Galen Rupp's 10000m Is Not Superior To Chris Solinsky's

26:48 is not a big breakthrough effort? Great observation. Also, nice job halfheartedly covering all the remarks you've made about Rupp in the past. Truly a top-notch post and a worth contribution to this forum.

Heard through the grapevine wrote:

26:48 is not a big breakthrough effort? Great observation. Also, nice job halfheartedly covering all the remarks you've made about Rupp in the past. Truly a top-notch post and a worth contribution to this forum.

26:48 is NOT a big breakthrough. Do you not understand that Solinsky could have run that fast last year? IF you don't, you must not be very bright. Galen could have run under 27 by late summer last year. This is a nice step in the right direction.

yeah I just as soon have Solinsky's 11 second slower PR

good thinkin

jesse was a friend wrote:

Heard through the grapevine wrote:

26:48 is not a big breakthrough effort? Great observation. Also, nice job halfheartedly covering all the remarks you've made about Rupp in the past. Truly a top-notch post and a worth contribution to this forum.

26:48 is NOT a big breakthrough. Do you not understand that Solinsky could have run that fast last year? IF you don't, you must not be very bright. Galen could have run under 27 by late summer last year. This is a nice step in the right direction.

No, you don't know if Solinsky could have run 26:48. You're not very good at debating. You lose.

I am clearly correct as usual. However, Galen Rupp is one helluva runner. Of course he'll never medal. So what? Let's appreciate him for what he is.

I believe Galen Rupp is capable of running the U.S. record for the marathon. There...I said it. However, he will NEVER medal in WC or Olympic track and field.

Javanator wrote:

jesse was a friend wrote:

26:48 is NOT a big breakthrough. Do you not understand that Solinsky could have run that fast last year? IF you don't, you must not be very bright. Galen could have run under 27 by late summer last year. This is a nice step in the right direction.

No, you don't know if Solinsky could have run 26:48. You're not very good at debating. You lose.

He's better at debating than you are. He wins. Solinsky, when healthy, is better than Rupp.

Jesse just can't admit defeat and that he was and is wrong, wrong, wrong. Poor Jesse, right now he is choking on crow. He sounds so desperate.

Night Runner wrote:

Jesse just can't admit defeat and that he was and is wrong, wrong, wrong. Poor Jesse, right now he is choking on crow. He sounds so desperate.

Find me one are where I was wrong. I will admit it if you can find it.

Jesse, keep on modifying your arrogantly definitive statements of "always right" opinion. Keep shifting the target. Everybody here believes you when you say you're correct as usual. We all agree 26:48 represents no big deal at all, not a breakthrough, really no different at all from 26:59 or 27:10 or anything else.

jesse was a friend wrote:

I am clearly correct as usual. However, Galen Rupp is one helluva runner. Of course he'll never medal. So what? Let's appreciate him for what he is.

I believe Galen Rupp is capable of running the U.S. record for the marathon. There...I said it. However, he will NEVER medal in WC or Olympic track and field.

How many times has rupp beat solinsky and visa versa? Who has more USATF championships?

claurence wrote:

Javanator wrote:

No, you don't know if Solinsky could have run 26:48. You're not very good at debating. You lose.

He's better at debating than you are. He wins. Solinsky, when healthy, is better than Rupp.

Listen, for the obtuse: Galen Rupp ran 26:48 in a 10,000 meter race in Brussels on September 16th. Chris Solinsky ran a 26:59 with a last 800 of 1:56 in Palo Alto on May 1st. That is all ye know and all ye need to know. These were two great performances, but you must be a moron if you think Solinsky couldn't have done this last summer.

Making a hypothetical statement and then telling people they must be morons not to agree with you is not exactly persuasive.

jesse was a friend wrote:

Listen, for the obtuse: Galen Rupp ran 26:48 in a 10,000 meter race in Brussels on September 16th. Chris Solinsky ran a 26:59 with a last 800 of 1:56 in Palo Alto on May 1st. That is all ye know and all ye need to know. These were two great performances, but you must be a moron if you think Solinsky couldn't have done this last summer.

You keep repeating the same thing over and over. How about you prove why Solinsky could run 26:48? Good luck.

Heard through the grapevine wrote:

Making a hypothetical statement and then telling people they must be morons not to agree with you is not exactly persuasive.

Exactly. It will not by definition be persuasive to the morons. They are not my intended audience, which probably means I shouldn't be here. The highly intelligent will agree with me, and if they don't, they are likely delusional about their intelligence.

jesse was a friend wrote:

Listen, for the obtuse: Galen Rupp ran 26:48 in a 10,000 meter race in Brussels on September 16th. Chris Solinsky ran a 26:59 with a last 800 of 1:56 in Palo Alto on May 1st. That is all ye know and all ye need to know. These were two great performances, but you must be a moron if you think Solinsky couldn't have done this last summer.

I am a HUGE Solinsky fan but he couldn't have come close to this performance this summer. Maybe next year but nothing he did this year suggested he could put down a time like this.

haha YO wrote:

jesse was a friend wrote:

Listen, for the obtuse: Galen Rupp ran 26:48 in a 10,000 meter race in Brussels on September 16th. Chris Solinsky ran a 26:59 with a last 800 of 1:56 in Palo Alto on May 1st. That is all ye know and all ye need to know. These were two great performances, but you must be a moron if you think Solinsky couldn't have done this last summer.

I am a HUGE Solinsky fan but he couldn't have come close to this performance this summer. Maybe next year but nothing he did this year suggested he could put down a time like this.

I was obviously referring to LAST summer, meaning 2010. He has been injured this year.

If Solinsky could've done it why didn't he? Track and Field is not a hypothetical sport. Who has the record? Rupp. Whether at that time Solinsky could've done it or not is irrelevant because the fact of the matter is he never did do it. Talk with your feet. Or, rather, let Solinsky.

Impossible Is Nothin wrote:

If Solinsky could've done it why didn't he? Track and Field is not a hypothetical sport. Who has the record? Rupp. Whether at that time Solinsky could've done it or not is irrelevant because the fact of the matter is he never did do it. Talk with your feet. Or, rather, let Solinsky.

You're not very bright, obviously. Solinsky ran 12:55 when he could have run 26:48. This was after his 26:59, which was early in the season. Learn to think.

Funny, if ventolin started a thread saying Chris Solinsky could have run 26:48 based off of his 26:59 with a 1:56 last 800m, people would have sh*t all over him, but not in this thread...