There was indeed testing at Nationals.
There was indeed testing at Nationals.
What about this race? And is she being tested out of competition?
This is the question here, not whether being a waitress supplemented her training.
Testing at Canadian Nationals usually consists of the winner and a random pick.
No testing at this race and isn't being tested out of competition. She isn't a nationally funded athlete so she does not receive any additional testing.
You will find yourself disappointed after putting her up on that pedestal. Since looks matter to you so much i suggest you fixate on a different woman who looks better. She's exhausted and trying to manage stress and it's aging her fast. she only breaks for 5 minutes every 4 hours of training. She has no time to give to anything but training or else she might miss an opportunity. Sure she has potential to recover but you won't see a strong improvement for at least 3 months.
The OP posted this:
Great run for her in Victoria, BC. Cool morning at only 1C, but she powered to a negative split 25:28.
This is called a statement, not a question.
Additionally, Rojo said, "other" and "short course" etc, none of which directly ask the drug question. I responded with what I do know.
Her volume of training, work, etc.
How did you magically combine your drug thoughts with my work thoughts?
Your an idiot
WSAN wrote:
No testing at this race and isn't being tested out of competition. She isn't a nationally funded athlete so she does not receive any additional testing.
So the only time she could be tested is once in July and once in November?
Drugs or not dis girl could whoop yo az in a race and you just jealous Wejo.
Natasha said she went through 5K in 15:48(just under 3:10/K.), so last 3K was 9:40 (a bit over 3:13/K.), so not a negative split. This would make sense as there is a gentle downhill in the first K., and gentle uphill in the last K. There is no doubt in my mind the course is legit., and so is Natasha!
rojo wrote:
Have i seen big breakthroughs like this? Yes, but they are rare. When do they happen?
1) She barely trained at ll her whole life and is now training a lot.
Given the fact she competed in college , that doesn't seem likely but look at American Alisha Williams -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT3NGCyzMqgshe started running 100 miles weeks from 65 before and went from 15:45 in the 5k to 32:03 for 10k. When I picked really training after college after not having run consistently since 10th grade, I could run a marathon at my 5k pr basically within 30 months.
2) She was anemic her whole life and it recently got fixed.
3) The course was short.
4) Other.
#5 would have been weight.
Being a male coach, I forgot how big that is for women. To lose 10 pounds is a ton.
There was a guy at Cornell who went from 7th to last at Heps in 2010 and not competing in 2011 to top 10 this year. What changed? Not much he said except he lost 10 pounds and ran more hills in the summer.
You see it more often with women.
Sounds like a great story.
Did you just "backtrack"?
HHS wrote:
Your an idiot
Well now that is funny.
Way to hammer it out, Natasha. Haters gonna, you know. Ignore them and just continue to work hard and stay healthy. Looking forward to,seeing what you can do at the Sun Run etc.
What a lot of scuttlebutts here.
Fat Old Man wrote:
HHS wrote:Your an idiot
Well now that is funny.
Way to hammer it out, Natasha. Haters gonna, you know. Ignore them and just continue to work hard and stay healthy. Looking forward to,seeing what you can do at the Sun Run etc.
U R always going to get haters, anywhere - sad!
Great job trash!
Here is a video of the race, shots of Geoff, Natasha and a decent look at the course and the day's conditions:
http://athleticsillustrated.com/video/pioneer-8k-race-video-lead-male-and-female/
32:00
Sorry to all the Canucks out in cyber space, but no way did Natasha Fraser run that fast for 8k.
tigerbear wrote:
She's kind of a babe.
I'd toss it in her