school that had multiple All-American jumpers (I wasn't one of them unfortunately, but I was decent). So looking at the winning jumps for women's LJ, TJ, and HJ....yeah, I could jump those marks on my first try, 9 times out of 10. I doubt I would miss the board because I wouldn't have to run that fast to jump 21 feet. I could slow down a little and concentrate more on making sure I hit the board the first time. And I wouldn't miss at 6'2" either. Unless I accidentally stumbled on the approach or something.

Granted, I'm not the typical LR poster because I wasn't really a distance guy in my younger days. I'm sure I'm also a bit stronger (weight lifting wise) than the typical LR poster. I'm not bragging. I suck at distance running and would probably have gotten my ass handed to me by the girls in the 3000 and 5000, even in my college days. And these days I would get pounded in every event, except maybe the throws if I had a couple weeks to learn some technique. But that would probably be a long shot too.

I am somewhere between 40-50. Off my PRs 50. In actual competition I am guessing mid 40s. As I said before the distance races are walk in the park when you can run 8+s off your 800m PR, 20 off your mile , 60s+ off your 3k 5k prs it is easy to pencil in wins. Now with a 51.7 indoor 400m pr I have no clue what I am scoring but anywhere from 2nd to 6th place seems reasonable. Not making the final is also somewhat possible (53.06 might be hard if it was like 15 mins after the 800m for example). There are lot of guys that can get 50 if they have good leg speed. A few more that can get to 60 (good leg speed and some limited field event exposure or the ability to run a national class 5k so you could get DMR points). I am guessing very few get to 70+ other than a ncaa level decathlete who can threaten to win the 60,60h,200,400,800 (some of them. Some would even be threats in the mile), shot ,pv, HJ and LJ and if they have done any technique work maybe score in the TJ and weight throw.

Dan Giovanni wrote:

no, the real question is how many of them you could score on.

Instead of everyone speculating what you could do, why don't you actually go out and do it!

http://www.decathlon2000.com/eng/2805/

hahaha Im dying. I dont know if you were trying to be funny which makes it funny

Med School Runner wrote:

Why would female runners be offended by this thread? They already know that female world champions are typically about as fast as recruitable high school boys. Men are faster and stronger than women... big surprise... maybe that's why they compete in separate divisions!

If women started another thread on something they are much better at than us by default (ie. empathy, recognizing color shades, attracting the opposite sex, etc.) I don't think we'd get too offended.

Festizio wrote:

haha, this thread would be so offensive to female runners, if there were any on this board that is. too bad they will never know...

med school runner? who are you, Roger Bannister?

Good point... I'm not sure either.

pennywise wrote:

hahaha Im dying. I dont know if you were trying to be funny which makes it funny

Med School Runner wrote:

Why would female runners be offended by this thread? They already know that female world champions are typically about as fast as recruitable high school boys. Men are faster and stronger than women... big surprise... maybe that's why they compete in separate divisions!

If women started another thread on something they are much better at than us by default (ie. empathy, recognizing color shades, attracting the opposite sex, etc.) I don't think we'd get too offended.