and Mary Cain ran 4:04.6 a couple weeks after turning 17.
Clarke's performance, relative to age, is better. But no one talks about it anymore.
Cain is able, but imagine if she had run within a couple seconds of her current PR shortly after finishing her freshman year? They already well-deserved clamor over her performances would have been absolute bedlam.
they grow boobies and can never come close to their times as flat chested teens.
Cain also ran 1:59.5 and qualified for world's in a tough field in the 1500m.
jjjjjjjjj wrote:
Cain also ran 1:59.5 and qualified for world's in a tough field in the 1500m.
Field wasn't that tough if she made it.
whatever happened to georgie? also, this made me laugh: "Cain is able"....did you mean to do that?
I have been saying this for months. Georgie Clarke is a perfect example of a flame out that I fear for Cain. Clarke matches marks with Cain almost to the tenth in some cases. When the Worlds are in London or Olympics in Rio will we still be talking about Mary Cain the present tense or in the past tense as her body is going to change. When it does is she and Alberto prepared to handle this mentally and emotionally as much as the physical part?
sadbuttrue wrote:
they grow boobies and can never come close to their times as flat chested teens.
not so with georgie.
i think she was 16 when she ran that time too.
she didnt reach her potential , for sure. too much anaerobic too soon?
fanboys are for free wrote:
"Cain is able"....did you mean to do that?
I did. I wondered if anyone would notice what a punny guy I am.
aussie boy wrote:
i think she was 16 when she ran that time too.
Born June 17, 1984 and ran that 4:06.7 in January 2000 qualifying for the Sydney Olympics. Definitely 15 1/2.
fanboys are for free wrote:
whatever happened to georgie?
She did a lot of her running barefoot, consequently lots of injuries and never reached her potential.
Its a lock that faster as a youngster correlates with faster as an adult. Lock.
Citing the exception to the rule does not change the rule.
and some of the age group stars keep going and going and going examples meseret defar and tirunesh dibaba, i expect mary cain will be more like defar and t. dibaba, because of salazars long term approach, emphasizing not train too hard and add to the workload a little each year so the body adapts to it, cain will likely be at her best at age 30-35.
There\'s a big difference between the two. Georgie Clark is beautiful and Mary Cain, not so much. Clarke had to deal with a lot attention not just over her running but her looks. She had to deal with guys and partying. Mary Cain won\'t have anything to distract her, so she can just train for the next ten years.
douglas burke wrote:
and some of the age group stars keep going and going and going examples meseret defar and tirunesh dibaba, i expect mary cain will be more like defar and t. dibaba, because of salazars long term approach, emphasizing not train too hard and add to the workload a little each year so the body adapts to it, cain will likely be at her best at age 30-35.
Lol who wants to wait 15-20 years?
not really waiting just a gradual process that takes time.
There are good reasons why Georgie Clarke didn't progess into the senior rankings. It's a sad story. I hope she's OK now.
Well what are the reasons Georgie Clarke didn't progress? She was a big deal in 2000.
i stand corrected
Alaskan Punch wrote:
fanboys are for free wrote:"Cain is able"....did you mean to do that?
I did. I wondered if anyone would notice what a punny guy I am.
aussie boy wrote:
i think she was 16 when she ran that time too.
Born June 17, 1984 and ran that 4:06.7 in January 2000 qualifying for the Sydney Olympics. Definitely 15 1/2.
Georgie found it pretty difficult to handle the pressures, setbacks from injuries etc that come with an international career.
She has come through all that quite well now and is still running at a good level.
She seems to be in a much better place emotionally now.