runner who professes wrote:
One needs to control for age and gender.
Not on LRC. Despising old people and women for their slow time is the standard on this board.
runner who professes wrote:
One needs to control for age and gender.
Not on LRC. Despising old people and women for their slow time is the standard on this board.
There are some good ones in this thread. Classic letsrun.
Some sentences are funny. But overall only two possibilities remain.
1. You are one of these supertalents in the sub 13-range or very close to become one, but at least your arrogance is way bigger than your actual supertalent.
2. You have failed to reach your goals, mainly due to a fundamental lack of sports spirit, i.e. fairness and discipline for example: Standard issue Lets Run board grumbler in the Muppet´s Show-style of Waldorf and Statler.
22:42 minutes would get a Masters' male All-American status on the road, 17:30 on the track.
http://www.nationalmastersnews.com/aa_main.htm
The former is too ridiculous for me to even contemplate claiming, even though I have no chance on the track (though
I'll easily break 62s for the 400 meters when I'm 55).
Here is the answer to that question.
Excellent: anyone appreciably faster than me.
Good: What I ran
Okay: A bit slower than me
Bad: A lot slower than me
The times that came into my head when reading the thread title...
"Excellent" - Sub 13:40
"Good" - Sub 16
"Okay" - Sub 21
"Bad" - 30+
george oscar bluth wrote:
The times that came into my head when reading the thread title...
"Excellent" - Sub 13:40
"Good" - Sub 16
"Okay" - Sub 21
"Bad" - 30+
Like my taste in women
Kim Young 1 wrote:
george oscar bluth wrote:The times that came into my head when reading the thread title...
"Excellent" - Sub 13:40
"Good" - Sub 16
"Okay" - Sub 21
"Bad" - 30+
Like my taste in women
LOL!
exceptional stat.just exceptional
context wrote:
this here wrote:Extremely context-dependent question you're asking.
In the WR 10;000m if you ran 27;20 you got lapped.
26;56 is the fastest 9th place ever
Mojo Jerkin wrote:
Here is the answer to that question.
Excellent: anyone appreciably faster than me.
Good: What I ran
Okay: A bit slower than me
Bad: A lot slower than me
Seriously, this is exactly how I think about other runners. Can't help it
Could win:
sub-21:00 Del Boca Vista Retirement Center 5K
sub 20:00 spot on middle school XC team
sub 19:00 Kiwanis fun run
sub 18:00 spot on HS XC team
sub 17:00 high school dual meet
sub 16:00 local Turkey Trot
sub 15:00 conference meet
sub 14:00 USA's
sub 13:00 Olympics
Sub 13:00-Decent, has a chance at winning
13:00+ hobby jogger
Only as good as your last race. If you can't break 13 today, YOUR A HOBBY JOGGER!!!
Men
30:00 completely out of shape
26:00 population average
23:00 not bad at all compared to general population
20:00 not bad / in good shape
18:00 excellent / in great shape
(Lower end of genetic potential for most people)
17:00 outstanding / starting to get competitive
(Upper end of genetic potential for most people)
16:00 fast
15:00 very fast
14:00 sub elite
13:00 olympic / drugs
Women
35:00 completely out of shape
30:00 population average
26:00 not bad at all compared to general population
24:00 not bad / in good shape
22:00 excellent/ in great shape
(Lower end of genetic potential for most people)
20:00 outstanding/ starting to get competitive
(Upper end of genetic potential for most people)
19:00 fast
17:30 very fast
16:00 sub elite
15:00 olympic/ drugs
5000 meters? Didn't I get rid of that one?
longjack wrote:
when you get under 1310 or so 5K you are probably on something.
by on something i mean blood boosting not necessarily illegal.
which means great athletes can't go much faster. only a super phenom can.
but with the oxygen tent, altitude, blood doping and other tricks guys can get down to 13 flat or a bit better.
then onto the super PEDs we go.
i'm wondering really what the british phenoms were doing. it's a real blip on the screen all the guys that came onto the scene out of nowhere.
now i consider coe and ovett, et all the last more or less clean world beaters, but i'm still wondering what they were doing...something...
ruthless coe will never divulge anything that's for sure.
the worst guy is that viren. all his medals, all of them are blood doping medals. he might have been good for one bronze or something like thaดt "clean". some of the other guys could have gone 13 flat on his program.
talk about your fake legends.
This "longjack" dude really has a problem with Viren. Been taking shots at him for years on here.
I think he is a jealous Kiwi who has never been able to deal with the fact that Viren handled his heroes in the big one.
Viren was legit.
Kim Young 1 wrote:
george oscar bluth wrote:
The times that came into my head when reading the thread title...
"Excellent" - Sub 13:40
"Good" - Sub 16
"Okay" - Sub 21
"Bad" - 30+
Like my taste in women
This dude bumped a 2 year old thread to make this joke. Gotta love it.
Don't know about all those times. Will say this though, I've been working hard and am down 85lbs now. I just hit 30:01 and can't wait to get through that magical 30. To me, I'm pretty badass right now. I know you'll laugh, but the first time I tried to "run" a 5K it took me over an hour.
Unless you're in a championship race at any level fast is just relative.
Emma Coburn to miss Olympic Trials after breaking ankle in Suzhou
Jakob on Oly 1500- “Walk in the park if I don’t get injured or sick”
VALBY has graduated (w/ honors) from Florida, will she go to grad school??
Congrats to Kyle Merber - Merber has left Citius for position w/ Michael Johnson's track league
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion