genetics aside, list top three things that separates a 4:10 miler from a 3:59 miler

The Way We Were wrote:

The way we aren't wrote:

A 4:10 miler doesn't have these things?

Of course, a 4:10 miler has those things. But a 3:59 miler has more of each. Remember the OP wrote "genetics aside." So the difference has to come from how hard each has worked.

But wait, aren't you a genetics denier?

And the 4:30 guys continue to make worthless contributions to the thread.

Good Post wrote:

And the 4:30 guys continue to make worthless contributions to the thread.

Thanks for your worthless contribution.

Genetics, genetics, genetics...genetics.

Unless that 4:10 miler is running 20 miles a week and skipping speed workouts, there is absolutely no difference between a 4:10 miler and a 3:59 miler except genetics.

gfdfdg wrote:

Genetics, genetics, genetics...genetics.

Unless that 4:10 miler is running 20 miles a week and skipping speed workouts, there is absolutely no difference between a 4:10 miler and a 3:59 miler except genetics.

The 4:30 guys continue to give their valueable input.

All sub 4 guys were 4:10 or slower at some point. What did they do to get to that point? Obviously, someone like you doesn't have a clue.

Good Post wrote:

gfdfdg wrote:

Genetics, genetics, genetics...genetics.

Unless that 4:10 miler is running 20 miles a week and skipping speed workouts, there is absolutely no difference between a 4:10 miler and a 3:59 miler except genetics.

The 4:30 guys continue to give their valueable input.

All sub 4 guys were 4:10 or slower at some point. What did they do to get to that point? Obviously, someone like you doesn't have a clue.

Sometimes they just grew up and reached genetic maturity. You get faster just because of that rather than training.

I removed 4 seconds from my best high school 800 time when I was 25 despite barely running for 6 years.

Fast enough wrote:

Sometimes they just grew up and reached genetic maturity. You get faster just because of that rather than training.

I removed 4 seconds from my best high school 800 time when I was 25 despite barely running for 6 years.

That doesn't mean it was because of "genetic maturity". You do not get faster from nothing. A stimulus is needed. Something you were doing during that 6 years was working. Could be nutrition, doing other sports, or maybe you were overtraining when you were in highschool/college.

The problem with you genetics people is that you ignore all of the other proven possibilities and instead blame everything on imaginary unproven genetics. There are actually idiots in this thread that think food comes AFTER genetics.

Gigi for me wrote:

Fast enough wrote:

Sometimes they just grew up and reached genetic maturity. You get faster just because of that rather than training.

I removed 4 seconds from my best high school 800 time when I was 25 despite barely running for 6 years.

That doesn't mean it was because of "genetic maturity". You do not get faster from nothing. A stimulus is needed. Something you were doing during that 6 years was working. Could be nutrition, doing other sports, or maybe you were overtraining when you were in highschool/college.

The problem with you genetics people is that you ignore all of the other proven possibilities and instead blame everything on imaginary unproven genetics. There are actually idiots in this thread that think food comes AFTER genetics.

Or maybe he sucked in general in high school so it didn't take much to improve, and now spends his days on LetsRun advising 4:10 milers on how to not get to 3:59.

Gigi for me wrote:

Fast enough wrote:

Sometimes they just grew up and reached genetic maturity. You get faster just because of that rather than training.

I removed 4 seconds from my best high school 800 time when I was 25 despite barely running for 6 years.

That doesn't mean it was because of "genetic maturity". You do not get faster from nothing. A stimulus is needed. Something you were doing during that 6 years was working. Could be nutrition, doing other sports, or maybe you were overtraining when you were in highschool/college.

The problem with you genetics people is that you ignore all of the other proven possibilities and instead blame everything on imaginary unproven genetics. There are actually idiots in this thread that think food comes AFTER genetics.

Of course you do. Kids get stronger from puberty. A 25 year old couch potato is stronger than a 10 year old athlete.

Oh, I forgot that I was doing something else in those six years. Smoking.

And no, 30 miles per week is not overtraining,

Good Post wrote:

Gigi for me wrote:

That doesn't mean it was because of "genetic maturity". You do not get faster from nothing. A stimulus is needed. Something you were doing during that 6 years was working. Could be nutrition, doing other sports, or maybe you were overtraining when you were in highschool/college.

The problem with you genetics people is that you ignore all of the other proven possibilities and instead blame everything on imaginary unproven genetics. There are actually idiots in this thread that think food comes AFTER genetics.

Or maybe he sucked in general in high school so it didn't take much to improve, and now spends his days on LetsRun advising 4:10 milers on how to not get to 3:59.

It didn't take ANYTHING except living 6 more years, And guess how you spend your days? Arguing on Letsrun.

Good Post wrote:

Gigi for me wrote:

That doesn't mean it was because of "genetic maturity". You do not get faster from nothing. A stimulus is needed. Something you were doing during that 6 years was working. Could be nutrition, doing other sports, or maybe you were overtraining when you were in highschool/college.

The problem with you genetics people is that you ignore all of the other proven possibilities and instead blame everything on imaginary unproven genetics. There are actually idiots in this thread that think food comes AFTER genetics.

Or maybe he sucked in general in high school so it didn't take much to improve, and now spends his days on LetsRun advising 4:10 milers on how to not get to 3:59.

Exactly why does one suck in general? Genetics?

Fast enough wrote:

Good Post wrote:

Or maybe he sucked in general in high school so it didn't take much to improve, and now spends his days on LetsRun advising 4:10 milers on how to not get to 3:59.

It didn't take ANYTHING except living 6 more years, And guess how you spend your days? Arguing on Letsrun.

Well yeah, when you start out sucking, then spend 6 years doing nothing, you don't have much to lose and re-gain. Congrats on doing that. It's a lot different for a 4:00 miler, which you aren't even qualified to hypothesize about.

the middle of the pack wrote:

Good Post wrote:

Or maybe he sucked in general in high school so it didn't take much to improve, and now spends his days on LetsRun advising 4:10 milers on how to not get to 3:59.

Exactly why does one suck in general? Genetics?

Lack of training in your case.

Good Post wrote:

Fast enough wrote:

It didn't take ANYTHING except living 6 more years, And guess how you spend your days? Arguing on Letsrun.

Well yeah, when you start out sucking, then spend 6 years doing nothing, you don't have much to lose and re-gain. Congrats on doing that. It's a lot different for a 4:00 miler, which you aren't even qualified to hypothesize about.

At least you agree on the genetic thing. That's also why you are not elite in case you were wondering.

And guess what? You never will be.

Unless you're a late developer bloomer, most people don't get advantage aging beyond age 19. By that point any improvement is just additional years of training. Many don't improve much after that age.

LM wrote:

toro wrote:

One last thing - everyone has the ability to run faster than whatever their lifetime PR winds up being.

But some are better at coming close to their individual limits.

I have enjoyed reading your insights, but that statement cannot be logically true because by that definition anyone can be infinitely fast. If I've run 3:58 I have the ability to run 3:57, if I have run that I have the ability to run 3:56...it continues down the line.

Your current PR is also your lifetime PR, and if you can always beat your current PR you have the ability to be infinitely fast.

I said "whatever their lifetime PR winds up being."

Meaning, looking back back after your prime has gone.

I am saying that no one has ever run to their unique limit.

El G could have run under 3:43.

Coe could have surely run under 3:47.

I know I could have run faster than I did.

And not knowing you at all, I am saying that you could have run faster than your PR.

But even if you apply my logic to someone currently improving it can hold true.

If you have run 3:58.0, yes you have the ability to run 3:57 and change.

But you can't take that leap that says therefore you can run 3:56 until you actually run that 3:57.

You have to put up the actual result first, it cannot be projected.

Good Post wrote:

the middle of the pack wrote:

Exactly why does one suck in general? Genetics?

Lack of training in your case.

See here's the cool thing. You don't know that.

A.C. wrote:

Unless you're a late developer bloomer, most people don't get advantage aging beyond age 19. By that point any improvement is just additional years of training. Many don't improve much after that age.

Because of genetics.

the middle of the pack wrote:

Good Post wrote:

Lack of training in your case.

See here's the cool thing. You don't know that.

Ah but I do, and you know it too.