For what it's worth, I think his calculator gives some pretty damn good values. He called Mo's 3:28, has said before women's 1500 was due for some faster times, was correct that most good guys running 5000 now can still run 12:4x with a good fast race, the list goes on. Their is lots of evidence that his calculator is pretty damn good
I think issues arise with the conversions and adjustments V3 makes to the race in an effort to think about the optimum result.
People also don't take into account that predictions are generally for a perfect race as well and that happens very, very rarely. So, people here something like Rupp running 12:40 and immediately think no way...but the odds of a perfect race are really low. A more realistic result to expect from Rupp is something like 12:4x mid or high, and I have little reason to doubt Rupp is capable of running such a time.[/quote]
His "calculator" is good? Gimme a break. All you have to do to make the same predictions is basically, any race where somebody runs x time, if it wasn't perfectly paced, you say they could have run a little bit faster. And you also give them credit for being able to carry that performance over to its equivalent for a shorter or longer distance, based on whether or not the runner is a speed runner or a strength runner. It's not like something mystical going on. If the weather wasn't perfect, or if the track was sub-standard, or whatever, you make slight adjustments. It's not really that interesting. If somebody runs 60-60-60-59 for a 3:59 mile, then that's that. If they run 63-63-63-50 for a 3:59, then they could probably have run faster in some other situation. No sh*t! Who cares?
Why the guy has to be such an a-hole is anybody's guess.